DEAR EVAN HANSEN Movie Musical - News & Discussion Thread — Page 13

jlindsey865 said: "Alex Kulak2 said: "Can we talk about why in the movie, Connor writes his name giant on Evan's cast? In the stage show, it's a practical thing, because the people at the back of the balcony need to see it. In the movie, I thought it might be more affecting for him to write his name normal-sized or even in little tiny print. It was always kind of a plot holehow Cynthia doesn't notice it until the very end of the scene in the principal's office. Making it smaller, where she has to get up close to notice it, might have that make more sense."

I noticed that to. It definitely makes Connor's intent seem more malicious than in the stage version."

Interesting. I never looked at it that way (being practical for people in the back to be able to see it).

I viewed it as Connor showing a spark of humanity and reaching out in a small way. He sees that Evan has gone the entire first day of school without anyone signing his cast. He knows Evan has no friends. He offers to sign the cast so that they can both pretend they have friends. Since the cast is totally blank, his signing it in supersize letters makes the cast not seem so empty.

In terms of plot hole in the stage show, I think Evan is usually positioning his arm in such a way that the name is not visible. It is only after he stands up to hand Cynthia the letter that it is exposed for her to notice it. (Same for the scene later on in his bedroom with Heidi when she first notices it.)

---

DEHFanatic said: "What do you either/both of you find troubling about the text?

I do love the crossed out "yourself!" that is replaced with "yourself?" Adds a whole new dimension to the letter."

And interesting because he replaces the tentative “?” with the emphatic “!” in the trailer, this time in the letter we know from the stage version.

Fagnes Gooch said: "CT2NYC said: "Alex Kulak2 said: "Can we talk about why in the movie, Connor writes his name giant on Evan's cast? In the stage show, it's a practical thing, because the people at the back of the balcony need to see it. In the movie, I thought it might be more affecting for him to write his name normal-sized or even in little tiny print. It was always kind of a plot holehow Cynthia doesn't notice it until the very end of the scene in the principal's office. Making it smaller, where she has to get up close to notice it, might have that make more sense."

Exactly why should we talk about this?

A bereavedmother not immediately noticing the writing on a stranger's cast is not something that I've ever heard any reasonable person criticize about the stage show, and calling it a "plot hole" is a big stretch.

So, why don't you wait until September when you can see it in the context of the film before you bring it up here?



"





Because this is a discussion board?"

Just because you "can," doesn't mean you "should."

If you wanna look at it that way, sure, but my comments make sense.

Sorry to interrupt but I have some breaking news - commercials are out on TV! Here is one with "Waving" as the background music!!!

https://youtu.be/dDsSxa9_8UU

---

Updated On: 5/24/21 at 09:46 AM

Connor writing his name huge on Evan's cast seemed more like a mean joke when I saw it.

Just want to pop in quickly and say:

I stand byu all the sentiments I expressed om this thread a couple days ago, but after a some reflection, I can see how the degree to which some of us (including myself) have devoted time and energy to tearing down this casting decision might be a mean-spirited. I do want to make it clear that I was mostly criticizing the production for deciding to cast him / build the production around him. I'm not trying to tear down Ben Platt himself, or criticize the way he looks in real life (him looking 27 is not an inherently bad thing). While I don't think Ben Platt made the right decision to go along with it, I respect that this is something he was aware of, and insecure about, and that he tried to mitigate it as much as he could.

As always, it's a bit frustrating that the conversation in this thread has now turned over a new cycle, with people bringing up points that have already been rebutted in a number of different ways, with no meaningful counter-rebuttal, but that seems to be the natural course of debates on this message board. I can't control what anyone else does, but I would encourage people to read through the past few days' worth of posts. But after this post, I don't think I'll devote any more time or energy to criticizing this casting choice, at least until I see the movie - and even then I'll try not to become mean-spirited about it. Because people like Sutton Ross and dramamamma are right to point out that harping on things like this isn't a valuable use of anyone's time. I find it really annoying when other people can't shut up about hating something, and sometimes I forget to practice what I preach.

Criticizing a wig/hair choice, a trailer or a casting choice isn’t mean or bullying. Saying one feels an actor looks too old for the part isn’t being a jerk. It’s an opinion. It holds no weight and isn’t any type of truth but people like sharing them, and bantering about them. Show business is full of them.

The people telling the critical voices to not see the movie can also tell Mr. Platt to not read comments that only serve to make him feel angry/sad and write and delete Twitter posts. They aren’t the truth and don’t deserve his time. He makes the choice to read and respond. He decides how valid they are based on his response. He decides what he puts energy into.

We live in a digital age, as clearly illustrated in DEH. Every person has to decide how they want to interact with social media. Many actors do not read anything written about them and ask others not to inform them of what is being said. For many it’s just not good for their mental health.

However, it’s here and it’s not going anywhere. When you’re dealing with theatre stans it’s gonna be intense. There’s lot of love on the YouTube trailer posts to counter any modest wig shade out there.

---

dramamama611 said: "If people were ONLY saying things that way, it would be fine....but many posts (or perhaps the ones that stuck out to me) are far more mean spirited than that."

If people are attacking Ben Platt as a person, that is very mean-spirited. And while those people will still share their opinions, it does suck. I hope that Ben does what he needs to do to protect his mental health if he chooses to read those comments. I do not know the celebrity experience, but I imagine you have to build some pretty strong boundaries.

I don't believe saying things like, "I wish they would have cast someone else as Evan", "Ben Platt has aged out of Evan Hansen", or "The CGI effects don't appear super effective" are mean-spirited. I haven't really seen many comments on this thread that I would put in the "mean & nasty" category, but I also know that other social media outlets (i.e. Twitter) are a whole different world.

I will say again that I find Ben Platt very, very talented. He has already had a pretty incredible career, and I believe that he will continue to do so. It's possible to believe these things while simultaneously being critical of his casting in the DEH film adaptation.

Updated On: 5/20/21 at 12:29 PM

jlindsey865 said: "Alex Kulak2 said: "Can we talk about why in the movie, Connor writes his name giant on Evan's cast? In the stage show, it's a practical thing, because the people at the back of the balcony need to see it. In the movie, I thought it might be more affecting for him to write his name normal-sized or even in little tiny print. It was always kind of a plot holehow Cynthia doesn't notice it until the very end of the scene in the principal's office. Making it smaller, where she has to get up close to notice it, might have that make more sense."

I noticed that to. It definitely makes Connor's intent seem more malicious than in the stage version."


That’s really interesting. I never considered that the letters were written gigantically so that they could be seen throughout the theater. Now that I think about it, it makes sense.


I always interpreted Connor’s actions as being malicious. I thought that by writing his name obnoxiously large, he was just being a jerk. And his comment about them not having friends was his way of making Evan feel bad. A classic case of a miserable person tearing others down so that they also feel miserable.

Bettyboy72 said: "It is interesting that we actually never learned the reasons why Connor was so mean in an attempt to humanize him. We only learned of Evan's lies about Connor. Another one of the plot issues for me, is inessence, Connor remains a really unpleasant person who hurt other people. I think it would have been nice for Evan or Zoe to actually unearth some truth about Connor that would shed light on his pain. As it stands, his annoying yoga mom and workaholic dad are left holding the bag. now they have to deal with Evan's deception on top of that. It's really ugly."

They actually flesh out Connor's story in the novel version - and had a bit of a twist (I'll let readers find out on their own). I hope they kind of incorporate it into the movie as it does add more depth to the character.

Ben has confirmed that it's not a wig:

(1) Ben Platt on Twitter: "I’m v flattered that ppl think my locks are a wig and I hate to burst bubbles but sadly those are my own jew curls @dehmovie" / Twitter

It’s a wig. A bad one.