Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS- Page 2

[AndAllThatJazz22]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#25

Posted: 11/8/08 at 5:21pm

I really hope it comes back, I really wanted to see it the first time around but but I didn't get the chance

"There's nothing good on. The media hates Christmas. The media loves vampires, though. Maybe they will show a Twilight Christmas."
-Danmeg's 10 year old son.

[Liza + Jesus = Patti]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#26

Posted: 11/8/08 at 5:22pm

what are our thoughts on amateur productions???

I'm not really understanding how this "Mad Lib" (fill-in-the-blank) structuring is going to work...

[logan0215]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#27

Posted: 11/8/08 at 6:23pm

I think it should be licensed as is.

"A Chorus Line" was based on real people and their actual stories (albeit heightened- but so is [tos]) and it continues to play with "other people" filling those roles after the OBC departed.

The show will have to go from being people playing themselves to people playing characters, but I don't think that will take away from the power of the material.

I rully rully want it to come back in April though :]
Updated On: 11/8/08 at 06:23 PM

[Weez]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#28

Posted: 11/8/08 at 6:39pm

You make a good point. :)

But half the fun of [TOS] is they merrily do their own thing wherever possible. If they can make the Madlibs version work - and if anyone can, it's Hunter and Jeff - then it could be awesome. :)

Notes from the Earlham Street Gutter

[broadwaytourist]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#29

Posted: 11/8/08 at 8:53pm

a. I am aware Daisies is not a sitcom. Thanks for pointing that out though since that correction certainly changed the whole point I was making.

b. Daisies may be good TV to some, but I think the premise is weak and I just couldn't hang with it. I tried to like it, but
just couldn't.

[timote316]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#30

Posted: 11/8/08 at 9:21pm

I'm sorry, but Bell is delusional if he actually thinks the economy was the cause of the show flopping. I still fail to see the logic behind it opening on Broadway period.

[SporkGoddess]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#31

Posted: 11/8/08 at 9:30pm

I don't really think that you can compare a show like Pushing Daisies to a sitcom. Apples to oranges comes to mind. That's why I said it.

Also, I think it's a fantastic show and that there are much better examples of bad TV.

Jimmy, what are you doing here in the middle of the night? It's almost 9 PM!

[vlegra]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#32

Posted: 11/8/08 at 9:34pm

Hopefully it will. It is a great show. I don't like the idea of licensing the show as a personalized version. The story is about Hunter and jeff not Paulo and Bob. I Still believe since the economy is not doing so well and not many people knew about the show it closed. If title of show is planning on re-opening on Broadway(which it should so tony voters can go see it) they need to make a lot more publicizing and getting the name out there more. Even tossers telling the world just like they did the last 3 weeks of the original run. Save title of show, save Broadway

[Dolly_Levi]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#33

Posted: 11/8/08 at 9:44pm

While I can understand that they might think about re-opening the show, it just doesn't seem like it would be any more viable on BWAY in the spring.

And if they opened OFF Bway (as NWS was mentioned) wouldn't that undermine the whole journey of the show?

Laughter is much more important than applause. Applause is almost a duty. Laughter is a reward. Carol Channing

[PiraguaGuy2]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#34

Posted: 11/8/08 at 9:48pm

Well, it's sort of like they finished the journey, and now they're just going to settle into retirement.

To be quite honest, I love [tos], but two things majorly piss me off about it:

1. The crazy fans.
2. This insistence to keep this show going and going. It got to Broadway, had a respectable run for what it was, has a cast recording out, could win a Tony...LET IT GO. People won't discover your show any more if you do than then if you realize the show's run its course.

Formerly SirNotAppearing - Joined 3/08

[Yero my Hero]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#36

Posted: 11/8/08 at 10:36pm

I think they'd do better off-Broadway, but the whole show (as it stands now) is about them making it to Broadway. Isn't it a bit anti-climactic to say, "We're going to Broadway!" in an off-Broadway theater?

Nothing matters but knowing nothing matters. ~ Wicked
Everything in life is only for now. ~ Avenue Q
There is no future, there is no past. I live this moment as my last. ~ Rent

"He's a tramp, but I love him."

[sparrman]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#37

Posted: 11/8/08 at 10:38pm

I've never seen the show, only heard the album. From this admittedly quite limited perspective, I'm wondering if this show could really survive being played by other people. Did the understudies ever even go on? It seems like a fun and funny show, possibly somewhat moving and inspirational. But isn't so much of the POINT of it that we're watching the actual people who wrote the show? Not to deny it its power, but it seems like a rather special "one-off" kind of thing that just might not survive other productions. Like watching someone else performing "Liza with a Z". What's the point?

Thoughts?

[logan0215]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#38

Posted: 11/8/08 at 10:56pm

You mean like Rachel Rak performing Liza with a Z in Fosse?

The material is about 2 guys writing a musical about 2 guys writing a musical just like Sweeney Todd is about a barber seeking vengeance on past foes. If you plopped a tourist in the theater with no background on the show, the natural assumption is that the play in front of them was written by someone else. Of course, there is a certain wink-wink nudge-nudge associated with knowing they wrote it, but its not the point entirely.

And yes, the understudies did go on during the Off-Broadway incarnation AND the NYMF version had Heidi playing a "character" who was based on the original girl Hunter and Jeff were working with and only changed her into Heidi once they were picked up to workshop the show.

[sparrman]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#39

Posted: 11/9/08 at 1:17am

I meant the whole "Liza with a Z" show, but perhaps it was a bad example anyway. I think you get my point, and I'm not really convinced by your "Sweeney Todd" analogy. My feeling is that this was more of an "event" than a "real show". I don't mean that in any sort of insulting way, I do like what I've heard, and it's a valid theatrical experience as is. But as I say, I haven't seen the whole show live, and so my perspective is limited. I'll shut up about it now. Good luck to them in whatever happens.

[RentBoy86]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#40

Posted: 11/9/08 at 1:54am

I don't understand the arguments. I saw the show on Broadway and I thought it worked perfectly in the space. It didn't feel lost and it didn't feel swallowed up by theater. And I loved the ending and how they incorporated the new space. Why can't a little show survive on Broadway? "39 Steps" is the same sort of deal. 4 No name actors. Sure, it has Hitchcock, but I've never heard of his film "39 Steps" before the show, and I really enjoy Hitchcock films. I think if they want to bring back [title of show] let them! I'd see it again. Probably a few times. It is a great show and it deserves some attention from the Tony voters. Will it win anything? Maybe not, but at least it gets the show out there and helps it transform into a commodity like "In The Heights" did.

[Corine2]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#41

Posted: 11/9/08 at 10:44am

Here is a video I did with him this summer.
I adore him;
My interview with Hunter Bell, he's so adorable!

[Weez]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#42

Posted: 11/9/08 at 11:21am

but I've never heard of his film "39 Steps" before the show

... I'm having difficulty coming up with a reply to this. "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent", I guess. O_o

[tos] as we know it is a musical about two guys writing a musical about two guys writing a musical. I imagine the madlibs version could end up being a musical about some people putting on a musical about two guys writing a musical about two guys writing a musical. Yeah, that got convoluted, but I hope it made sense. The show is already wrapped in layers, and I think this new layer could totally work. :)

Notes from the Earlham Street Gutter

Updated On: 11/9/08 at 11:21 AM

[broadwayjim42]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#43

Posted: 11/9/08 at 11:21am

I think a very limited, very finite run...perhaps two to three months, is a great idea. I love the show to death and welcome the opportunity to see it again in whatever venue they choose. But making it a between this date and this other date kind of deal will give those who want to see it a set time frame. No more "I hope it's still around in six months" and more "let's make plans and go now."

[shesamarshmallow]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#44

Posted: 11/9/08 at 11:21am

Why can't a little show survive on Broadway? "39 Steps" is the same sort of deal.

Except that people are going to see 39 Steps, and people weren't going to see [title of show].

broadwayunderstudies.com - most underrated performers on broadway

[GIZMO2]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#45

Posted: 11/9/08 at 12:59pm

Why can't a little show survive on Broadway? "39 Steps" is the same sort of deal.

"39 Steps" is based on a famous Hitchc*ck movie that basically anyone over 45 knows and loves, for various strange and sometimes campy reasons. It's a fun show with talented actors doing truly amazing performances on a barely-there stage.

Obviously it helps that most people over 45 actually have money in their pockets and enjoy paying to see a show that they can appreciate, vis-a-vis the gobs of tweenagers [tos]sers that flocked to the [tos] box office with only their student IDs.

Oh, and maybe it has something to the fact that at no point during "39 Steps" do the actors turn to their mothers, aunts, former teachers, fellow professionals, and critics of the show and talk about masturbation, sucking their big fat c*cks, and basically telling them all to go f-themselves!!!

In the world that many of us live in, expressing those kinds of sentiments to the people who basically give and sustain your life -- professional or otherwise -- is immature, unnecessary, and offensive. . . .

As box office returns from both "39 Steps" and [tos] have proven.

[dramamama611]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#46

Posted: 11/9/08 at 2:28pm

"Going from Broadway to catering jobs. How frickin' sad is that?"

No, how frickin' real is that?


REALLY: Happens ON all the time: Think LB; Xanaud; and all the other closed shows!


And I have no problem with other people playing Hunter and Jeff...it's called ACTING. (After all, Benjamin Franklin never actually appeared in 1776, did he?)

The bigger issue: if not enough people wanted to see this ON B'way, how are folks in Keoke going to come out for it?

Note: I enjoyed the show a great deal, but still in the camp that it never belonged on the Great White Way.

If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it? These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.

Updated On: 11/9/08 at 02:28 PM

[logan0215]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#47

Posted: 11/9/08 at 2:29pm

Holy missed-the-entire-point-of-[title of show] Batman!

You stated yourself why the box office returns were so differing. The 39 Steps has a solid base audience of people who know the material and are old enough to appreciate AND afford it. To imply that [title of show] is an exercise in revenge to former teachers, family and nay-sayers is absurd.

[title of show] has a vast appeal to all ages but does not have the recognition of brand that the previous has. Within its broad appeal, it also has a huge fanbase in the largely broke high school & college age group.

[wicked_beast4]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#48

Posted: 11/9/08 at 2:29pm

Did you just censor Hitchcock's name? Why? It's not like it's vulgar or anything.

"He found something that he wanted, had always wanted and always would want— not to be admired, as he had feared; not to be loved, as he had made himself believe; but to be necessary to people, to be indispensable." -F. Scott Fitzgerald's This Side of Paradise

[DrewBill]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#49

Posted: 11/9/08 at 2:50pm

I liked [tos], but I don't think the economy was the primary reason why it didn't last on Broadway -- the material just didn't work in that venue for your average Broadway theatergoer. Yes, the hardcore fans ate it up, but no one else did.

Bowen and Bell are very talented, and hopefully have bright futures ahead of them. They should be extremely happy with what they achieved with [tos], but it's time to put it aside and move on. I can't see the show working any better, or being any more successful a few months from now. And realistically, at best it's a very long shot for any significant Tony nominations. It's time to finally let [tos] go.

[Liza + Jesus = Patti]

re: Hunter Bell interview.. discussing downfall/future of TOS#50

Posted: 11/9/08 at 2:57pm

agreed, DrewBill.

MOVE ON