Superman in Dallas?- Page 5

[sondhead]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 1:28pm

"Haven't reps from DC been in Dallas to check in on the show? That's what I was told. Hardly sounds like they wish it hadn't been written. If that were the case they could easily have prevented its being licensed at all."

That sounds to me like evidence they were making sure their copyright's weren't being infringed, not of them supporting the work's success. When you license a MTI show and find out MTI's coming to your performance tonight, it's generally not because they heard it was awesome and want to support their customers.

[tourboi]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 5:35pm

You're comparing apples to oranges. A production on this scale is sure to get reviewed by the major regional (and some industry) press, as it rightly has. DC can easily watch those reviews to see if a character was used without their okay (if Luthor had been used, for instance, you know the reviews would mention him).

DC doesn't need to send someone for that task.

As for MTI, no kidding. And most of the time they go out to check on smaller productions (community, and what not) and usually then it's because they've been tipped off.

[Director1971]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 5:48pm

However, in the case of this production, where they wrote the script with Lex Luthor, Toyman, etc., in mind, and then simply changed the names when DC forbade them from using those iconic characters, there is definitely some legal follow-up that would need to be done by DC's reps, I would expect. Particularly when it comes to the minor villains and their costumes - if someone is now "Jack-in-the-Box" rather than "Toyman," but still wears a costume similar to Toyman's, that is still within the realm of copyright infringement.

And there also is the issue of how much of the original material remains vs. Aguirre-Sacasa's changes. If it can be deemed that they have rewritten a large enough percentage of the show that it is technically a new play, DC has the right to withdraw rights, since the legal rights do pertain to the 1966 script, as written.

[Director1971]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 5:57pm

To clarify my previous message, it is my understanding that DC requested that the DTC production refrain from using Lex and other characters not originally licensed for the 1966 musical after a spate of public press events by the theater company in which they described the changes they were planning on making to the script, as well as a story or two published about the changes on Playbill.com. DC would have the right to be suspicious of this production on those grounds alone, since it appears Aguirre-Sacasa and the company did not seek the rights for those characters in advance of making the changes, as would be proper legal procedure. Maybe they thought, once the script was written, DC would love it so much they would give them permission? Who knows? But the worst way of going about it is to do it in such a way that their lawyers call you out of the blue.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 5:59pm

Having seen the original & really enjoying it, I wondered about how the score would fare. Other than Everythings Easy When You Know How done by the Lings & missing from the cast album, it looks like the entire score is intact with new songs added. How they managed to do that with such a major rewrite is astonishing

It should be interesting as to what happens now. It stands more of a chance succeeding than the bloated Spiderman

The costume does look chintzy & has to go.

Updated On: 6/30/10 at 05:59 PM

[myusualflair]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 6:46pm

You can actually see from my previous post, missing are: "Revenge" and "What I've Always Wanted", along with the overture. Also, some numbers are reworked, such as "Meanwhile" aka "It's Superman (reprise), and "It's Supernice". Also, many numbers from the original are given to different characters, for instance, "We Don't Really Matter" was Lois and I think Jim, while in this production it is Clark and Sidney. It is definitely quite a feat on the part of Aguirre-Sacasa working these songs into a new plot!
Updated On: 6/30/10 at 06:46 PM

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 6:59pm

I did not notice these

No great loss re What I've Always Wanted . Revenge is a shame

[stagedoorslacker]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 9:36pm

Ran across this review from the Observer. Good for them!
Observer Review

[Director1971]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 12:31pm

Review from NPR/Art & Seek...
Art & Seek Review of "Superman" Musical

[RWilliamsCenterStg]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 12:47pm

Interesting observations from the die hard comic book fans. I think this show plays to these "super" fans in a really great way. A tribute to the comic books and the story. Another layer to the show I guess...

Back to work.

http://dcboards.warnerbros.com/web/thread.jspa?messageID=2005994471� Updated On: 7/1/10 at 12:47 PM

[Director1971]

Posted: 7/2/10 at 2:31am

Review from The Dallas Voice...
Dallas Voice Review of "Superman" Musical

[tourboi]

Posted: 7/3/10 at 7:04pm

Been thinking. Director1971 joined around the time SUPERMAN was opening in Dallas. Then proceeded to post only bad reviews, and negative things about the show (and constantly saying that it would NOT transfer under any circumstances).

After the announcement that they are exploring transferring it (which several of us have said for weeks), one has to wonder if he/she had an axe to grind against DTC.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/3/10 at 7:23pm

Well, it's not Julie Taymor. She's a director, but she was born in 1952 -- not 1971.

[ObiHave]

Posted: 7/3/10 at 8:21pm

MTI doesn't license the show, Tams-Witmark does...unless it's been renegotiated.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 7/3/10 at 10:02pm

Maybe Julie lies about her age?

[Director1971]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 12:25am

A few corrections.

Did I only post bad reviews? No. I posted ALL of the reviews that have been printed, with the exception of the Dallas Observer one, and that was because someone else beat me to the punch.

I must have missed the official announcement that they have been given permission to pursue transferring the show. Could you provide a link to it?

I do not have any kind of a grudge against the Theater Center. But I do think that they could use their considerable resources to pursue better work than this mediocre (at best) musical. Even the most glowing of the reviews have said the play is "slight," "a trifle," etc., and that the script still has MAJOR problems, in spite of a valiant effort by the Dallas production team.

[Director1971]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 12:51am

And the worst thing that I did in this discourse was to provide an alternate, LOCAL viewpoint to many of the questions that were being raised about the show and its future. And everything that I have claimed was backed up by verified news sources.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 12:57am

I just read the linked article that was posted in the other thread and I have a question about this passage for those who have seen the show:

Hassan El-Amin portrays both Jor-El, Superman’s father, and Perry White, The Daily Planet’s editor in chief.

How does this change the character of Perry for the audience? Does it makes Perry's rough exterior seem more of a costume than previous incarnations?
Look! Up in the Sky! Hoping for Broadway!

[SNAFU]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 2:48am

Perhaps the unbearable snide provincialism of the Producers in NY see something you don't in the piece?

[Director1971]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 3:04am

Fine, guys. I was wrong. This is a brilliant piece of theatre, probably the best musical ever written. I hope it plays in NYC with the current cast and script intact. And when it does, I can't wait to hear what Brantley, Isherwood, and Feingold think of it.

[CateBroadway]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 3:32am

Just dropped in on this thread. Wait, am I correct in noticing that Director1971 hasn't even SEEN THE SHOW?
Buddy, what are you even doing doling out these rants? At very least take the time to form a real opinion.
Well, I'm hoping for a transfer. And if a show from my hometown was being buzzed about in a major way, I'd at least stop by to support some community locals before dragging it through the mud.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 3:56am

I am also sure if it were to transfer the Producers would retool it quite a bit before it opened here. Perhaps with cast changes and book tightening. What this has in it's favor is a nostalgic feel to an oft time romanticized time. Something that might appeal well to today's audience.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 7/4/10 at 6:06pm

It has to be a hell of a lot better than Spiderman

[Daniel2]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 7:45pm

I would be surprised if any production of this show goes to Broadway--and even more surprised if it was successful. The truth is, even though the score is fun it has a deeply, deeply annoying book and even the rewrites have been bad. The satirical take on the story just doesn't work. It's too cloying. It annoys the people who are Superman fans and is uninteresting to people who aren't.

[myusualflair]

Posted: 7/23/10 at 3:30am

Michael Riedel saw the show earlier this week:

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/man_of_steel_steals_hearts_g0X7AI34YcoMv8PJFOs5RK