Spiderman Preview Thread!- Page 21

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 8:44pm

OK fine 'fingerlakessinger' Pahntom also had a bumpy preview period with the tech stuff.

"95 of the people who saw the show said the music and story sucked big time and the visuals have been both praised and bashed."

Oh statments like this make me giggle, where an earth do you get 95 percent from? you are basing that of the few posts on here and a few other boards (many of which seem to be the same poster on many sites), don't pull numbers like 95 percent out of your a**e. I had 4 friends who watched it last night who all enjoyed it. The tech issues were a problem for them and they said the book needs work but they said they had fun and with the right work could be a solid show. I guess they are part of that 5 percent.

"This show has a budget of mammoth proportions"
And?

"it has a manic director who loves attention more then life itself and is well known"

Who has also done some incredible work

"yes, we are allowed to come on here and say our peace. They have had PLENTY of time to fix these kinks. PLENTY. They have been in rehearsals for much longer than "4 months" and if Taymor wanted to bring such a innovative show to a Broadway stage...then she should have lined up her ducks before letting paying audiences in."

Nobody is saying you should not give an opinion, you are more than free too, im talking about people going on about a new show looking to take the venue etc as i clearly stated in my post. And AGAIN, Taymor and co will have started previews with what they THOUGHT was a piece ready to be shown as a preview and then start working on. She has not thought "oh what the hell, it's only all our reputations on the line, lets open the show even though its a mess", they thought the show was at a place that was ready to be seen. If you don’t think so that's your opinion, you may well be right, but people seem to think they just opened it for the hell of it, they would gain nothing from doing that.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 8:50pm

I love Alan Moore's graphic novels and I think Ed Brubaker's Captain America has been fantastic so I am sorta bias in saying there is good writing to be found in the comic book form, though I have not read a Spidey comic in years (I am definitely more in tune with Batman above all). I still think the target audience are the people who watched the movies (I am assuming like the first movie there is a major Gwen Stacey omission to not have a love triangle sub-plot that took until the third movie, which people would prefer to forget, to delve into).
Updated On: 11/29/10 at 08:50 PM

[tazber]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 8:58pm

2 reviews from non theater fanboys:

What I found interesting about them is that both said the book and music was poor and that the aerial stunts, while amazing, didn't make the night worthwhile.

Be warned, the second review goes over the first act beat by beat. And the first has spoilers also.



fanboys weigh in

Updated On: 11/29/10 at 08:58 PM

[SNAFU]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:24pm

Thanks Taz. Interesting takes from the Fan Boys. Afraid they won't get much emotion for Julie though.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:24pm

Seriously. Why is Gwen always getting the shaft in adaptions? I've always found her so much more interesting than MJ. Maybe because MJ has been ruined so many times though that I'm just done with her by now. Gwen was saved some dignity by being dead through many poor times. Glad she's getting her due in the reboot movie though!

Love that the show is appearing on Ain't it Cool now... sure to get the fanboys talking!

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:32pm

Because when you've only (presumably) got one show, you want to include the seminal girlfriend, who is, of course, MJ.

The only thing I think Gwen Stacy's for is her death, which is still one of my favorite arcs from the Spider-Man comics. It would be amazing if the first film of this new "reboot" series ends with Spidey accidentally snapping her neck on the bridge and MJ was introduced in the next film.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:40pm

Katurian2, no idea why Raimi did not have her (or if it was his doing at all) but the reboot **cough** money grab **cough** at least has Gwen in the movie. Emma Stone is going to play her when her attachment to the project was widely assumed she would be MJ.

Leave it to AICN to not warn of all of the spoilers in the second email.

[wexy]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:46pm

None of us are investors ( I think) so lets have fun with it.
If it's good fine, if its horrible, fine.
Sometimes I like to see horrible about to close things just to see how horrible it really is to judge for myself
Sometimes they're not that bad and sometimes they are/

No such thing as bad press. Right?

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:48pm

God, how times have changed! In the olden days, the book and particularly the score were the first things that provided the impetus for any musical. Then the casting. Then the sets, lighting and other elements without which no show can be done properly. (Okay, sometimes it was "let's write a musical for so-and-so" and then the book and score and then the other stuff.) If the sets/costumes were found wanting, they could be changed; if the "star" became unavailable, for whatever reason, a search was done for someone else. I'm NOT dismissing the value of a good production, but it seems that the whole thing has been turned around. Just my two cents.

Updated On: 11/29/10 at 09:48 PM

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 9:59pm

btw I also thought the Lizard looked more like a T-Rex to me.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:02pm

True, Gwen kind of lives to die. But I did like what they did with her character (before she died, again) in the Ultimate series. She was pretty badass for the time she was in it. I also appreciated the fact she was more of a friend than a love interest for Peter. Thought that was a nice change of pace. But yes, her original death arc was MAGNIFICENT and for sure one of the most moments in any comic EVER!

And I am so glad Emma Stone is playing her in the reboot. She has so much personality I'm sure will come through. Interesting thought about it ending with her death. I could totally see that working incredibly well.

[Taryn]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:10pm

The point isn't the current state and overall quality of Marvel Comics at the present time. The point is that it's ridiculous to say that people don't come to see a famous super-hero franchise and not expect a decent narrative that they can follow. Comics are stories, for crying out loud.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:16pm

In the olden days, the book and particularly the score were the first things that provided the impetus for any musical. Then the casting. Then the sets, lighting and other elements without which no show can be done properly.

Actually, in the "olden days", the score came first, then the choreography, then a silly implausible book was shoehorned in for some gags and to lead into some romantic duets. Visuals and spectacle was given high regard (though without the technology of today) often involving bolstered choruses of boys and girls who had little else to do than dance in the background while smiling at the lead or acting as human scenery. And let's not forget the popularity and influence of Ziegfeld, who was the king of Broadway bookless spectacles for decades. I have absolutely no problem with shows high on spectacle and short on book as long as it proves to be entertaining. Broadway has its roots in bookless entertainment and spectacle and there is no reason why it can't be home to it again.

That being said...this thread reminds me SO MUCH of the buzz surrounding Titanic previews on Broadway. The cynics were wringing their hands and licking their chops, salivating over the prospect of a major bomb. Especially one that was deemed to be a tasteless and impossible prospect like a musical based on a major tragedy considered impossible to stage. I don't know how Spider Man will fare, but I really do hope it does well. If not, well...I've said for a couple of years now that Lord of the Rings should have gone into that space.

Updated On: 11/29/10 at 10:16 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:20pm

If the flying needs to be fixed, they could always do it the easy way...

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:24pm

That being said...this thread reminds me SO MUCH of the buzz surrounding Titanic previews on Broadway. The cynics were wringing their hands and licking their chops, salivating over the prospect of a major bomb.

They must have been stuffed as it was a major bomb.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:31pm

Titanic may have financially flopped, but it wasn't a major bomb. If it was, it wouldn't have found success in international productions, tours and now regional productions. The show won several awards, garnered critical praise and didn't fall into obscurity.

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:38pm

Still, not a show that would come to mind when thinking of Spider-Pig.

Titanic was actually good. The score was incredible, the effects were well done without taking from the substance and their investment was actually possible to get back one day.

This thread reminds me more of BKLYN: The Musical.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:44pm

I was just saying the buzz of this preview reminds me of the buzz from Titanic's preview, which was vicious. Brooklyn had a previous production that brought with it local fans and fangurlz thrilled to have Shoshana originating a role in anything. It was the tween annoyance that rubbed people the wrong way around here. That, and it really was an awful show.

[Radioactiveduck]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:44pm

I would go see it. Even if the show ended up being terrible, I would feel good supporting artists who decided to take a risk. They're trying to create a new theatrical experience to keep theatre alive and relevant. And if they miss the mark...well then...I just wont buy the top priced seats.

[crewdude]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:50pm

I love all this talk of Titanic. The internet was really just starting to take off when that show was opening. Who realy knows what the internet would do to it if it was opening now.
As for it not sinking in to obscurity (Oh, come on that was just TOO easy to not say) you'd be amazed at how many non-Broadway centric people are amazed when they hear there ever was a Titanic musical. So sorry, I do consider that obscurity.

Every time I think of of Titanic I still laugh. The show established the bow is stage right yet they sang facing the audience when they saw the iceberg the ship was running in to.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:52pm

I'm not convinced it's really a "new theatrical experience". It's attempting to take some flying sequences a step further, but other than that, what is it that is so new? Maybe I'm missing something by not having watched 60 Minutes, but I haven't heard much about this show that is hugely innovative. Don't get me wrong, I'll go see it and I'll probably enjoy it, but I haven't heard much evidence that it is especially revolutionary in any way.

[Radioactiveduck]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:56pm

It's not a COMPLETELY new experience, but its still got a lot to offer. There's quite a bit of video from what I heard, as well as the flying sequences that are now almost interactive because the actors have the freedom to move around the house as well as the stage. It's a legitimate action adventure musical.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:56pm

TITANIC went through huge changes pre-opening. I don't actually think they had a beginning or finale, either. And half the time the ship didn't sink.

Performances cost a lot less then, and they even had partial view seats where were deeply discounted.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 10:58pm

The show established the bow is stage right yet they sang facing the audience when they saw the iceberg the ship was running in to.

During the iceberg sequence, the stage showed various levels of the ship from different perspectives with the crow's nest hanging in front of the stage facing the audience. It wasn't necessary to give all the various framed scenes the exact same perspective to illustrate what was happening.

Most non-Broadway centric people have never heard of Follies, either. Doesn't mean it's obscure.

[steven22]

Posted: 11/29/10 at 11:02pm

It wasn't Shoshana originating anything in BKLY. It was Eden.