High FIdelity 12/13- Page 2
High FIdelity 12/13
Stand-by Joined: 10/16/06
re: High FIdelity 12/13#25
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:11pm
i personally dont see how Will Chase was miscast, he is a great Rob. ive never read the book, but ive been a fan of the movie for years, and he makes the character so much better and likeable than John Cusack did. actually, the only person from the movie that i thought was better was Jack Black.
Im not saying this is a perfect show, its not. That doesnt mean its not a great show. The point of a show is make you have fun and forget whats going on outside the walls of the theater. High Fidelity did that for me, and i had a ball watching it. I know this show isnt for everyone, its more of a guy show(not saying girls wont like tho, because i know a few who do), and you will enjoy the show alot more if you're REALLY into music. At least this show is somewhat original, and not just taking the songs of some group and wrapping a story around it and calling it a musical.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#26
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:13pmThere is a way to do "fun" with intelligence. I don't see that on display here.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#28
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:26pmI got tickets to the 7pm show on the 17th.... like a day before they announced it was closing at that performance. Talk about weird.
Stand-by Joined: 10/16/06
re: High FIdelity 12/13#29
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:28pmnever said it was an intelligent show. is a fun show.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#30
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:35pmAll theatre should be rooted in intelligence, regardless of the subject.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#31
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:41pm
bobby- could you specify? intelligence how? in what area?
the subject matter?
the creators?
the actors?
and remember, intelligence is subjective. some people thought Urinetown was the dumbest piece of theatre since Cats, and others thought it was the most brilliant thing to come along in many a year.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#32
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:41pmWhy can't you walk into a theatre and turn your brain off and laugh a little, just like you can with a movie (aside from the fact that you've paid 10 times as much to see a Broadway show)? Sometimes it's nice to just have a little fun.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#33
Posted: 12/14/06 at 3:46pmI'm sorry, but even though I really enjoyed the show and am going back to see it a second time this Saturday evening, I agree with BobbyBubby.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#34
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:02pm
Im not saying that theatre shouldn't be fun. It seems to me though, that certain shows around here are praised despite large mistakes that could have been solved with an little innovation and intelligence. It seems to me that producers prey on their audience's attraction to a property rather than creating a solid product that is both artistic and escapist.
There are quite a few shows that allow you to escape, but handle themselves with great class, intellgence, and innovation. This doesn't happen to be one of them.
I guess I will never really get the "this is just supposed to be fun" argument. For me, if you want to turn your brain completely off, it should be at home and not in a theatre that costs 100+ bucks to get the mindless escapism you can get at home.
'
For me, theatre is a quilt or a gigantic yearbook. There are historic, beautiful shows that belong in the record books or at least deserve mention. A lot of what is coming out these days doesn't seem to be contributing to the landscape of the American Musical. These shows seem to deny history and prey on an audience member's television and movie aesthetic, and conveniently leaving out the very principals of what makes musical theatre work. They seem bent on pushing the familiar rather than being truly creative. Sure, movie’s have been musicals for ages, but this new trend has really gotten out of hand.
It seems to me, that on this board, there is a forgiveness factor for mindless entertainment that stars anyone related to Rent, or, more broadly, anything with friendly actors who make for a great stage door experience. Just an experienced option based on a few years on this site.
My opinions are in no way meant to bash your personal views, but, merely come from a sadness seeing what musical theatre has become to so many people and how easily lazy shows are forgiven just because they may have a recognizable actor or a mindless mission. Sure, you can enjoy these shows, but are they as satisfying as a truly moving or truly innovative theatrical experience. Do these shows belong in the history books?
re: High FIdelity 12/13#35
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:09pmyes. if there was ever a book displaying the history of bad, meaningless fluff musicals, (which there should be).
re: High FIdelity 12/13#36
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:10pm
Well, NOt Since Carrie, though there are tons of gems in there too.
I think some of these shows are best left forgotten.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#37
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:11pm
Stand-by Joined: 10/16/06
re: High FIdelity 12/13#38
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:15pmmy "forgiveness factor" is simply because i thought will chase did a great job in the show. i have never seen rent, and i just started going to broadway shows earlier this year, so i have no biases for or against actors. im not saying high fidelity is going to go down in history as an amazing play, im just saying i enjoyed it and i am sad to see it go, everyone has opinions.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#39
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:20pmWell, pay the producers about 2 million bucks and I'm sure they'll keep it around for you.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#40
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:28pm
I can definitely see where you're coming from, BobbyBubby. However, stage musicals from movies, whatever the producer's non- admirable intentions, can be quite artistically sound, in my opinion. I find many shows to be intelligently crafted, although they may be exceedingly commercial and based on sale- able commodities. For example, I find The Full Monty to be an admirable, thoughtful, creative attempt by the artists involved. In my opinion, they articulated the characters and story uniquely for the stage in a way that was interesting and entertaining for me to watch. This takes just as much artistry as adapting a musical from a book or a previously written play or any other source material.
This is an opinion that many theatergoers (on this board and off) have held about The Wedding Singer, and now High Fidelity.
There is certainly a different between escapist musical theater and mindless, badly crafted stage shows. But usually, this is truly a matter of opinion.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#41
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:37pmYou can enjoy the Wedding Singer, but if you think it is finely crafted (the general you, not specifically you Frenzy), you really need to pick up a Theatre 101 book
re: High FIdelity 12/13#42
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:46pmI strongly agree with you Bobby. There is a huge difference between a fun and entertaining night of theatre spent watching "The Full Monty" or "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels" than there is watching "Footloose." The first 2 actually manage to elevate already superb material. The other shows that the only thing the movie really had going for it was John Lithgow, Kevin Bacon, and a stellar soundtrack. Without those elements, it falls horribly flat.
"Shut up! It's been 29 years!!!" --the incomparable Patti LuPone in her MUCH DESERVED Tony acceptance speech for Gypsy.
Kitzy's Avatar du Jour: Kitzy as Little Red Ridinghood in her college's production of "Into the Woods"
re: High FIdelity 12/13#43
Posted: 12/14/06 at 4:49pmFully MOnty and DRS are great examples Kitz. Those shows were so smart, yet, didn't have the big, dark themes that most people think art should be about.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#44
Posted: 12/14/06 at 5:01pmBobbyBubby, I'm with you 100%. DRS and Full Monty are excellent shows.
re: High FIdelity 12/13#45
Posted: 12/14/06 at 5:16pmJust to contribute to the discussion, at Tuesday night's show, Will went on for Act I, and his understudy (I think Walker?) went on for Act II. :)
Stand-by Joined: 10/16/06
re: High FIdelity 12/13#46
Posted: 12/14/06 at 5:19pmyeah it was Jon Patrick Walker...you were at tuesdays show?
re: High FIdelity 12/13#47
Posted: 12/14/06 at 5:24pmBobby - do you feel the same way about music and film? Should they all be rooted in intelligence too? I'm all for intelligence in any art-work, I even prefer it, but there IS a place for mindless entertainment. I don't necessarily think it's intelligent to put a mindless musical on Broadway at today's prices, but go back to vaudeville and the Follies - slapstick and puns ruled the day -- nothing wrong with that!
re: High FIdelity 12/13#48
Posted: 12/14/06 at 5:27pm
As I said, mindless drivel is for film and tv, not theatre, in my opinion. Theatre's main problem is its need to mimic film and tv. I'm not going to argue this any more, its clearly falling on deaf ears.
Vaudeville and slapstick had a style and intelligence behind it.
Joined: 12/31/69
re: High FIdelity 12/13#49
Posted: 12/14/06 at 5:32pm
It's a bit unfair to slap the "unintelligent" and "mindless" labels on High Fidelity. While you might not have seen the humor in the show, it takes someone with a witty comedic mind to write some of the jokes in the show. While it's certainly not as intelligent or high-brow as something like Company or Grey Gardens, it's also not Mamma Mia or Hairspray. There are definite moments in High Fidelity that reveal a certain sense of wit on the part of the writers.
I'm not claiming that High Fidelity is superbly crafted or some sort of theatrical masterpiece, but to disregard the entire show as unintelligent doesn't seem right.
Videos
