Dave the Musical — Page 2

But the creators back then wanted their musicals to survive on their own, not be dragged along by some movie brand. They wanted to create something NEW and they did.

Well, it really sounds like you're more hung up on the title than anything else. And there has been much on the subject about how the distancing from the source material actually inhibited a lot of the musical adaptations of the golden age, such as with Here's Love, Take Me Along or Breakfast at Tiffany's. A new title doesn't mean a better show, just as leveraging a popular title doesn't mean they aren't creating something new or different. Such as the case with The Full Monty, Billy Elliot, Kiss of the Spider Woman, La Cage aux Folles, Grand Hotel, Sunset Boulevard, The Producers, Thoroughly Modern Millie or Hairspray. And for the record, I loved Legally Blonde (especially the superior London production) even moreso than the film. Despite using the same title, to me, it played like classic musical comedy.

Mister Matt said: "But the creators back then wanted their musicals to survive on their own, not be dragged along by some movie brand. They wanted to create something NEW and they did.

Well, it really sounds like you're more hung up on the title than anything else. And there has been much on the subject about how the distancing from the source material actually inhibited a lot of the musical adaptations of the golden age, such as with Here's Love, Take Me Along or Breakfast at Tiffany's. A new title doesn't mean a better show, just as leveraging a popular title doesn't mean they aren't creating something new or different. Such as the case with The Full Monty, Billy Elliot, Kiss of the Spider Woman, La Cage aux Folles, Grand Hotel, Sunset Boulevard, The Producers, Thoroughly Modern Millie or Hairspray. And for the record, I loved Legally Blonde (especially the superior London production) even moreso than the film. Despite using the same title, to me, it played like classic musical comedy."

I'm glad you like Legally Blonde - I found it dreadful in every way. And of your list, how many are based on movies of the last two decades? Hmmm. But I'm not "hung up" on anything - You think Take Me Along should have been Ah, Wilderness, The Musical? I don't. And funny, ain't it, about Here's Love, which is now called Miracle on 34th Street, The Musical - why? Because NOW they want the BRAND. Then they didn't. NOW they call Sugar Some Like it Hot, The Musical because NOW they want the BRAND. And what is your point about Breakfast at Tiffany's? Originally called Holly Golightly, they changed it because they mistakenly thought the title would get butts in seats. You know the outcome.

And funny, ain't it, about Here's Love, which is now called Miracle on 34th Street, The Musical - why? Because NOW they want the BRAND. Then they didn't. NOW they call Sugar Some Like it Hot, The Musical because NOW they want the BRAND.

And in the case of both, it was often thought that NOT leveraging the title was a mistake. Here's Love was always a terrible title for a musical based on Miracle on 34th Street and Sugar was considered a fairly strong show that had trouble developing an audience. Some Like It Hot may have brought in more advance. It's not "funny", it's smart. Because if you want to produce those shows today, you're going to have a MASSIVE uphill climb to sell tickets based on their original titles as they were never established as known hits.

And what is your point about Breakfast at Tiffany's? Originally called Holly Golightly, they changed it because they mistakenly thought the title would get butts in seats. You know the outcome.

I do know the outcome. Distancing itself by changing the title didn't change the quality of the material. Criticizing a show based on your supposition of the motives of the creators with respect to "branding" is just a prejudice that disregards everything else about the product and process.

Mister Matt said: "And funny, ain't it, about Here's Love, which is now called Miracle on 34th Street, The Musical - why? Because NOW they want the BRAND. Then they didn't. NOW they call Sugar Some Like it Hot, The Musical because NOW they want the BRAND.

And in the case of both, it was often thought that NOT leveraging the title was a mistake. Here's Love was always a terrible title for a musical based on Miracle on 34th Streetand Sugar was considered a fairly strong show that had trouble developing an audience. Some Like It Hot may have brought in more advance. It's not "funny", it's smart. Because if you want to produce those shows today, you're going to have a MASSIVE uphill climb to sell tickets based on their original titles as they were never established as known hits.

And what is your point about Breakfast at Tiffany's? Originally called Holly Golightly, they changed it because they mistakenly thought the title would get butts in seats. You know the outcome.

I do know the outcome. Distancing itself by changing the title didn't change the quality of the material. Criticizing a show based on your supposition of the motives of the creators with respect to"branding" is just a prejudice that disregards everything else about the product and process."



Says you, my friend, says you. They stayed away from The Miracle on 34th Street and Some Like It Hot because they WANTED to. Was it a mistake? Not back then it wasn't. Neither of those shows would have done better had they used the movie titles. But then you'd probably think a smash hit like Hello, Dolly! (some would say that's not a very strong title) should have been called The Matchmaker because people would have heard of that play and film. No. And you'd think a smash hit like Promises, Promises should have been called The Apartment, The Musical because, you know, it was an Oscar-winning film from a mere nine years prior. No. Neither of those shows wanted to use the movie title and both of those shows were massive successes without them. Today is a different world and taking movies of the past two decades, no matter WHAT is ALL about branding. That's movie crap, not theater, I'm afraid. But let's add up the flop to hit ratio on this and let me know what you find.

Back to Dave, The Musical--

I hear it's happening at a regional theater (where it would make sense, given its subject matter) in the next season. BUT who ever knows about these things.

I actually find "Dave the Musical" less offensive in the adaption genre only because it's pretty obscure. It's one thing to adapt "La La Land" to a full fledged musical, but a small 90s movie most don't remember? Pretty obscure. I think the "hits" of the past decade have all been obscure movie titles or books - The Band's Visit, Light in the Piazza, Once, heck, even Wicked - so I'm not sure much can be said in terms of wanting the "brand."