Moulin Rouge on Broadway?- Page 2

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 3/24/06 at 9:59am

Moulin Rouge will never happen

[Pinaud]

Posted: 3/24/06 at 1:12pm

Kate Levering was on Taye Diggs' show Kevin Hill, and while she was great dancer, I thought she was very weak in the acting and vocal departments.

According to this article from 2002, Strictly Ballroom is the priority of the three films:
Link

[AshleyBrownFan123]

Posted: 3/24/06 at 8:02pm

It was to Open in Vegas.. in 2003. It shouild have played at Mirage when Sigfreid and Roy closed. But, they got another d***
Cirque show. It's not even that good. But with Nicole Kidman as Satine on Broadway...matchmade in heaven.

[NYC4Life]

Posted: 3/24/06 at 8:20pm

I think it is an awful idea because the movie was awful. The songs just did not go with the plot. It was a mess and the acting was pretty bad. I think if they reworked the show a created some original songs and an awesome score it would work.

"Kate Levering was on Taye Diggs' show Kevin Hill, and while she was great dancer, I thought she was very weak in the acting and vocal departments."

Nicole Kidman is what I would call weak singing and it was by far her weakest acting moment.

[logan0215]

Posted: 3/25/06 at 11:28pm

"I think Rachel and Lisa are both a little old and a little robust to play someone dying of TB."

Old and Robust? She's supposed to be the matriarch practically, one of the few who has moved from a simple CanCan dancer to the star, which I'm sure took time. I thought Nicole had the sophistication that comes with age to play this part perfectly, and same for Rachel and especially Lisa. Lisa also has beauty in a high register, like Nicole with a more Broadway voice.

In response to NYC4L:

I love this film, and have taken on a different view toward movie musicals lately such as Evita, RENT, and PotO. I feel if you want impecable singing performances without the attention to acting, then see the original on Broadway! A movie is meant to focus on so many other things than the vocal aspects. This is where I believe the emotion was lost in RENT. When you can be 2 feet from Adam Pascal, you realize he may not be the best actor, as opposed to 100+ ft. in a Broadway theater. I think that enough vocal talent was present in these films, especially in Moulin Rouge.

[bjivie2]

Posted: 3/26/06 at 2:12am

AshleyBrown has it right. The show was announced as a possibility for Las Vegas (which is where it would work best), and they were in talks to get Nicole Kidman to reprise Satine. It wouldn't work on Broadway because it would be too hard to recapture the movie. But in Vegas, the standards of story and theme aren't as high, and it would be a great Vegas show.

[tomwing]

Posted: 3/26/06 at 6:14am

What's the point of a stage version of Moulin Rouge? What we saw in the movie wass already theatrical enough. Ii could never give something new.

PS. nevertheless, I never liked the movie:P

[logan0215]

Posted: 3/26/06 at 2:35pm

I don't see why you would ask what "the point" is. I mean can't the same thing be asked for many of the movie musicals brought to the stage? (Hairspray, Disney, Producers)

I thought the theatrical aspect would be the main reason it would fit so well on the stage, I see it as very Phantom-esque.

It would probably fit in Vegas because of the scale of productions out there (Phantom, KA, O) but judging by the result of other shows transported from Broadway to Vegas, the success would be hit or miss. (Spamalot will probably be the next to tell us how these transfers will work). I don't see it as a campy or revue type show, but a legitament theater piece, I'm really surprised so many people are so willing to poo poo the idea or say it is impossible before really considering the potential. I fully visualized it (set/adaptation) on my own time hoping to put it on stage in high school, but oh well...
Updated On: 3/27/06 at 02:35 PM