Sexism defeats Taymor- Page 2
Sexism defeats Taymor
#25Sexism defeats Taymor
Posted: 3/11/11 at 9:44amI may be wrong but I don't think Bono and the Edge could attend previews regularly due to their tour. A week or so ago there was talk of Bono being somewhere when he probably should have been at the show.
Just give the world Love.
#26Sexism defeats Taymor
Posted: 3/11/11 at 10:42am
whyohwhyoh, you're just deliciously insane.
Taymor wrote an awful script, and can't direct an actor to save her life. She's terrific at visuals, and has been fortunate to have others helping her with the book and acting on projects prior to this.
She fell victim to her own pride here, and bit off more than she could chew.
Sexism isn't even a miniscule part of the picture. Don't use gender to cloud issues.
#27Sexism defeats Taymor
Posted: 3/11/11 at 10:42am
It's true. Sexism is to blame for both the failure of this show as well as the failure of The Lion King.
....but the world goes 'round
finebydesign
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/17/07
#28Sexism defeats Taymor
Posted: 3/11/11 at 11:31amLet's face it guys this show did not have a real pre-Broadway tryout. I think producers trying to cut corners are going to learn the hard way how important it is to put months between tryouts. If Julie was fired in Nebraska at least it wasn't here on the main stage. Look what happened to Little Mermaid, Tarzan, Woman on the Verge and on an on.
#29Sexism defeats Taymor
Posted: 3/11/11 at 11:43amLittle Mermaid had an out of town tryout in Denver. That's where I saw it.
Just give the world Love.
crewdude
Understudy Joined: 11/29/10
#30What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 12:11pm
Julie Taymor should count her blessings! She was an experimental theatre director with a focus on puppets...yes, puppets! When Disney took a chance on her and let her direct Lion King. AND if you bother to study the actual history of the production - not the fictionalized spin AFTER the show was a hit - you will learn that her inability to understand budget and the collaborative nature of commercial theatre led to her being fired TWICE by Disney. Name ONE other of actual SUCCESSFUL financial hit directing projects. Can't be done.
No man has EVER been entrusted with $65 and NINE YEARS to make a commercial Broadway Musical - by the way she hasn't done it yet either. The show has no spent more than the $65 mill and it is STILL not open!
As to your failure to understand WHY she is accountable and not the composer - AGAIN I suggest you study ACTUAL theatre history and stop your "oh, woe is me, they're picking on her because she's a girl." attitude and attempt to shift the focus of the story.
Gordon Craig was the theatre guru that espoused the concept that "the director is the Super Artist" of the theatre. The director is responsible for each and every element of the production. The composer answers to the director. Unless you have some kind of ego driven composer that is also the producer, but enough about Sir Andrew.
Investors in a show are INVESTING. They are NOT coddling a pampered "visionary". They are business people. They revere deadlines and returns. She has hemorrhaged money. She has risked safety of the company. She caused an endless stream of bad press. She has ignored producers demands for change. SHE IS THEIR EMPLOYEE.
No one - I repeat NO ONE - man, woman or spider would be given the chance as an employee to blow that kind of money and be that insubordinate and be called a "visionary". Her actions MIGHT have been excused if she had made a product that was GOOD - not even excellent, but just good.
No one cares that Julie Taymor has a vagina. That is not the problem. The problem is she is NOT a good director that can work well with others and can't accept the fact that she is an employee of the producers and should conduct herself as such.
broadwayguy2
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/18/03
#32What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 12:52pmGee, and I thought whyohwhyoh was nuts everytime he flailed about the new Les Miz orchestrations... this takes the cake. A cakewrecks-worthy cake!
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#33What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 12:57pm
Taymor defeated Taymor.
not sexism.
To seek revenge may lead to hell yet everyone does it but seldom as well......
#36What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 5:46pmThis would never happen to Susan Stroman or Kathleen Marshall. What with their penises and all.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Baileyboo
Stand-by Joined: 7/28/09
#37What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 6:59pmI just want to take this opportunity to say hello to Snafu...
#38What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 8:37pm
CHURCH DOOR TOUCAN GAY MARKETING PUPPIES MUSICAL THEATER STAPLES PERIOD OIL BITCHY SNARK HOLES
#39What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/11/11 at 11:44pmOh Hi, Bailey! Glad your not out on a ledge somewhere. Are you leaving with Julie?
Those Blocked: SueStorm. N2N Nate. Good riddence to stupid! Rad-Z, shill begone!
whyohwhyoh
Understudy Joined: 12/15/10
#40What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 12:02amWHAT??? I have never commented about the new Les Miz orchestrations! I am so sick of this boy's club mentality. Taymor is a visionary who had the misfortune to work with a hack producer and amateur composer/"lyricist" if you can even call them that. And they have the collossal GALL to imply that they will save the show??????? NO. Never.
#41What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 12:11amTaymor is a visionary, yes. But what you morons are ignoring is the fact that even a visionary can have a bad vision. Not all of her shlts are going to be gold. Some of them are going to be just plain ol' shlt (with corn, even if she ate at chipotle recently) like the rest of us poop out.
crewdude
Understudy Joined: 11/29/10
#42What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 12:27am
WhyohWhyohWhy can't you get it? Taymor can't be a "visionary" if she can't see the forest for the trees.
You keep harping (yes, that's intentional) on the idea that anyone cared that she was a women. I still say - NO ONE CARES THAT JULIE TAYMOR HAS A VAGINA!
She failed! She spent $65 million PLUS and could NOT deliver a project completed on deadline - not once, not twice, not three times! She should have been fired LONG ago for being so insubordinate to her producers/employers.
Again - I challenge you to name ONE successful (critical OR financial) Broadway Musical she has done since Lion King?!Name ONE successful (critical OR financial) film she has directed!
If you're going to call her a "visionary" what exactly is your definition? Or are you just repeating Taymor's own press releases?
#43What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 12:37am
You're right- no one will be saving this show, unless Christ returns to earth and wants to get into directing musical theatre.
But Taymor has to accept nearly all of the blame here. She has been attached to the project for years. She co-wrote the book. She did some design. She is intertwined with this project.
Yes, the music sucks. Yes, the producers seem to lack any sense of... anything.
But she is NOT the victim here. She has a spend thrift attitude toward "art"- she has gone on record as saying she doesn't care what the cost of her vision is, as long as it's achieved.
She can envision remarkably beautiful images.
She just can't direct very well.
She should just paint or something.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#44What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 12:45am
Let's face it guys this show did not have a real pre-Broadway tryout. I think producers trying to cut corners are going to learn the hard way how important it is to put months between tryouts. If Julie was fired in Nebraska at least it wasn't here on the main stage. Look what happened to Little Mermaid, Tarzan, Woman on the Verge and on an on.
The producers are not trying to "cut corners." It really irks me when people say the show needed an out of town tryout. The show cost $65 million. The Foxwoods had to undergo some renovations to be able to house this show. There is no way in hell they could have done an out of town tryout with a show that is this big. The show has so much technology and permanent rigging that requires renovations and installation of equipment. There is no way they could have loaded this into a theatre out of town for a couple months then pack it up and take it two New York. That is like saying Cirque du Soleil should have done an out of town tryout for O.
Not to mention the fact that Little Mermaid did have an out of town tryout.
"There’s nothing quite like the power and the passion of Broadway music. "
TheatreDiva90016
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/10/04
#45What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 12:56am
"And I saw this show TWICE!!! Yes, I am a fool folks"
Yes. Yes you are.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Moneyspider
Stand-by Joined: 12/16/10
#46What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 1:59am
I'm reminded of Lost in La Mancha. Anyone see that movie? Originally, it was going to be a making of doc of a Terry Gilliam movie but rotten luck and an inadequate contingency plan meant Gilliam's Don Quixote never got made.
I really think Julie should've looked at the last animated Spiderman show. Its showrunner is not lacking in pretensions, as Riedel might say, but when he had Peter Parker's classmates performing Midsummer's Night Dream it did not play as something shoehorned in- it was subtext, it revealed character and it was appropriate to the setting.I also love the 1602 Spiderman created by Neil Gaiman. It's not the blending that's the problem but how it's done. I'm also not keen on the spider totem bit that was pushed in the comics at some point- and it sounds Arachne is in that vein.
dramamama611
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/4/07
#47What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 4:40am
She was hired to do a job and FAILED. It has nothing to do with being a woman. WE have no idea how things have come down behind the scenes. How often and in what ways has she been asked/told to revise or even FINISH this show and she did not comply? How easy/difficult is it for anyone to work with her? How CLEAR is her ("amazing") vision to those working with her?
They needed money and that's how they ended up with the producers they have now. I'm fairly certain I remember seeing that this was bono and the edge's idea and they hired her: THEIR idea, so they DO get to control it.
CrewDude is 100% right in his comments here (who'd-a-thunk we'd be agreeing with CrewDude?) This has NOTHING to do with her VAGINA.
N
O
T
H
I
N
G.
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.
Baileyboo
Stand-by Joined: 7/28/09
#48What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 10:48am
As Jordan C says so often, I AM Julie!
Actually, no. I want to stay till the bitter end and see how this sideshow actually plays out. To call it a roller coaster just doesn't say enough about what has happened, is happening, and will happen. Believe me, the final chapters are no where near written.
#49What a CROCK!
Posted: 3/12/11 at 11:03am
Sexism doesn't have anything to do with Julie Taymor's inability to get Spider-Man (which I neither hate nor particularly like) into shape after months of previews. She clearly did not do her job.
However, as an attentive and long-term lurker here, I have to say that some of the reactions I've seen on this board during this whole ordeal have been disturbing. Some people have seemed almost gleeful as the director and the show struggled, and that's not something to be proud of.
Finally, the anatomically picturesque manner in which a few people have chosen to emphasize the irrelevance of Julie Taymor's sex is bizarre and undermines their claims.
Videos