She's Back! CARRIE - First preview !!! — Page 34

Exactly, Jane. I think they do it "on camera" or on stage or in print to admonish their own guilt that "something should be done."

They've done their good deed by presenting the obsessive and sensationalized information in such a way that glorifies the killers and "monsters" and absolves them of their crimes as well. So that's a good thing. And they make a buck doing it, so that's a good thing.

It's all a good thing.

Killers are a good thing.

EDIT: The interesting thing to me is that Stephen King, back in 1974, didn't do this in his book. He presented all the the information and backstory and motivation as to why the characters were who they were ... but didn't glorify or admonish their ultimate actions (or reactions), not Margaret or even Carrie. But this is not 1974 anymore.

And we're more "advanced" now.

---

Updated On: 2/18/12 at 05:22 PM

Actually, songanddanceman2, I think the exact opposite is true today.

It's VERY easy to turn the "Margarets" and the child murderers into "understandable" and "forgivable" people.

It's the new "black."

I think it's much harder today to say Margaret was an evil, deranged monster of a woman who tortured and ultimately murdered her child. Bring in the flying knives and shattering mirrors!

That's not a "good thing." You haven't done your "good deed" as an artist if that's your approach. By the way, I don't think anybody, ANYBODY has come up with answers as to why people murder. Because it's far too complex. You can't just do it like a math problem ... if Margaret's past was X, and she did Y, then Z will happen.

Killers come from well-adjusted, privileged, non-religious homes, too. With loving siblings. They aren't all so easy to solve in a darkened theatre, just to make artists feel better.

EDIT: Oh, also, I wouldn't be interested in any recent interviews with King about how Margaret "loved" Carrie (assuming one actually exists). That's such a common fashion today. "In her own way, she loved her." Show me an interview from the '70s where he said that. I'd be shocked if you found one.

---

Updated On: 2/19/12 at 05:40 PM

I think we're all still talking about this (here and elsewhere) because the source material (meaning the King novel of Carrie) is rich indeed.

It's a terrific idea for a musical or a play or an opera or a puppet show or a ballet, etc.

I don't think this musical is doing it justice at all, even though I appreciate the attempt (twice). But I'm also fascinated by the current change in approach, particularly where Margaret is concerned. It says so much about the trends in society and in art today. It says things that I'm not particularly happy with or proud of as "evolving" people.

I appreciate the healthy discussion, too ... and while I'm very passionate about my opinions (always), I definitely appreciate and respect that others are equally as passionate about theirs, too.

---

Updated On: 2/18/12 at 05:59 PM

According to you an a few people in this thread, i'm not sure the 6 or so people saying in this thread can really constitute as final word on bringing down a revival.

I'm not saying you are wrong, it's your opinion and that's cool, it's great that a show like Carrie is getting us all talking, but at the end of the day Stafford clearly has his vision along with the writers of who they want her to be, all the constant back and forth on it is not going to make a blind bit of difference. We all agree that she should be crazy, she should be more intense, i just also happen to think the human side to her is a good counter balance, that is all.

If anything should be discussed as something that should be removed straight away it should be The World According to Chris, its awful and kills what is otherwise a very good act 1.

---

I have seen the show on DVD and see it in the theatre in a few weeks. I feel that the show in act 1 is building really well, the tone is right and consistent, it moves with ease and then that song comes in (and the dreadful scene before it) and knocks it off course. It did the same in the original show (going from a powerhouse song like Eve Was Weak to Don't The Waste the Moon killed the moment) and somehow this seems to come over even worse. At least for all it's horrid lyrics Don't Waste The Moon was cathy, this song is just dire. I always felt that if they wanted to put a 'teen' song there they should have eased in to the moment rather than go to the 2 extremes (and back to a beautiful moment) the way have done the past 2 times.

Im not going to talk about Margaret's character anymore, what is the point? am i going to convince you otherwise? No, will you convince me? No. I adore this thread and people like Bestie who is fast becoming someone im loving debating with on here, but i think we have done her characterization to death. Let's move on to other things.

---

I also enjoyed "The World According to Chris," though feel "Don't Waste the Moon" was catchier.

If something should be cut it should be that awful "Once You See".. does no one else have a problem with this song? And when it comes back as the finale... yikes. Just end with Sue in the interrogation room.

I'm curious what was it that Stafford told the creative team that made them want to do it again - nothing done makes this a "must see" in my opinion.

I would just like to start this by saying that I am huge fan of the original novel Carrie, and was very excited to the show tonight. I’ll start the positives. The cast sound amazing, and the show has really fantastic orchestrations. The scenes between Carrie and Margret where really wonderful, and I also enjoyed the girl who played Sue

Unfortunately, I thought the whole show over all was very blah. They weren’t any really strong directorial choices, the Spring Awakening-esque choreography felt very out of place, and its been a long time sense I have seen a leading man as boring as Tommy. Also, include me in the camp of people who didn’t enjoy what they have turned the character of Margret into, the Margret in the novel is an incredibly frightening force of nature, but in the musical she comes off as a confused child. My friend and I were talking about, and I wished I could have walked away with the same feeling I had when I walked away from Women on the Verge…. Sure it was a hot mess, but there were some incredible moments that happened. With Carrie it was ultimately very forgettable, because the material just isn’t strong enough to carry the earnest approach that this production is going for.


***Spoiler***
I’m sorry but projection blood? What is the point of doing Carrie if you don’t go full out on that.


Now feel free to rip me apart.

I read this on Wikipedia

The characters of the principal and the teacher are merged into a single character named Miss Gardener.

So is the Reverend/male teacher character new for this revival? Was he not in the original production?

'Seeing the show on DVD is not like being in the room, theatre is a living, breathing art form. And you sorta have to be in the room to feel HOW a particular show breaths. You do not get the real sense of a play or especially a musical from DVD'

OK then, so i guess all those people, i'm going to guess including yourself who for the longest time have debated and passed judgement etc over the original 88 Carrie from the DVD that i put out over a decade ago can't really analyze it? you know, because you have to BE in the theatre to see how it makes you feel?

Honestly, never has there been a worse thread to say anything about Bootleg DVDs since everyone opinions and indeed the legend of the show was kept alive through bootlegs.

'Also...how and/or where did you see a DVD of the revival anyway? Perhaps the same place you saw an interview with Stephen King saying Margaret loved Carrie? '

Ignoring your bitchy tone that im bored with already, 2 copies of the show are going around already from people who film them, both filmed in the first week. I'm sure you will see clips on You Tube soon from said DVDs

'It kind of disturbs me that people who purport to love theatre are watching DVDs of a show they are seeing a few weeks and vivisecting it based on a DVD.

I mean, it's a little over the top, isn't it? Can't you just wait until you can experience the show live.'

It's a good point, simply a friend of mine had gotten hold of one of the 2 copies going around and asked if i wanted to watch it, i said sure. The bottom line is im flying to New York from the UK to watch the show, it's not like watching that DVD stopped me from paying out a lot to enjoy it live.

'I also enjoyed "The World According to Chris," though feel "Don't Waste the Moon" was catchier.

If something should be cut it should be that awful "Once You See".. does no one else have a problem with this song? And when it comes back as the finale... yikes. Just end with Sue in the interrogation room.'

I like Once You See, its not a stand out or anything, maybe i like the intention of the song more than the song Hmmm,not sure.

'Also, include me in the camp of people who didn’t enjoy what they have turned the character of Margret into, the Margaret in the novel is an incredibly frightening force of nature, but in the musical she comes off as a confused child.'

I liked her conflict but agree she needs to be more frightening. The only place i found her disturbing was I Remember.

---

Updated On: 2/19/12 at 07:44 AM

Random question. Why has the gym teacher's name changed so much? It went from Miss Desjardin to Miss Collins to Miss Gardner. Any reason?

Random question. Why has the gym teacher's name changed so much? It went from Miss Desjardin to Miss Collins to Miss Gardner. Any reason?

My guess - and it's only a guess - is that Desjardin might have seemed too confusing a name, at least when you're hearing it (in the movie and show) as opposed to reading it (in the book). I don't know if "Collins" has any significance, but "desjardin" means "the gardens" so that's probably how it evolved to Miss Gardner.

According to Twitter, Marin is out today.