Is Next to Normal the new Spring Awakening?

[binau]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 3:17am

I don't know anything about Spring Awakening, so it IS a question more than a statement.

But when Spring Awakening first played, was it critically acclaimed, then gathered a massive teen fanbase until it was overrun and then the show lost some of its 'reputation'? (This is an ill-informed 'hypothesis' so again, Im' questioning not stating)

If so, will "Next to Normal" suffer the same fate?

(There is a professional production of Spring Awakening happening in Australia I'm waiting for, before I make a judgement on the show, in case you were wondering why I don't know anything about it).

[blaxx]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 4:02am

But when Spring Awakening first played, was it critically acclaimed, then gathered a massive teen fanbase until it was overrun and then the show lost some of its 'reputation'?

Pretty close. Yes, it was critically acclaimed and had pretty hardcore fans, but IMHO they weren't as extreme as they can be for other shows, or at least not in the same numbers. It had a few stalkers, the girl who saw it a trillion times, the spinach girl, etc. but you can't compare any of them to ReNtheads when it opened, for example.

Has this affected the reputation of the show? I think it's a very good production, strong score and staging. But I could've smacked a girl or two who confused Broadway with an N'Sync concert. They certainly made it difficult to take the show seriously, which is too bad.

If so, will "Next to Normal" suffer the same fate?
It really is nothing compared to ReNT, Wicked or Legally Blonde - those were hardcore and A LOT.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 8:44am

I have a hard time comparing Legally Blonde to Rent (or really even Wicked) in terms of fan phenomenon status. Yes, it had its devoted crazies, but Rent and Wicked kind of transcend the norm when it comes to that.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 8:48am

The big difference for me is that Wicked, Legally Blonde, Rent, and Spring Awakening were all specifically marketed to the teen demographic.

Next to Normal has been marketed to adults, but for whatever reason, the teens have gravitated to it. That in and of itself doesn't bother me, but their behavior is irritating to the nth degree.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 8:51am

N2N is also an infinitely better show than any of those. Except maybe RENT.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 9:21am

Yawn

[MusicSnob1]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 9:26am

"N2N is also an infinitely better show than any of those. Except maybe RENT."

Pretty bold statement, love.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 9:45am

Yeah, which is why it is an opinion.

[jonmbway4652]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 9:55am

:Next to Normal has been marketed to adults, but for whatever reason, the teens have gravitated to it. That in and of itself doesn't bother me, but their behavior is irritating to the nth degree."

I agree. I think it is great that more and more people (teens in particular) are becoming interested in theatre and that shows like Next to Normal and Spring Awakening draw them in. However, I think it is important that these fans realize there are other shows out there besides Wicked, Next to Normal, Spring Awakening or whatever the show may be. I know that a lot of people compare EVERYTHING they see to Wicked. Updated On: 10/19/09 at 09:55 AM

[cherios]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 10:01am

I'm a little guilty of comparing everything I see to Wicked, but I have an excuse. I managed to make it until about age 23 until I saw my first live theatre production. I saw Wicked in London with Kerry Ellis, and I was just blown away by the theatre and atmosphere... I loved everything about it.

I've seen everything I can since then and always find myself comparing everything to that initial love I felt for Wicked. I can't help it.

[ashley0139]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 10:09am

^ Um, what does that have to do with anything in this thread? Nothing? Ok. No one's attacking people who like Wicked.

N2N is also an infinitely better show than any of those. Except maybe RENT.
I'll 100% agree with you on that.

In the general idea - yes, I think there are great similarities between Next to Normal and Spring Awakening (except that I think N2N is much better). Honestly, it made so much more sense for the teens to flock to SA, though, a show about teen angst. I still kind of don't understand why everyone flocks to N2N. There are tons of great shows out there that people don't care about. Ah well, I never did have that teenage mentality.

[cherios]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 10:12am

I was following the thread of conversation. Take it easy.
Updated On: 10/19/09 at 10:12 AM

[MusicSnob1]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 10:43am

Nah, I'm with Ashley... the connection between your post and the original discussion was lost. I think.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 11:21am

Um, what does that have to do with anything in this thread?

Um, by being directly related to the previous post? Just a thought.

I guess people just skipped over jonmbway4652's post that stated:

"It also bothers me when people compare EVERYTHING they see to see Wicked."

I think it is pretty clear cherios was responding to that statement, considering it was the last sentence of the previous post. Not sure how that was confusing or unclear. Unless the point was to just pick on someone, but it's usually more effective for it to be justified in some way.

As for the topic, I'm going to say "no". Next to Normal doesn't seem to be as specifically targeted to younger audiences as the shows previously mentioned. And, at least the night I saw it, there wasn't an enormous population of young fans trying desperately to make the show about themselves as I have experienced with Rent, Legally Blonde, Spring Awakening or Wicked. Do I believe Next to Normal "infinitely better" than those? No. In some respects it is better than some of those, but it really depends on your own personal criteria for what you expect from a musical and the type of show you want to see.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 11:30am

Well, that too, though I wouldn't include Rent in that at all. But that's neither here nor there.

It's a very interesting phenomenom to me, given how next to normal has been marketed almost exclusively to adults, even boldly proclaiming itself as "a new musical for grownups" (that quote hangs prominently outside the theater).

Again, I'm not at all bothered by the fact that teenagers like the show. There are for worse shows to like. This is an original musical with no pre-existing source material written by two hitherto unknown American composers with no stars in the cast. In the era of movie and jukebox musicals, that's something to be celebrated. However, the BEHAVIOR of these fans is what gets irritating- the bizarre stage door behavior, the commenting on Alice Ripley's facebook, the overnight rushes, etc., etc., etc.

[jessica0414]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 11:49am

^ agreed. I wouldn't have a problem with teens liking the show if they weren't so damn psychotic about it. It makes sense that they'd be drawn to Natalie's story especially, but the stagedoor behavior and throwing things on stage during performances is absolutely ridiculous.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 12:39pm

I agree about the fans. The SA and N2N fans are nothing compared to some of the teen groupies for the other shows. However, the extreme N2N groupies are kinda scary. And creepy as hell.

Personally, I'm in the camp (that seems to be shrinking on BWW) that found SA to be better than N2N. Although I obviously think both are pretty astonishing works in their own right. Both have flaws, but something about SA struck me more than N2N; I think it might have been on a more personal level. But, I digress, I still found SA to be better crafted than N2N and RENT to be nowhere near as good as either of them.

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 2:14pm

I definitely think that overall, in terms of quality, Next to Normal trumps Spring Awakening, Wicked and Legally Blonde and is a worthy successor to Rent. And I actually enjoy all of the shows that are mentioned here but for different reasons.

[MusicSnob1]

Posted: 10/19/09 at 5:13pm

"Although I obviously think both are pretty astonishing works in their own right."

with the "their own right" being the key words there... oy.

[specialk2]

Posted: 10/20/09 at 12:55am

Honestly I don't know how you can compare SA and N2N seeing as they are two different musicals about two very different subject matters. The thing they have in common is their ridiculous fans who ruin stage door appearances for those of us not planning on declaring our undying love for the lead...

[binau]

Posted: 10/20/09 at 1:01am

The only way I AM comparing the shows, are in terms of critical appeal+ridiculous fans.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/20/09 at 3:57am

But the shows seldom get bad raps that affect the average theater goer. MOST have no idea about a fanbase or what happens at rush or the stage door. In all honesty, I think those are the only two areas that are affected by the fangirl base. (Although, I've only heard recently about the note throwing during the show and don't know of the validity of that.)