Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Do we really need those stomach lumps on Broadway?
Stage presence never was attached to an ab. Do they serve a purpose?
Updated On: 10/29/10 at 03:24 PM
Abs lure my attention...
They're hot. I fail to see the problem here.
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Okay, oblique muscles can stay.
Whoever knew what they were called until Mr. Morrison's became an issue. They rather remind me of this roomful of little Greek figurines of male torsos at the Louvre. They all had nice hips and those oblique things.
But stomach lumps? Who needs them?
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
It's like, metaphoric.
A six-pack is just a beer belly to me.
Huh? A six pack is like the anti beer belly...
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Stomach lumps can't sing to me. Updated On: 10/29/10 at 04:01 PM
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
Are you saying that before Matthew Morrison got a tv show no one referred to abs as ... abs?
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
That one guy up there doesn't have abs. He's got a little pot belly.
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/25/06
i don't know about broadway, but definitely needs those abs on ME!!!
I just googled Broadway Bares & grabbed a clean one.
Broadway needs abs. Otherwise Chicago should have no marketing campaign.
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
"Are you saying that before Matthew Morrison got a tv show no one referred to abs as ... abs?"
No one knew what obliques were called, or that anybody had any besides him before he ran around in his baby chicken suit on Broadway Bares.
The obliques are not stomach lumps. They are off to the side.
I can't imagine how Mr. Morrison became part of this discussion. Just running around showing off his stomach again, I suppose.
Updated On: 10/29/10 at 04:27 PM
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
Ethel Merman had a stomach you could do laundry on. And she'd show you for a quarter.
I still don't understand the f*cking question!!!
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
I can't imagine how Mr. Morrison became part of this discussion. Just running around showing off his stomach again, I suppose.
You're the one who said his name.
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Yes, after his near-nekkid form was 'splayed afore me.
But the point is, shouldn't we care more about say (if you are going to pick a body part to focus on) a dancer's wonderful legs which are used in performance than lumps on their stomach?
At least legs move and do things. You can't really "see" stomach abs support the back, which is all they apparently do.
Updated On: 10/29/10 at 04:39 PM
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/28/05
If you think a dancer's abs don't play a part in his dancing, then you are very mistaken. Nearly every muscle group is needed and used to pull it off. You wouldn't ask the same question of the ballet, would you? Of course abs are needed on Broadway, and depending on the show and its design there is nothing wrong with showing them off. Ordinarily I would say there are no stupid questions...
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Perhaps there is a difference between needing the abs to move and the strange focus on them.
It's like the lean long line of a dancer's arm compared to a weightlifter's that's all bunched up with muscle bulk.
Have they become a symbol of physical prowess? Are they an object of beauty, a fixation? The ab shots I see seem more like objectification, detracting attention away from the skills of a performer. Isn't a shot of a dancer in action more thrilling?
Updated On: 10/29/10 at 05:37 PM
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/21/05
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/20/05
I don't recall seeing six-packs on his portrayals.
Videos