How would've- Page 3

[robbiej]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 3:39pm

Perhaps, in that production, when she comes back, Higgins thinks she's a burglar and shoots her.

Now THAT would be something to spoil. As it would be new to that production.

But plot points for shows that are old enough to fight and die in the Iraq war??? Come now.

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 3:39pm

People, it's not a spoiler that will ruin the show, or even has a huge bearing on the plot.

[Pippin]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 3:43pm

yeah, Millie, please report your experience of my fair lady with the rest of us, I know I am dying to know what happens. but make sure you post spoilers, because I know it's been out for 50 years, with a movie, and at least 500 high school productions a year, but I haven't seen it yet.

[postergirl]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:04pm

I'm sure you meant no harm, but it was kind of an unthinking thing to do, Pippin. I've not seen ITW, and would have preferred not to have this information screaming in a thread title.

[robbiej]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:06pm

But if you've WANTED to see the show, you've had every opportunity to do so, since it's available on tape/dvd.

So really, it's all on you for not having seen it.

[postergirl]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:10pm

Not really, Robbiej. I would like to see it at some point - just haven't gotten around to it. That doesn't mean I appreciate having the ending trumpetted in the thread title. Pippin could just have easily titled his/her thread without giving that away. But thanks for the blame - I haven't had any yet today.

[robbiej]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:14pm

First of all, it's not the ending. It's actually relatively minor in terms of the theme of the show. When you finally 'get around' (YOU'VE HAD 20 YEARS) to seeing it, you'll understand that.

Honestly, I would not expect anyone to censor a post (or post title) about the ending of CASABLANCA simply because I haven't gotten around to seeing it. It would be my own fault.

[LeaGirl]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:16pm

You're set then, the ending wasn't trumpeted in the thread title, since the point in discussion isn't the end of the show.

I rarely laugh out loud but some of the stuff on the past two pages has been totally chuckle worthy. These threads always seem to come to brighten up my afternoons... is it just that people get twitchy around 3?

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:16pm

"Why, thanks for the spoilers, since I've never seen INTO THE WOODS."

Avoid the topic then. "Spoiling" Into The Woods is like spoiling Les Mis at this point.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:19pm

How can one avoid it when it's in the title?

[RockabyeHamlet]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:36pm

Thinking about it: I think the charecters throw the narrator to the giant in order to choose their own destinies, much like people who reject religion. Except that they still can't control the repercussions of their actions.

[FosseForever3]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 4:42pm

"I agree- act two probably would've ended just as sweetly and "ever afterly" as act one. No one would have learned anything, and would've kept wishing for more than they had."

This is interesting. If you mean God in the Christian sense, as in Jesus Christ, then you're sort of saying that if the narrator(God) had lived the characters would have remained the same. Hmm...I agree! Kind of. I mean, if Jesus hadn't died (and more importantly risen) we would all have remained ignorant too.

"so if you take God as narrator position, I guess the show is saying that we are better off without religion because then we are held accoutable for our own actions, and cannot blame them on anything else. WE are forced to think for ourselves, make our own decisions, and live with whatever consequences may arise. It may have been easier with a narrator, but the rewards are greater if we are accountable for ourselves."

Ok, here's where I find fault with your statements. Jesus gave his life willingly for us. The narrator was thrust in front of a giant forcefully. He didn't want to die for his characters! ALSO, I think God gave us free will to make our own decisions, mistakes, ect. The narrator was - well, narrating the story! The characters HAD to follow along for the first act. Just my two cents :)

[popular_elphie]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 5:08pm

"Why, thanks for the spoilers, since I've never seen INTO THE WOODS."

Avoid the topic then. "Spoiling" Into The Woods is like spoiling Les Mis at this point.
It's in the title. Usually, I read the titles of threads. I can't really avoid something I've already read, can you?

And LES MIS is a lot more popular than INTO THE WOODS (and still, I've only seen LES MIS very recently). As far as I know, there has never been a production of INTO THE WOODS in my hometown, and I really don't have the money to buy it offline (as I'm sure the local library wouldn't have had it) when I may not even like it.

[ahmelie]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 5:31pm

People, it's not a spoiler that will ruin the show, or even has a huge bearing on the plot.

Yeah, I didn't even remember that he died until reading this post! It's not a big deal. Saying who the murderer is in Curtains will actually *spoil* the show for you. Knowing the narrarator dies really won't affect anything.

[Pippin]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 5:54pm

"Ok, here's where I find fault with your statements. Jesus gave his life willingly for us. The narrator was thrust in front of a giant forcefully. He didn't want to die for his characters! ALSO, I think God gave us free will to make our own decisions, mistakes, ect. The narrator was - well, narrating the story! The characters HAD to follow along for the first act. Just my two cents :) "

I see your point. But I think it depends on how you look at it. Actually Jesus I'm sure did not want to die for us, his father made him do it. it was pre-destined. but remember, Jesus wept at the fact that he was going to have to sacrifice his life for humanity. he went into the garden the night before and begged not to be made to do the deed his father was going to have him do.

also, it comes down to how you view life, whether or not you think that God has pre-arranged it. if he has, then he is like the narrator, but if we really do have free-will, then you would be correct.

but what if we only think we have free will, and God still knows the choices we were going to make the whole time?

what I'm saying is that in today's times, the majority of people have rejected religion, and in doing so killed God in thier own way, just as the characters killed thier own narrator. And remember, OK, SPOILER TIME IF ANYONE WHO IS READING THIS HAS NOT SEEN THE DAMN SHOW!!!!!!!!

it was only the witch who threw him to the giant. some of the other characters threatened him, but it was only the witch (Satan, symbolically?) that threw him to his death.

Updated On: 8/2/07 at 05:54 PM

[FosseForever3]

Posted: 8/2/07 at 6:06pm

Oooh Pippin that is so interesting! It's true, Satan thought he had outsmarted God when Jesus was crucified!! Good one.

Yeah, you know it's pretty deep that whole free will analysis.

Again, my only qualm is that by doing away with the narrator, the characters are actually doing away with God, which can't be done in my opinion. Even if you reject God, I don't personally think you can ever do away with Him...soo that's where it gets sticky. But your comparisons are very thought provoking. Good thread!