Does 'A Classic' Automatically Equal Good?- Page 2

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/17/07 at 1:42pm

I don't think CATS and PHANTOM have yet to enter the pantheon--most of our experience of those shows are from the original productions, rather than years of many different interpretations and concepts--not that everything should be tinkered with a la Doyle, but with CATS and PHANTOM, we're really seeing one very long run of the same production--once more theatres begin to do it and we see what kind of legs (hee hee) it has past the original version, then we can start classic talk.

A classic doesn't mean you will like it, but it does imply a certain level of artistic merit and audience appeal.

Sorry you didn't like OUR TOWN, but that is likely more of a reflection of the production than the play--read it and then decide.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/17/07 at 3:12pm

No.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/17/07 at 5:40pm

It's perfectly understandalbe that today's audiences, who adore SPRING AWAKENING and LEGALLY BLONDE, wouldn't be capable of appreciating even a good production of the classics

[istillbelieve24601]

Posted: 5/17/07 at 6:06pm

Tom, I think it's possible to enjoy Spring Awakening and also enjoy classics like My Fair Lady. I try to keep a balence- my top four favorite shows are Fiddler on the Roof, My Fair Lady, Les Miserables and Into the Woods (in no particular order.)

It's the same with classic literature. Sure, "Twenty-Thousand Leagues Under the Sea" is a classic, but even literature teachers say it could get boring at times.

[EdmundOG]

Posted: 5/17/07 at 10:12pm

Or Moby-Dick. Some of that book is positively punishing.

"Classics"- Not automatically good.

Our Town- I've seen one good production. And it was by a director I know to be incompetent, so I think it was an accident.

Brigadoon- Just Stupid.