Ken Davenport responds to SPONGEBOB musical: "Why This Broadway Bound musical worries me."- Page 2

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 3/21/15 at 7:37pm

Mothballs wants to see a SPONGEBOB musical??


I have officially seen it all.

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 3/21/15 at 10:53pm

"Sure, it could turn into 'Shrek' "

Easy there, I *like* Shrek.

[OKBroadwayFan]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 1:16pm

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Breaking-News-Steven-Tyler-John-Legend-Cyndi-Lauper-More-Will-Write-Music-for-THE-SPONGEBOB-MUSICAL-Premieres-in-Chicago-Next-Summer-20150831

 

More information

[Pippin]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 1:44pm

Usually, I'd agree with the sentiment "Could we get something original on Broadway, Please?"

 

But that argument does not work following a year where we've had many original properties hit the great white way - Something Rotten, Hand To God, and of course the TONY WINNER - Fun Home, and now Hamilton - ALL original and  hugely successful. - not to mention Allegiance coming up, which we've yet to see if it will have an audience or not. 

 

It's refreshing to be able to see this many original titles on Broadway at this time where Commercialism is king. It almost feels as though this may be the start of a new golden age for musicals, where innovation and originality are key. I say that without hyperbole of any kind.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:02pm

HAMILTON is not "original." It is based on a very popular 2004 book. 

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:06pm

Fun Home is also not "original" if we're talking adaptations. 

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:07pm

^Maybe not purely original, but both of those shows are still some very innovative theatrical works based on source materials that were never commodities to begin with.

Updated On: 8/31/15 at 02:07 PM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:08pm

Maybe not purely original, but the show is still some very innovative theatrical work based on source material that was never a commodity to begin with. Same with Fun Home.

 

Um... Okay. But adding in those qualifiers automatically voids its status of pure originality, as it was [incorrectly] suggested by Pippin. 

[Pippin]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:16pm

ugh. fine. they are not "original" Nothing is truly "original"

 

 

but my defintion, which I guess I should have detailed, is that it's not from a well known movie property. That's why I didn't include Waitress and School of Rock.

 

But for me, Hamilton is an "original" musical. as is fun home. 

[Hamilton22]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:34pm

I totally get where you are coming from, Pippin. While of course there is source material that inspired both musicals, I also would say Hamilton and Fun Home are original musicals. We all know what you meant, they're just being sticklers. 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 2:42pm

"Look, I’ll admit, I can be as commercial as they come, and if there were unlimited Broadway theaters, I’d say come one, come all, to shows based on animated kids television shows or shows based on office supplies or whatever."

Am I the only one who is kind of interested in a Staples musical? Or Office Depot, I'm not picky. Maybe not for Broadway but for the Fringe or NYMF. It sounds like fun.

I do like Lady Antebellum and at least a song or two from most of the "composers" listed. The most interesting choice is Jonathan Coulton though. If he can bring irreverence and cleverness and help tie everything together, it could work. That's a big IF. 

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 3:34pm

Most of these responses seem to indicate a desire for the censorship of musicals being produced on Broadway due to personal taste.  I'm not a fan of that at all.  I'd rather Spongebob get produced and have the chance to succeed or fail like any other musical than have Broadway start moving toward some utterly ludicrous restrictions on what may or may not be produced.  Originality does not equate to quality.  It doesn't automatically give any show a leg up.  Just like the word "Disney" doesn't indicate success.  Audiences ultimately decide the fate of every musical.  Why should Spongebob be treated any differently?  I don't think it should.  That would be heading down a very dangerous path.

 

I'm still trying to imagine what the costumes will look like. Lol.

 

I had friends who said that when Lion King was announced.  They didn't lol when the performances started.

[Ado Annie D'Ysquith]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 3:34pm

Where's the Scanners head explosion clip when you need it?

I wish, if anything, that this would just open at MSG as a seasonal thing.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 3:35pm

We all know what you meant, they're just being sticklers. 

 

Or we're being accurate and factual...

 

Both of those musicals derive from other source material already published/produced/accessible. HAND TO GOD and SOMETHING ROTTEN (just like AVENUE Q, A CHORUS LINE, and others) are purely original. They might be based on another idea, event or person, but they are not a byproduct of some other work like HAMILTON and FUN HOME are. 

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 3:56pm

Isn't Something Rotten derived from the works of William Shakespeare?

[Hamilton22]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:01pm

It's pretty clear that everyone here (including the OP) is well aware that Hamilton and Fun Home are from other sources and not "original". It was pretty obvious what he or she meant. But judging by your history here, it didn't matter what the OP implied or didn't imply, you were just looking for a reason to be an ass to someone.  Typical trolls. 

 

 

Updated On: 8/31/15 at 04:01 PM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:18pm

But judging by your history here...

 

Hmm. What do you know about my history here, newbie? You seem rather comfortable and it hasn't even been two months... interesting and impressive. Bilbo? Is that you? 

 

Isn't Something Rotten derived from the works of William Shakespeare?

 

If you read my post, I was very clear in acknowledging that it SOMETHING ROTTEN is based on an actual person but is not derived from -- or based on -- a published Shakespeare piece; unlike FUN HOME (a graphic novel) and HAMILTON (a 2004 best-selling book). There is a significant difference. 

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:33pm

Headband is correct about what is and isn't original-- Pippin recalibrated his definition of original (rather oddly, I might add, but he did so).

Moving on...

[Hamilton22]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:37pm

 

Hmm. What do you know about my history here, newbie? You seem rather comfortable and it hasn't even been two months... interesting and impressive

All I needed to know about you was in Kad's post to you over on the off-topic board. Turns out every word he said was true. 

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:38pm

the point is Fun Home and Hamilton were a labor of love, and Spongebob is just tryna get money. and its the theatre owners responsibility to not let crap like this come to broadway. I mean idk maybe it will be really good but idk 

[BWWMatt]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:41pm

I've always thought that the argument against movies adapted for the stage was odd. In the early and mid-20th Century, when movies were not yet the dominant form of popular entertainment in America, musicals were adapted from plays (OKLAHOMA!, HELLO DOLLY!) and books (SOUTH PACIFIC, GUYS & DOLLS, DAMN YANKEES) all the time, and no one seemed to mind. I wonder if it is musicals being adapted from movies in general that people don't like, or more the specific movies being adapted into musicals. 

Updated On: 8/31/15 at 04:41 PM

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:45pm

It would not surprise me if this succeeded on the Disneyfied Broadway while shows like Bridges could not make it.

 

If it does make it, how about bringing the Casper The Friendly Ghost musical to town.

 

Boy , did Philly come back with a vengeance.

Updated On: 8/31/15 at 04:45 PM

[Kad]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:48pm

Alack the day! A musical based off of a cartoon. However could we allow the delicate musical theatre canon, with works like You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown, Lil' Abner, and The Lion King, to be besmirched so?

Updated On: 8/31/15 at 04:48 PM

[NewsiesForever]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:49pm

I think it is just sad that all of these talented musicans are going to come together to create broadway history in Spongebob the Musical! 

I feel that this is just going to be another Shrek, they are going to spend 25 million dollars, and it is never going to recoup. 

There is a difference between Disney and Nickolodean/Universal/Viacom etc. 

Here is the thing: Given the price of theatre tickets, the audience, the etiqutte demands of broadway theatre. A broadway theatre has no place for a show where small children will scream at the stage. I mean there already was a Spongebob stage show and it was a free for all for kids.  Plus with the cost of broadway shows. I do not feel that families are going to pay $$$ to take their kids to see spongebob.

I just see this being a joke on broadway and make a mockery of the the great white way.

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 4:50pm

I still think musical theatre is classier than film and tv