DISASTER Previews — Page 3

"I venture that the reason all of the songs are snippets is because to sing any longer means to pay royalties."

I recall once hearing that royalties must be paid if you sing or play more than 5 notes. So I'm sure they're paying royalties on all the songs credited in this show.

But yes, clearly the dream is to license this skit and try to milk some income out of it.

Yea, there is no way they're not paying royalties for these songs.

Maybe they pay less if they don't use the entire piece as published, but still they're paying something.

I'm shocked to hear such a negative review of what I considered to be perhaps the most fun and entertaining show I've seen. I suppose the impression people get out of it has to do greatly with their attitude on the way in. Any fun person with a good sense of humor who goes in looking forward to the show will absolutely love Disaster!

It was silly and ridiculous and I loved it because of that. Of course there were no original songs! That misses the point of this tribute/spoof of the 1970s. The show included snippets of just about every 70s hit song you can think of - it was not a concert so of course they did not play entire songs. I really enjoyed that each song was included not just to add in another 70s song, but each song fit the show perfectly as it's own punch line.

I was in the mezzanine and could not see the orchestra seating, but everyone in the mezzanine laughed the whole way through and gave a standing ovation during the too brief curtain call. I spoke with several people after the show who were still laughing and talked about how much they also enjoyed the show. One woman mentioned a stoic man who sat next to her, never cracking a smile. She mentioned this to me because she was so surprised by it (as am I). I guess some people just appreciate silly slapstick humor and a few just don't get it.

This thread is funnier than the stupid show.

We look forward to you sharing all your knowledge, hopes, and dreams with us!

lol Songs aren't licensed by the yard. Royalty fees are based on audience reach and the length of run (aka how many times will the song be performed during a given period of time).

And the number of notes and/or words is used for plagiarism lawsuits, not licensing agreements.

Hehe...Rudetsky would do better to turn this thread into a musical.

newintown said: "I've been fascinated by Rudetsky for quite some time - like a certain breed of celebrity from the mid-twentieth century, he has no exceptional talent for acting, singing, dancing, music - but he does have a "colorful" fast-talking persona, one that is manically devoted to musical theatre."

I used to watch the videos he posted on his private YouTube page back in the day, and I think he spoke about playing piano in pit orchestras before he was a writer for Rosie O'Donnell's talk show. And he did play for some of his guests on his show OBSESSED! So it may be inaccurate to say he has no talent, but I don't know how exceptional he is.

I was at last nights show and I rather liked it. Was it amazing, no. It was a fun show with a wonderful cast. I had not seen this when it played off Broadway so I really didn't have any preconceived ideas before I went in (I didn't even know this was a "jukebox" musical)I found it to be extremely funny, in a good way! I felt the campiness was done just right. I could not stop thinking how well this will do in the community theaters when it gets licensed. I do agree with Wizzer in the fact that a all the "snippets" of the songs seemed a bit odd. Why not sing the whole dang song?

Toeknail said: "Once we left there, we walked back to the lot to pick up our car and again spoke with a couple more people who had also just seen the show (they started the conversation because, I assume, they saw my daughter carrying her Playbill)."

Were they still laughing while you were waiting in the lot? Maybe that's how they knew you'd just seen the gut-busting hit of the season.

Close the window...it's shilly in here!

I can enjoy silly, irreverent shows that celebrate a campy sensibility. I enjoyed Xanadu- hell, I even loved Lucky Guy! But those shows (especially the former) displayed signs of craft and panache. Just because something is a silly spoof doesn't mean all craft gets to be thrown out the window. Book scenes ended abruptly and served no purpose, ideas were either undercooked over overused; this stuff is fine for St. Luke's, which houses some of the notoriously worst off-Broadway theater in New York, but it doesn't fly on Broadway.

Maybe the worst thing is that Rudetsky and Plotnick didn't seem to be able to get to the root of what made all those 70s disaster movies so fun in the first place. The satire was all wrong and they didn't even follow the rules of the genre. They shouldn't have been so scared to kill off more (main) characters. The disaster movies actually had a body count and these cast members were mostly deprived of their big death scenes. I can only imagine what Charles Busch would have done had he been asked to write (or doctor) the book.

I love how if someone has a positive opinion about a show around here they are always a "Shill" come on some people like it some won't.

Always? Or when a new person shows up strictly to shill for a show?