How a Spider-Man musical became a theatrical disaster — Page 2

Ugh. I never said there weren't women in rock. I never objected to the idea of women in rock. That was never the point, at all. There are a number of not just good but great female rock singers. I never even said their weren't sopranos in rock: I said they were rare. And that is simply fact. Most rock does not use a soprano voice, it is not a voice inherent to the form. It is not voice the sound requires or often utilizes. Just get over it and move on.

Back on track:

Spider-Man needed to embrace the actual Spider-Man mythos. It was the only way for the show to work because, maybe thanks more to the movies now than the comic books, just about everyone who is interested in superhero stories knows and likes that mythos.

No one wants a Spider-Man that centers on a silly, campy villain--the whole shot in the arm comic books and comic book movies have gotten since the 1980's is by rejecting a campy approach to their subject. It needed to be centered on Peter Parker. It needed to be about him and his struggles, and the unique mixture of strength and weakness that came with being Spider-Man.

Obviously, there was still room for a soprano voice, if the need was felt for one, in either Gwen Stacy or Mary Jane Watson (depending on which heroine they chose to go with), they just couldn't be the center of the evening. Because they aren't the center of the story: Spider-Man and his villains are. But Spider-Man: Turn off the Dark was built around the idea that a soprano has to be the focus of the show, and since a villain could conceivably be a big part of the story's focus, they chose an irrelevant villain and camped her up just for the sake of supplying the "need" for a particular kind of voice. It was as boneheaded a decision based on as boneheaded a premise as is possible.

If you make a musical about a subject, it's best for the musical's main focus to be on that subject. And the main focus of a Spider-Man musical has to be--this isn't complex or difficult to figure out--Spider-Man.

It can't be "obviously silly" when in fact rock rarely uses a soprano voice. That's just reality. Now let's move on. You can be a big boy and admit you were wrong, or simply not reply. Up to you.

You can discuss other aspects of Spider-Man, now. You always could have, if you really were more interested in that than arguing.

JBroadway said: "I was enjoying the content of your debate before it turned into a pissing contest.

Hogan, if joevitus' "faux pas" was saying that the rock music world is male-heavy, you haven't really offered much in the way of convincing counterarguments. Unless I missed something, the last thing you said on that specific point was to say that "they aren't as big of a minority as you think." But that's not really going to change anyone's mind, is it? That's why that part of your debate has remained in a loop.

And then you tried to steer the conversation back to rock musicals, and Joevitus did goalong,making valid points about how forcing in a certain type of voice because of an arbitrary rule of thumb makes even less sense in musical theatre, because musicals need to put storytelling first.

However, Joevitus --unless I missed something, itlooks like you haven'tresponded to Hogan's other point: that regardlessof the way things are in the mainstream rock world, and regardless of how things SHOULD be with musical storytelling,in rock musicals it ISvery common for there to be soprano voices (if not in principal roles, then at least in the vocal ensemble). Hogan, forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth, but it sounds like you want Joevitus to acknowledge that point."

There is no question but that nearly every rock musical has utilized a soprano voice. Indeed, the whole reason Yitzhak is played by a woman in Hedwig is so the show can incorporate that sound. I have no argument with the reality of that, only with the lazy thinking that in this case led to the utilization of one. (Though many rock fans deride rock musicals for not really being rock--and the use of such an atypical voice may be part of the reason why).

Updated On: 12/2/20 at 12:32 PM

I saw it in its last incarnation. (Sat in that special mezz section. The flying zone or whatever they called it) The show didn't look cheap to me. I actually found it to be the most visually stunning thing I had seen on a Broadway stage. Now the rest of it was a bit of a mess. I remember when they announced that Bono and The Edge were writing the music and thought "Hmm, this just went south." I am a big U2 fan but it just made me wonder in what direction they were going with this. All in all, I still had a blast at the show. Afterwards I was really sorry I was not able to have seen it in all of its incarnations.

I had actually planned to see it again just to "see" it but never got back. Really glad I saw it as it introduced me to Reeve Carney. I know a lot of people don't care for him but I love his voice. JMO

I don't think it was particularly worse than Moulin Rouge. Really fancy sets. Good cast. Should be a good plot. But feels like an empty, hollow, theme park show without the heart and soul of a typical Broadway musical.

I remember it being fine. Moulin Rouge was fine too but I paid $200 for it, which is way too much for a "fine" show. ha.

joevitus said: "Tough. There aren't many sopranos in rock, it's a voice almost totally out of sympathy with the nature of the form, and all you have to do is look at the history of the genre to see that.

Actually, I have said I waswrong or don't know about something, so I can't be "a genuine know-it-all of the worst kind." But I won't go along with the pretense that something false is true just because everyone else is playing along, and I won't pretend to be wrong when I'm right just to make others happy. I guess you're one of those people who prefer group-think to reality. If so, it isn't surprising you don't care for my comments."

Joe, in this case, I have twice demonstrated that you were wrong, both within musical theatre and across the broad genre. You have not engaged with what I presented. To me that is not a know-it-all but someone exhibiting Trump-like qualities. Totally out of sympathy? Seriously? You can't be serious. LOL

joevitus said: "You haven't presented anything. You said something about sopranos not being "the small minority" I think, but if they are a minority of any kind in the genre, my point stands."

well, actually I have and the funny thing about this board is that you can go see it. But you won't because, as rehearsed, you don't engage with anything, you just keep saying the same thing over and again despite what anyone says. If you want to address my refutation of your point, I will respond. Otherwise you are just, to quote someone else, being insufferable, and I'd rather not waste any more time on you.

well in the musical theatre realm I suggested as a first step looking at the current Tony nominees for best musical, which has sopranos very well represented. If you want to take the next step I think you will find sopranos well represented in musicals in this century. But the other list may be more to the point, which is that sopranos are extremely well represented in the Grammys for rock this year and it is not atypical.

based on the singing voices and vocal arrangements.

joevitus said: "But somehow, you've decided that rock musicals mark the majority of rock performances or set the style for rock music performance. Not so."

I have no idea where you got that notion; I never said that and never would.

"I have no difficulty agreeing that rock musicals haveused soprano voices, but it was never my argument that they didn't. My argument is that rock music as a form has not primarily depended on that kind of, and therefore Spider-Man--which was trying to prove its rock bonafides by employing Bono--did not need to, either."

Actually, that was not your argument. Your argument was that "It seems the antithesis of sound musical theater thinking think a show has to have anything. It's always a queston of what works for the specific show (no soprano leads in Pacific Overtures). And rock rarely uses a soprano voice, anyway." As rehearsed, I agreed with everything except your throwaway employing "rarely." That has been the cause of all of this nonsense. Now it seems that the root of the problem is your use of "rare" to mean not " primarily." That is inaccurate of course. You did not need that error to cloud your argument; sometimes you've got to know when to fold em (not sung by Kenny Rogers in a soprano voice).

When I am wrong, I say so. You don't. But it does not matter because the internet doesn't lie. The more you write the more Trump-like you become. Bye.