Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:09pm
broadwayboy223 said: "I thought Julianne had an okay voice but the most distracting part of her performance was her acting. There was no character at all. She just batted her eyelashes a lot. And whoever mentioned that the relationship between Sandy and Danny was underdeveloped was so right. "
Because they're all such a well-written characters . . .
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:11pm
newintown said: "DigificWriter, you make the error that Helicopter Parents (and others) make by assuming that there IS such a thing as "universally appropriate for kids," as well as the error that you (and those who think like you) are the person who decides what is universally appropriate for kids.
"
This isn't about being a "helicoptor parent" or the "morality police"; it's about recognizing the common sense wisdom of what is or is not appropriate for kids.
Grease may have been marketed as being family-friendly, but if you actually sit down and think about the content of some of the songs and the themes that the show deals with, it becomes decidedly less-so.
You're free to do what you want with your own children, but calling Grease "family-friendly" as if it's some universally understood truth is grossly misrepresenting the situation (at least IMO).
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:15pm
BobbyBubbi said: "broadwayboy223 said: "I thought Julianne had an okay voice but the most distracting part of her performance was her acting. There was no character at all. She just batted her eyelashes a lot. And whoever mentioned that the relationship between Sandy and Danny was underdeveloped was so right. "
Because they're all such a well-written characters . . .
"
True. I've never had a fondness for Grease and this production did not change my mind.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:18pm
Looks like Grease Live! passed The Wiz in ratings. Good day for live theatre!
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:22pm
I agree with Theatre_Nerd. There is some content/dialogue in "Grease" that is definitely not kid-friendly. At times, some of us don't actually focus on the actual dialogue and instead concentrate on the dancing/singing. I myself watched Grease (197
as a high school junior. I wasn't aware of the racy lyrics then. People in years past may not have taken notice of such racy content, but people are more aware of that these days. Whether you agree with him or not, Theatre_Nerd's views DO matter. It is highly ridiculous for anyone to state that his/her opinion is valid and another one's is not. That's so junior high-ish.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:23pm
"This isn't about being a "helicoptor [sic] parent" or the "morality police"; it's about recognizing the common sense wisdom of what is or is not appropriate for kids."
And again, you make the error of assuming that your point of view represents some universal notion of "common sense."
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:36pm
The biggest loser of the night might just be Alex Rudzinski. Who you ask? Well he co-directed alongside Kail and is the reason the show looked so great and was executed so seamlessly. Yet he's been completely swept under the rug today, in the shadow of the fawning over Kail.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:40pm
At least it gives you something to be indignant about, though, so that's good, right?
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:42pm
^^ Not completely. I noticed. The transitions were great. The move in and out of Freddie My Love was brilliant. There could have been more of that.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:56pm
At least it gives you something to be indignant about, though, so that's good, right?
Yes, yes it does.
Thank you for your contribution to this thread.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 2:56pm
Yeah, Grease is definitely not for kids. I remember when it first came on HBO and my 5 and 6 year old cousins walked in the room just as the scene with Riz and Kenickie are getting it on in the back seat of the car and I remember my mom sending them out of the room.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:01pm
Grease is fine for children. Kids watching Grease is like Adults watching CATS. You have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on, but the dancing, music and cool costumes keeps your attention.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:04pm
Shrek3 said: "Grease is fine for children. Kids watching Grease is like Adults watching CATS. You have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on, but the dancing, music and cool costumes keeps your attention.
LOL..that is until you get your kids asking you what "Fongool means" and "Daddy what's a gang bang?" LMFPRAO!!!
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:06pm
newintown said: ""This isn't about being a "helicoptor [sic] parent" or the "morality police"; it's about recognizing the common sense wisdom of what is or is not appropriate for kids."
And again, you make the error of assuming that your point of view represents some universal notion of "common sense."
"
Recognizing that Grease has non-child-appropriate content isn't expressing a "point of view"; it's just recognizing the reality of the situation and utilizing common sense in doing so.
I don't have an opinion on this one way or the other, but just based on content alone, Grease really isn't as family-friendly as it's been marketed to be.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:09pm
I generally enjoyed it, and thought it was an amazing technical feat. But, performance wise, I was bored with both Carly Rae Jepson and Boys 2 Men. I thought the new song was pretty awful, along with Beauty School Dropout. And, like someone else said, they were seemingly doing impresssions of actors from the movie.
Hough surprised me in a good way, and though he looked too old, Tveit was fine doing his Travolta impersonation. I thought Hudgens really came to life in the second half.
I would actually like to watch it again without all of the commercia breaks and Mario Lopez yapping at me. I kept thinking to myself - "where's James Marsden when you need him?"
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:10pm
I think I remember the trailer for the film's 20th anniversary that Paramount digitally erased the cigarettes in any scene used for the trailer.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:16pm
I watched the movie religiously at 5 or 6 years old and I'm pretty sure most of the adult content went over my head.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:19pm
"Recognizing that Grease has non-child-appropriate content isn't expressing a "point of view"; it's just recognizing the reality of the situation and utilizing common sense in doing so."
You may very well see it as "common sense;" you should realize that others see it as prudish, repressed, puritanical, priggish, square, Victorian, unenlightened, etc.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:23pm
ljay889 said: "I watched the movie religiously at 5 or 6 years old and I'm pretty sure most of the adult content went over my head.
The movie was released when I was 9. I understood and knew all the "dirty" stuff. I grew up in the South Bronx, LOL.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:23pm
newintown said: ""Recognizing that Grease has non-child-appropriate content isn't expressing a "point of view"; it's just recognizing the reality of the situation and utilizing common sense in doing so."
You may very well see it as "common sense;" you should realize that others see it as prudish, repressed, puritanical, priggish, square, Victorian, unenlightened, etc.
"
My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
I don't have any idea where you got the notion that expressing the facts of the situation, which are that Grease's content is by no means as family-friendly as it's been marketed to be, is any of the things you just said.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 3:28pm
DigificWriter said: "newintown said: ""Recognizing that Grease has non-child-appropriate content isn't expressing a "point of view"; it's just recognizing the reality of the situation and utilizing common sense in doing so."
You may very well see it as "common sense;" you should realize that others see it as prudish, repressed, puritanical, priggish, square, Victorian, unenlightened, etc.
My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
I don't have any idea where you got the notion that expressing the facts of the situation, which are that Grease's content is by no means as family-friendly as it's been marketed to be, is any of the things you just said.
DigificWriter, don't take some of these guys too seriously. They have a way of twisting and misconstruing someone else's opinion or point of view to suit their own agenda or to justify their own skewed views.
It's all bullsh!t.
Updated On: 2/1/16 at 03:28 PM
Posted: 2/1/16 at 4:34pm
I just watched again on Fox.com. just as good 2econd time.
Actually even better, they corrected the dead air during Hand Jive and the static during Hopelessly Devoted.
Posted: 2/1/16 at 5:14pm
Thanks. I will be watching again on fox.com this evening
Btw, are there any more posters you wish to chastise for repeating something that was said 12 pages ago? I know you love to do that.
Stop. this isn't about winning anything. Why are some of you so incapable of just having a discussion on an adult level without resorting to insults and condescension. It's downright petty. I'm not engaging in this discussion any longer.
"
Posted: 2/1/16 at 7:04pm
I did really enjoy this broadcast and pretty much the whole cast. The one part that kinda put a damper on things for me was Carly's new song. I understand wanting to give the internationally famous pop star a moment to sing, and I'm all for it since I find her very charming. But why not just have her sing the wonderful "Raining on Prom Night" at the dance like they had Jan do in the last revival to highlight Lindsay Mendez? Heck, make it a duet so Kether could have sung something, too. But hindsight's 20/20, I guess. I stil adored the show.
