Julie Taymor confirms...

[SallyF]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 2:41pm

"We've never called this a Broadway musical," Taymor says.
Link

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 2:42pm

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 2:45pm

"I've described it as a circus/rock 'n' roll drama. What we're doing is closer to a Cirque du Soleil model, and those shows can take a year and a half to rehearse."

Really? I understand the similarities but to use "Cirque does it, we should be able to too." is such bullsh*t. Aside from the Spider-Men, Arachne, & Goblin does anyone else even leave the deck?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 2:48pm

I'm absolutely not in the "badmouth everything Julie Taymor does just because" camp, and I actually DO think she's very talented, BUT -- I see this:

We've never called this a Broadway musical," Taymor says. "I've described it as a circus/rock 'n' roll drama. What we're doing is closer to a Cirque du Soleil model, and those shows can take a year and a half to rehearse.

and I have to wonder why, then, they've gone about (or, better, set out to go about) rehearsing it like one. She says this like it's been the "model" the whole time, but in the past few months, they've been trying to put this thing on a fairly traditional Broadway musical track. If it "should" be operating on the Cirque model, and she's saying so like she knew this, then why hasn't it been? Why haven't they been rehearsing AWAY FROM AN AUDIENCE for a year and a half? Again, I'm not out to strike her just for kicks, but this seems like some major backpedaling to me.

Don't know why I suddenly felt like weighing in, but there you have it.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:00pm

Then why is it on Broadway, with credited librettists, composers, and lyricists?

That, to me, constitutes a Broadway musical. The Cirque de Soliel show that ran at the Broadway a while ago was not a Broadway musical. Spider-Man is.

And I'm pretty sure the producer who spoke before the performance I attended called it a "musical."


Musical, or not musical, the show sucks. And there's just no excuse for that, with the years they've had to make it work. At this point, calling it a "circus" is just an excuse for the bad music, the lame storyline, the uninteresting performances, and the ridiculous lines the actors have to speak. What's left when you strip all of that away? The stunts and the visual aspects. Which are the only good thing about the show. Too bad the stunts make up maybe five minutes of the three hour running time.

[Kalimba]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:01pm

Hopefully the Tony nominating committee will remember those words when the time comes around.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:04pm

The Cirque de Soliel show that ran at the Broadway a while ago was not a Broadway musical. Spider-Man is.

It wasn't a Cirque de Soliel show, either, but that's besides the point. Cirque Dreams was some knockoff using the word Cirque in their title. If I remember correctly, Cirque de Soleil tried (unsuccessfully) to sue them.

The only Cirque de Soleil show that's played near Broadway is the horrible Wintuk.

[twinbelters]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:20pm

But Taymor is heeding other voices. "I asked an 11-year-old boy what he liked about the show, and he said how Peter 'Piper' gets torn between being himself and Spider-Man. Everyone hooks into something different."

That reads like a bold lie. I can't envision any 11 year old getting the name wrong and then making such an intellectual assessment of the show.

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:31pm

Having finally seen the show, I now understand all of what people have been saying. It really is easily the worst show I have ever seen. But while I was watching it, the thought that it really shouldn't be a musical at all, but instead a play/Cirque type-show with background music did pop into my head. That said, the only song that I would qualify as better than just okay was "Boy Falls From the Sky", so the score itself has a LONG way to go yet to be considered even a decent musical score.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:41pm

But the thing is, whether or not the book and score stink is irrelevant. The fact that they exist is enough of a reason for this to be categorized as a "musical." Because they aren't good doesn't mean that the show shouldn't be considered a "musical."

[quizking101]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 3:43pm

This show by any other name is a still a steamin' pile of ****!

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 4:05pm

This is true, rocks, but there were many times in the show that I forgot that we were actually in a "book song" and instead just focused on the action with the music behind it. To me, the score never really seemed to want to commit to being a real score of a Broadway musical.

[GlindatheGood22]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 4:39pm

Okay. So I guess Julie Taymor will remember that if she gets shut out in June.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 4:39pm

If it TAKES a year and a half to rehearse then that's what they should do: BEFORE a paying audience comes in. Not in FRONT of a paying audience.

[B3TA07]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 4:44pm

"Hopefully the Tony nominating committee will remember those words when the time comes around."

That's REAL.

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 4:54pm

It's not going to matter if Julie Taymor thinks her show is actually a musical or not, since there's not way it's getting nominated for anything other than technical awards.

[mominator]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 5:06pm

" Hopefully the Tony nominating committee will remember those words when the time comes around."
A very large AMEN to that thought Kalimba!

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 5:24pm

Hopefully the Tony nominating committee will remember those words when the time comes around.

O please. If they deem Contact, La Bohème, and Swan Lake eligible in the musical categories, this will be eligible as well. Not everything in this show is horrendous beyond belief. I can already see it winning Tonys for the design elements.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 5:36pm

I did think the lighting was stunning.

[nexttotheheights]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 6:02pm

They'll probably sweep the creative awards and not get one nomination more. Oh, and give a Tony to Natalie Mendoza, poor thing.

[prsnr24601]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 6:39pm

I did not like the lighting because the bright lights blinded me at times, especially during the villain's fashion show at the top of Act 2.

Someone please tell the producers and production staff not to shine lights directly in the eyes of audience members -- that is NOT fun.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 7:21pm

Spiderman has gotten so much coverage that nomadic traders on camels in the Sahara know the story. No one has to buy tickets or go see it. You people act like they are giving people herpes and charging them $150 to boot. No where on this earth do people whine more than on this board about Spiderman.

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 7:27pm

I thought all the technical elements were stunning. I literally gasped at the way they did the flying and how the sets worked...I thought that was brilliant. And, as pointless as her character was, I thought TV Carpio was great as Arachne. Other than that and maybe Damiano, who does her best with the material in a weak year for leading actresses, nothing else deserves to be nominated.

[dramarama3]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 9:16pm

New rehearsal footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh7bYNAHXxw

[PopAria]

Posted: 1/17/11 at 10:25pm

Ok, what if they changed the name to "Cirque du Soleil presents Spider-Man: Turn Off The Dark" Would you love it more? Less?


I know when I've seen Cirque du Soleil shows it's been about stunts and acts on stage... never a clear story and never any real direction. DO you think if Cirque was presenting the show it'd be better off? or would it still get criticized to hell on here?