#51
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:12pm
Well I'm going to wager it will have a short run, and be a loss.
Cinderella rehearsal photos up — Page 3
#52
"I'm a HUGE fan of this property and looking forward to the new songs and the book...but damn this is a worse idea than the Annie revival."
FinebyDesighn, why do you htink this this is destined for financial failure? I don't get it. It's Rogers and Hammerstein, never done on Broadway, but with beautiful and well known music (along with some "new" trunk songs and a timeless stroy that's nevertheless been updated. What prompts so much negativity towards a "property" that you claim to love?
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:34pm
"I'm a HUGE fan of this property and looking forward to the new songs and the book...but damn this is a worse idea than the Annie revival."
FinebyDesighn, why do you htink this this is destined for financial failure? I don't get it. It's Rogers and Hammerstein, never done on Broadway, but with beautiful and well known music (along with some "new" trunk songs and a timeless stroy that's nevertheless been updated. What prompts so much negativity towards a "property" that you claim to love?
CZJ at opening night party for A Little Night Music, Dec 13, 2009.
#53
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:34pm
Were some of the dancers in the parade not a part of the cast? I noticed that Sam Cahn wasn't in the cast photo on Broadway.com but he was in their number in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade.
Hey Dottie!
Did your colleagues enjoy the cake even though your cat decided to sit on it? ~GuyfromGermany
#54
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:36pm
"KELLY2 you are quite entitled to your opinion, and beauty is in the eye of the beholdher but as an all american male (not that there is anything wrong with that) i think; as does anyone i talk to; Laura Osnes is one of the prettiest actresses anywhere and certainly with a voice like hers!"
I never said she wasn't pretty? I believe I said she was TOO pretty. Again, it's only my opinion, and I am certainly coming from a place of hating princess-y fairy tales that remove all of the darkness and complexity of their source material, so admittedly this isn't my cup of tea going in. But as I said, a lot of the cast seems to be good, so I will give it a chance.
And Douglas Carter Beane's new take on the Prince and the casting of Santino is one of the very few things that intrigues me about this production.
I never said she wasn't pretty? I believe I said she was TOO pretty. Again, it's only my opinion, and I am certainly coming from a place of hating princess-y fairy tales that remove all of the darkness and complexity of their source material, so admittedly this isn't my cup of tea going in. But as I said, a lot of the cast seems to be good, so I will give it a chance.
And Douglas Carter Beane's new take on the Prince and the casting of Santino is one of the very few things that intrigues me about this production.
"Get mad, then get over it." - Colin Powell
#55
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:45pm
this industry, this business has so many naysayers, so much negativity and so many rooting against its success from in it and out of it, inside and out by those who profess to love it. it amazes me that people even bother. Just look at this thread.... this show will fail, this actress is too pretty, shes too plain... shes too unknown.... this actor is too ugly... hes not famous enough... this show is awful..... the material is neutered... its gonna suck... its gonna be a failure...it will have a long fun but be unsuccessful.... it boggles my mind how bitchy and self hating some of you are. IT HASNT OPENED! IT HASNT HAD ONE PERFORMANCE!! How do you know all of this? some of you remind me of of the 12 year old in his basement commenting on how the new SUPERMAN will suck when before filming has even started !
Updated On: 1/8/13 at 04:45 PM
#56
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:46pm
"why do you htink this this is destined for financial failure? I don't get it. "
Mainly because this show is playing against some really good "Family" shows. I just don't know one person that would shell out $120.00 to see Cinderella.
"It's Rogers and Hammerstein, never done on Broadway, but with beautiful and well known music"
I'm not sure what appeal this has on the audience it's aimed at. Us theatre queens will go once. The general audience has no idea who those people are. Look at the artwork, it could not get anymore Disney. That is who they want to confuse people with. Fairytales are so over.
"What prompts so much negativity towards a "property" that you claim to love?"
I'm not trying to be negative, I'm just not an idiot. These shows are HUGE and when you see one like this... like Leap of Faith .. it makes you wonder what is going on in the heads of producers.
Mainly because this show is playing against some really good "Family" shows. I just don't know one person that would shell out $120.00 to see Cinderella.
"It's Rogers and Hammerstein, never done on Broadway, but with beautiful and well known music"
I'm not sure what appeal this has on the audience it's aimed at. Us theatre queens will go once. The general audience has no idea who those people are. Look at the artwork, it could not get anymore Disney. That is who they want to confuse people with. Fairytales are so over.
"What prompts so much negativity towards a "property" that you claim to love?"
I'm not trying to be negative, I'm just not an idiot. These shows are HUGE and when you see one like this... like Leap of Faith .. it makes you wonder what is going on in the heads of producers.
#57
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:49pm
This thread gives me a headache.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#58
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:50pm
^ Funny. I was just thinking some posters on this thread might need to wear a helmet to prevent any further damage.
#59
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:51pm
"IT HASNT OPENED! IT HASNT HAD ONE PERFORMANCE!! "
Well maybe they should have had a tryout! This show ain't "new". Everyone knows it's a fairytale for kids. I'm sure they could care less who wrote it. And there are zero stars in it, why would someone pay $120.00 to see a redux of a story they've seen a million times.
"How do you know all of this?"
Well I'm currently watching the decline of the "much lauded" and "much needed" Annie revival. I saw Leap of Faith and Scandoulous blaze into town on something but it was CLEAR these would be failures.
Even if this show gets rave reviews, it still has to survive the spring. It also has fierce competition with all the Disney shows, Annie, and Matilda (which will probably be a sort of big deal).
Well maybe they should have had a tryout! This show ain't "new". Everyone knows it's a fairytale for kids. I'm sure they could care less who wrote it. And there are zero stars in it, why would someone pay $120.00 to see a redux of a story they've seen a million times.
"How do you know all of this?"
Well I'm currently watching the decline of the "much lauded" and "much needed" Annie revival. I saw Leap of Faith and Scandoulous blaze into town on something but it was CLEAR these would be failures.
Even if this show gets rave reviews, it still has to survive the spring. It also has fierce competition with all the Disney shows, Annie, and Matilda (which will probably be a sort of big deal).
#60
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:53pm
"IT HASNT OPENED! IT HASNT HAD ONE PERFORMANCE!!"
That's why nobody is commenting on how the performances are or have gone. The storyline and casting are public knowledge, that's what's being debated. If you have a problem with publicly available information about upcoming shows being debated, maybe this isn't the place for you.
That's why nobody is commenting on how the performances are or have gone. The storyline and casting are public knowledge, that's what's being debated. If you have a problem with publicly available information about upcoming shows being debated, maybe this isn't the place for you.
"Get mad, then get over it." - Colin Powell
#61
Posted: 1/8/13 at 4:59pm
Also might I add, this show is VERY lucky Disney didn't bring in a Beauty tour for the winter or the Into the Woods transfer didn't happen.
#62
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:01pm
Finebydesign, good point. Into the Woods especially would've definitely stepped on this. I would much rather have seen ITW come in though, if we're being honest. Jessie Mueller was exactly the kind of fresh, unique take on Cinderella that I'm talking about. But of course, the Cinderella of Into the Woods is not the same Cinderella as the one in this production.
"Get mad, then get over it." - Colin Powell
#63
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:06pm
"Degrassi, to classify Perrault's as the original isn't exactly right either but I do see your point."
Sorry! Yes, you are right. The Perrault is not the original Cinderella tale, but it's the version that most are familiar with. That's what I meant by original.
And, I guess I do see your point in Laura being too pretty (even though I think she looks fine for the role). Past Cinderellas haven't really been conventionally beautiful by society's standards of beauty compared to Laura who is incredibly beautiful in my opinion. So, I see your point.
As for the prince, well looks really isn't everything. Maybe other things make him charming, such as his personality, intellect, etc.
I think this will do well. It's Cinderella. It's Rodgers and Hammerstein. It's on Broadway for the first time. If I could, I would shell out $120 to see it. Then again, I'm biased because I am a fan of the Cinderella story in general. Also, I do not think this is a worst idea than an Annie revival. Just before the show was announced, I was thinking "Why has this never been to Broadway? It should!"
Sorry! Yes, you are right. The Perrault is not the original Cinderella tale, but it's the version that most are familiar with. That's what I meant by original.
And, I guess I do see your point in Laura being too pretty (even though I think she looks fine for the role). Past Cinderellas haven't really been conventionally beautiful by society's standards of beauty compared to Laura who is incredibly beautiful in my opinion. So, I see your point.
As for the prince, well looks really isn't everything. Maybe other things make him charming, such as his personality, intellect, etc.
I think this will do well. It's Cinderella. It's Rodgers and Hammerstein. It's on Broadway for the first time. If I could, I would shell out $120 to see it. Then again, I'm biased because I am a fan of the Cinderella story in general. Also, I do not think this is a worst idea than an Annie revival. Just before the show was announced, I was thinking "Why has this never been to Broadway? It should!"
#64
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:06pm
And since no one here has yet read Beane's new libretto, no one here can quite say what who Cinderella in this production is.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#65
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:07pm
its so idiotic to comment on whats publicly available. which is a couple of songs and a logo. its like commenting on a phonecall youve eavesdropped on. you dont have the full picture
youre not commenting on performances... you havent seen it... or the script... you dont have it... or how well it will do... how can you possibly know when its not a finished product.... there are comments on the material, whether its good or not, neutered or not, will sell or not. you just sound like some self important idiots commenting on something that hasnt even happened yet. the theater equivilent of sports bar talking about how the jets will do against the dolphins in a game a month from now. it means nothing.
youre not commenting on performances... you havent seen it... or the script... you dont have it... or how well it will do... how can you possibly know when its not a finished product.... there are comments on the material, whether its good or not, neutered or not, will sell or not. you just sound like some self important idiots commenting on something that hasnt even happened yet. the theater equivilent of sports bar talking about how the jets will do against the dolphins in a game a month from now. it means nothing.
#66
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:10pm
Well, I'd venture that if you don't want to hear idiots talking about how the Jets will do against the Dolphins, don't go to a sports bar. 
"Get mad, then get over it." - Colin Powell
#67
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:14pm
Well, I'd venture that if you don't want to hear idiots talking about how the Jets will do against the Dolphins, don't go to a sports bar.
nah, i go because i enjoy the "bar" "the game" and laugh at those know it alls who are proved wrong over and over. luckily unlike the bar(i think), none of you are betting actual money against it!
nah, i go because i enjoy the "bar" "the game" and laugh at those know it alls who are proved wrong over and over. luckily unlike the bar(i think), none of you are betting actual money against it!
#68
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:15pm
"its so idiotic to comment on whats publicly available. which is a couple of songs and a logo. its like commenting on a phonecall youve eavesdropped on. you dont have the full picture "
Right so my opinions concerning the show's timing, and lack-luster marketing campaign are completely off-base.
Please I beg of you to come back here and rub it in my face three months from now when this show is limping along. (Unless they get some money to get a Jonas Brother, Pussy Cat Doll or Rosie O'donnell.
Right so my opinions concerning the show's timing, and lack-luster marketing campaign are completely off-base.
Please I beg of you to come back here and rub it in my face three months from now when this show is limping along. (Unless they get some money to get a Jonas Brother, Pussy Cat Doll or Rosie O'donnell.
#69
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:18pm
^ No...but your bringing up LEAP OF FAITH and SCANDALOUS is so beyond bizarre as to make you seem...well...touched.
#70
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:18pm
Darion, what exactly can I be proved wrong about? I made no prediction on whether or not the show will be a success, I just stated my opinion about the story and about the casting. It's not my taste, and I'm perfectly entitled to that opinion.
However, I don't think there's any harm in discussion and speculation. That's what boards like this are for. Not for endless fawning over any and everyone just because.
However, I don't think there's any harm in discussion and speculation. That's what boards like this are for. Not for endless fawning over any and everyone just because.
"Get mad, then get over it." - Colin Powell
#71
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:41pm
As a sports nut myself, as well as a theater lover, that really makes absolutely no sense to me at all. I understand the point you're trying to make, it's just a horrible metaphor.
CZJ at opening night party for A Little Night Music, Dec 13, 2009.
#72
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:44pm
I actually think that the marketing has been pretty good, starting with a great spot in the Macy's Parade which generated a good buzz.
CZJ at opening night party for A Little Night Music, Dec 13, 2009.
#73
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:53pm
It did? I saw that and couldn't believe how hideous the costumes were.
#74
Posted: 1/8/13 at 5:59pm
Darion, are you suggesting that any speculation on anything is without value? That's just silly. The entire STOCK MARKET is set on speculation. Guesses. Educated guesses.
No one is saying they WANT it to fail, some just think it won't do well or don't think the casting will work. MOST of these folks will go see the show and come back and report on what they thought. MOST will admit if they were wrong. Many will gloat if they are right. SO WHAT?
Many of us thought that Rock of Ages was going to be a huge flop once it came to b'way. We were wrong. SO WHAT? Lots of folks thought that Next to Normal, and Hair were going to be commercial disasters. They were wrong. So what?
What our little world here does has little effect on b'way shows. Sometimes we're right, sometimes we're wrong. And we have fun along the way seeing how things pan out.
No one is saying they WANT it to fail, some just think it won't do well or don't think the casting will work. MOST of these folks will go see the show and come back and report on what they thought. MOST will admit if they were wrong. Many will gloat if they are right. SO WHAT?
Many of us thought that Rock of Ages was going to be a huge flop once it came to b'way. We were wrong. SO WHAT? Lots of folks thought that Next to Normal, and Hair were going to be commercial disasters. They were wrong. So what?
What our little world here does has little effect on b'way shows. Sometimes we're right, sometimes we're wrong. And we have fun along the way seeing how things pan out.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#75
Posted: 1/8/13 at 6:01pm
I think it looks great. Everyone seems talented and attractive enough for their roles.
This looks like it's going to be a cute, beautiful, and fun show. It's not going to change the face of theatre. It's unlikely it's going to comment on the darker aspects of society. But it's going to be a great production where very talented people get to sing beautiful songs. And in my opinion, that's all it needs to be. A wonderful night at the theater.
This looks like it's going to be a cute, beautiful, and fun show. It's not going to change the face of theatre. It's unlikely it's going to comment on the darker aspects of society. But it's going to be a great production where very talented people get to sing beautiful songs. And in my opinion, that's all it needs to be. A wonderful night at the theater.
Updated On: 1/8/13 at 06:01 PM
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95