THE PROM to Open on Broadway in November 2018- Page 2

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 3:37pm

newintown, you are so easily provoked that is amusing.

However, to your point, if sissy types were the only type that we see now a days, I would agree with you, but to call them "Uncle Toms" and "Aunt Jemimas" is not only a bit inaccurate, but pretty untrue.  Those sissy types, that you are "evolving" out of our culture, happen to be the ones that were leading the charge for whatever rights and change we see now.   They were at Stonewall, leading marches, protesting, and doing die ins for Act Up.  So to call them that is pretty disrespectful.  I am happy that there are more "butch" types represented in culture (I tend to lean that way myself).  And I say this as a person that grew up with the Paul Lynde and Alan Sues types being pretty much all I saw in the media as a younger person.

I'm all for diversity, and believe that whatever people want to label themselves is fine (including the much maligned "questioning" and "fluid".  I have been out for almost 40 years now, and today I still see these "sissy" folks at festivals, at school proms (sometimes even running for Prom King - or Queen), at political rallies, at rights demonstrations, at women's marches, and at all manner of other functions.  So, if you are uncomfortable with that "stereotype", perhaps it says more about you, than the actual stereotype. 

BTW, it's the same argument that has been heard in the gay community, for decades, "If we weren't represented by those people, and, if gay people just acted more "normal", than we would be accepted (or sometimes folks might say, more accepted)".  I don't agree with this ideology, and never will.  Those people are the ones that are part of our community, have been there and probably will be there always.  To "pink" wash them away is a disservice to history.

Thanks for the "discussion".

[newintown]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 3:47pm

Who's "provoked?" The tone of your writing sounds rather upset. I'm merely (mildly) disagreeing with you.

Much of what you say is perfectly valid; however, most two-dimensional stage/tv/film queer stereotypes have as much in common with the Stonewall protesters you cite as Bugs Bunny has with a real rabbit.

To suggest that David Turner's ridiculously shallow stereotypical flaming angel in In My Life, or Blumenkanz's cartoon queen in Bright Star represent characters as real as the men and women who threw bricks that night - well, that does no service to those people, comparing them to facile cartoons created mostly to make straights laugh at their "flamboyance."

It's a logical fallacy to assume that because one doesn't like shallow, poorly written/acted stereotypical gay characters, that must mean one only likes "butch" gay characters. On the contrary - Stephen Spinella and Tony Kushner created a much more interesting and defined gay character with Prior Walter in Angels In America. If only more writers and actors created gay characters with such skill.

Updated On: 10/20/17 at 03:47 PM

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 3:56pm

newintown said: "To suggest that David Turner's ridiculously shallow stereotypical flaming angel inIn My Life, or Blumenkanz's cartoon queen inBright Starrepresent characters as real as the men and women who threw bricks that night - well, that does no service to those people, comparing them to facile cartoons created mostly to make straights laugh at their "flamboyance."

Side note... the "real" characters in Bright Star were so shallow that Jeff's character didn't bother me as much. He was a bright spot in that show not because the humor mocked his flamboyance but because he could actually land a joke. Though I agree it played into the stereotype. 

[newintown]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 4:01pm

That is a good point.

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 4:05pm

Not really upset, but the general conversation is something that I do feel strongly about. 

And, I agree with your points above, I would rather see more fully dimensional characters, than 2 dimensional representations.  There is a bit of a difference between Prior which is a character that evolves over 8 hours of story, verses a small character such as the one you mention in Bright Star (he probably has 15 to 20 lines and about 10 minutes of time on stage).  The Bright Star character is more of a "device" for humor and to make a couple of plot points (that have nothing to do with whether he is gay or not).  I doubt that anyone could make that character fully dimensional given the amount of lines, but I guess it's not impossible.  This is a story that takes place in the 1920s (of course written in the modern day), but to give that character a different sensibility, while still furthering the plot, probably would have made it a "generic" character.   The fact that it had a gay "tone" to it, was kind of fun (in my mind).   Blumenkanz has been presenting cartoons for a long time (look to his work in Murder for Two for a whole passel of different cartoons), so to expect a deep, multi-dimensional portrait was probably too much to ask.  Now that being said, given the right project, I think that he would make an interesting three dimensional character that also had sissy characteristics (like Prior or like Arnold in Torch Song).  

I guess I am still of the generation that is thankful to see something gay presented, even if it's a bit stereotypical.  Yes, I'm glad there is more fully rounded characters, but it's nice every once in a while to just go for some fun, too.

[newintown]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 4:13pm

I understand your points, and admire your passion for the topic.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 3:55pm

Casting announced (still bizarrely early, but here you go):

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Brooks-Ashmanskas-Beth-Leavel-and-Christopher-Sieber-Will-Bring-THE-PROM-to-Broadway-20180128

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 4:06pm

F L O P

[Itonlytakesajourney]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 6:34pm

This show seems like fun in a Bring It On type of way. Nothing too serious, but a decent musical comedy anyhow. I’m curious to see how this’ll fair with Mean Girls as the other high school show on the block (I don’t count DEH-it’s very tonally different).

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 6:38pm

I suspect this will have the same fate as Tuck.

[MrsSallyAdams]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 6:49pm

It's odd to have three gay prom musicals at once with PROM QUEEN THE MUSICAL (gay man wants to bring his boyfriend to the prom) in Canada and EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT JAMIE (gay man wants to go to the prom in drag) alongside this one. The premise for this one is odd enough (out of work actors protest on behalf of a lesbian banned from the prom) that I'm surprised it's the one going to Broadway.

[michaelhale]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 7:11pm

MrsSallyAdams said: "It's odd to have three gay prom musicals at once with PROM QUEEN THE MUSICAL (gay man wants to bring his boyfriend to the prom) in Canada and EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT JAMIE (gay man wants to go to the prom in drag) alongside this one. The premise for this one is odd enough (out of work actors protest on behalf of a lesbian banned from the prom) that I'm surprised it's the one going to Broadway."

I think it makes sense that this is the one getting on Broadway based on plot alone, the other two are the base plot, LGBT teen faces troubles trying to go to prom, versus the Prom which has this other weird layer. Based on plot alone (I have heard a half a song from the Prom and Jamie each and nothing from Prom Queen), I would probably choose to see the Prom because of this factor.

No idea how this will do on Broadway but I genuinely wish it the best.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 1/28/18 at 11:49pm

I think the name is too broad to make it successful.

[ChildofEarth]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 12:02am

As a member of the LGBT community, I understand that we still face MANY problems but I feel this would have felt fresher and more innovative...at least a decade ago.

[Speed]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 1:34am

If you've read up on a summary of the plot, you'll see that this is one of the most original books Broadway has ever seen. I can't wait!

[dramamama611]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 9:50am

Ever seen?  Even if that's so, doesn't mean it's worthy.   Sounds pretty sophomoric and sitcom-ish, to me.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 1:00pm

Call_me_jorge said: "I suspect this will have the same fate as Tuck."

I was at BroadwayCon and saw their performance yesterday. I can't argue with this. I didn't hate it, but I wasn't aware of the plot regarding two goofy actors. I like the idea of exploring what it's like to not want to be in the headlines (as is the case of the young lesbian in question), but I hope it doesn't get derailed in execution.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 6:50pm

Sad to see Martin Moran replaced by Michael Potts. I love Martin. He needs to be back on Broadway. A great talent, 

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 6:51pm

Bettyboy72 said: "Sad to see Martin Moran replaced by Michael Potts. I love Martin. He needs to be back on Broadway. A great talent,"

Hes the new dr. Dillamond in Wicked!!!

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 1/29/18 at 6:55pm

I know Jorge, but he deserves far better than that. He's an exceptional actor. Originating a role would be lovely. 

[jpbran]

Posted: 1/31/18 at 8:30pm

It was ok... saw the ATL run, and I'd have been more impressed in 1998. The humor and satire isn't as cutting edge as they seem to think it is. The real story it's based on is heartbreaking, and the Hollywood satire added to it is a no-go. Talented folks in search of a better show. 

[Robbie2]

Posted: 2/3/18 at 9:11pm

At the Jacobs

[CoolDogeGuy]

Posted: 2/3/18 at 9:44pm

I do agree with the "flop" thing. I feel this might be the next Amelie or Tuck Everlasting. I hope it does well though.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 2/3/18 at 9:50pm

CoolDogeGuy said: "I do agree with the "flop" thing. I feel this might be the next Amelie or Tuck Everlasting. I hope it does well though. "

Well, if you tend to follow pedigrees, as I do, this doesn't bode well. Shrek meets Legally Blonde.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 2/3/18 at 11:05pm

I just think the name is too vague and boring. I wouldn't be compelled.