#126
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:21pm
Methinks Anthony Mouse is the same person as Buffalo Bill.
The Last Ship previews — Page 6
#127
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:23pm
"Wait, didn't you say that?" "Yes, in another thread." "But what do you think about this show?" "Gah, I already gave my opinion in TLS thread 3.7." "What kind of music is this?" "IT'S NORTHUMBRIAN CELTIC AS I STATED IN THREAD #5!" "Should I start a thread about preview #7?" "Yes." "They changed the order of those two songs between the 12th and 13th previews... NEW THREAD!" "Cool... but can it hot-link back to thread TLS #8?"
That's why.
That's why.
#128
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:33pm
Pro-tip for Buffalo Bill: New posts and new threads are very different things, and people shouldn't be involved in a forum if they can't tell the difference. I may be a Broadway noob, but having over 1.5 decades of solid social media experience (forums, chat boards, IRC, mailing lists, etc.), I can tell you that "netiquette" is a very real thing even if it's not a hard-coded universally accepted rule set. Varies by venue, but this is the stuff that allows "communities" to even exist online. In this case, it's pretty basic: Don't spam, especially in creating new threads on the same topic. Spamming reduces credibility of the poster AND reflects badly on the very object of one's obsession. The thinking is simply, "The show must be bad if it attracts people like this." Obviously, that's unfair to the show (like IF/THEN and the idiotic fanzels), but there it is. Why make things more difficult than they need to be?
#BoycottTrumplikePattiMurin
#129
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:41pm
Nope. I am not Buffalo Bill. But oh how I love a good sh@t-stirrer.
#130
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:43pm
Now, now you shouldn't call yourself such names. You're really detrimental to the show you two are shilling (edit: if it's actually 2 of you-I have major questions about that).
Updated On: 10/6/14 at 12:43 PM
#131
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:53pm
A shill? Really? I have not seen the show and have said nothing positive or negative about it. I just like watching you little fleas hop around all irate when your nest is disturbed. It entertains me.
#132
Posted: 10/6/14 at 12:56pm
I have no doubt that Buffalo Bill/Anthony Mouse2/Hackasaurus doesn't care anything about The Last Ship. It's just a dumb kid, hungry for attention, who hasn't yet figured out the difference between good and bad attention.
It merely uses The Last Ship as a convenient mask; it could have just as easily been On The Town.
It merely uses The Last Ship as a convenient mask; it could have just as easily been On The Town.
Updated On: 10/6/14 at 12:56 PM
#133
Posted: 10/6/14 at 1:02pm
It's a shame really that Buffalo Bill is turning people away from the show. I really believe that the show is excellent and everyone should see it.
#134
Posted: 10/6/14 at 1:09pm
neonlightsxo, we would be happy to see the show if you will pay for the tickets, transportation and hotel. We'll pay for our own meals.
#136
Posted: 10/6/14 at 1:12pm
Oh, I don't believe Anthony Mouse2 is a shill or Buffalo Bill. He's just a self-proclaimed troll and more likely, a friend of Buffalo Bill (or just someone who regularly pops up to sh!t-stir themselves but unsurprisingly can't keep track of all their past names). Why else would he get his rocks off on this particular troll/shill behavior and not at any other time? Funny thing is, they are both contributing far more to the negativity in the threads than anyone who actually didn't like the show. They only succeed as meaningless trolls and/or terrible shills (or shill-supporters).
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
#137
Posted: 10/6/14 at 3:39pm
See the weekly gross is out. Being the first week we shouldnt need to read too much in it. But think the show and Mr Sting will be upping the publicity blitz.
#138
Posted: 10/6/14 at 3:42pm
They only did 7 shows as well. But they did just fine.
#139
Posted: 10/6/14 at 3:49pm
There's definitely a chance that things will improve, but in what bizarro universe is $533,382 and just under 1/2 the potential gross "fine" for a Broadway musical?
#140
Posted: 10/6/14 at 3:53pm
For the first week of previews that happens to fall on a Jewish holiday, I think it is fine. But we clearly don't live in the same universe.
#142
Posted: 10/7/14 at 11:36pm
It was pretty full tonight. Nowhere near sold-out, but solid.
I have mixed feelings. I can't imagine this will catch on. I saw quite a few people looking around the theater or gazing off, etc. The score has some nice moments and some rather dull moments. I actually disliked the songs Whizzer mentioned, but really enjoyed all of Meg's material. The rousing bar number in Act 2 was quite weird, but after all the ballads, it was a nice change of pace.
The book as mentioned is pretty terrible. How these two talented men wrote such a dull, uninteresting story is beyond me. If this were having an out of town tryout or a workshop, I'd say they should just reverse the story and give more attention to Meg. Her story is more interesting. All we know of Gideon is that he hated his father, and he traveled a lot. That's about it. Surely there are more layers to him than that? And Esper's Kristen Stewart angsty performance wasn't really drawing me into his character. His voice was find in the first song, and I rather liked "All This Time," but soon his singing voice grew tiresome. I'm just not sure he has the vocal ability to lead a big, brash new musical.
The performances were if except Jimmy Nail. He's a fine actor, but why was he speaking singing so many lines? He'd talk in rhythm and rhyme, and then start singing? Maybe it wasn't intentional, but it sounded like he was speak singing. I thought maybe his voice was tired, but then he'd start belting it out, so heck if I know.
My only real qualm with the direction/design was the projection at the end of the water on the back wall. With such a realistic set - real water, realistic looking plants - it seems so jarringly fake to put this big projection of fake water on the wall. It looked like a computer game. Why not just have some haze and use the fabric/projection they used for the show curtain?
Just a few musings. I think there's maybe a good show in there, but like a friend said, it's just a plot we've seen so many times. The whole working class English town, down on their luck sort of thing. Kinky Boots, Full Monty, Billy Elliot. It's done with. Find a new plot.
I have mixed feelings. I can't imagine this will catch on. I saw quite a few people looking around the theater or gazing off, etc. The score has some nice moments and some rather dull moments. I actually disliked the songs Whizzer mentioned, but really enjoyed all of Meg's material. The rousing bar number in Act 2 was quite weird, but after all the ballads, it was a nice change of pace.
The book as mentioned is pretty terrible. How these two talented men wrote such a dull, uninteresting story is beyond me. If this were having an out of town tryout or a workshop, I'd say they should just reverse the story and give more attention to Meg. Her story is more interesting. All we know of Gideon is that he hated his father, and he traveled a lot. That's about it. Surely there are more layers to him than that? And Esper's Kristen Stewart angsty performance wasn't really drawing me into his character. His voice was find in the first song, and I rather liked "All This Time," but soon his singing voice grew tiresome. I'm just not sure he has the vocal ability to lead a big, brash new musical.
The performances were if except Jimmy Nail. He's a fine actor, but why was he speaking singing so many lines? He'd talk in rhythm and rhyme, and then start singing? Maybe it wasn't intentional, but it sounded like he was speak singing. I thought maybe his voice was tired, but then he'd start belting it out, so heck if I know.
My only real qualm with the direction/design was the projection at the end of the water on the back wall. With such a realistic set - real water, realistic looking plants - it seems so jarringly fake to put this big projection of fake water on the wall. It looked like a computer game. Why not just have some haze and use the fabric/projection they used for the show curtain?
Just a few musings. I think there's maybe a good show in there, but like a friend said, it's just a plot we've seen so many times. The whole working class English town, down on their luck sort of thing. Kinky Boots, Full Monty, Billy Elliot. It's done with. Find a new plot.
#143
Posted: 10/7/14 at 11:37pm
I think you're wrong since the show is sold out through March.
#144
Posted: 10/7/14 at 11:46pm
And I maybe sat by a few BWWers. Y'all be crazy.
#145
Posted: 10/8/14 at 8:28am
Seriously, Kristen Stewart? That's your "criticism" ?
#146
Posted: 10/8/14 at 9:47am
Maybe Buffalo Bill or someone else can help me. What is the run time of the show as of now? Thanks :)
#149
Posted: 10/8/14 at 11:40am
Saw the show last night and had a marvelous time, despite its flaws. Whizzer's done a superb job spelling out the absurdities and inconsistencies regarding "the last ship" itself, so I won't go there. Suffice it to say that the dramaturgy surrounding how the ship is designed, built and financed is still pretty sloppy. I also wish that the physical representation of the ship and its building were stronger. That said, I could argue -- like a previous poster -- that the ship itself is 100% poetic metaphor. Given the literalness of the rest of the show, however, that's a harder argument to make and support.
Is the show "dreary?" I suppose, if what you're looking for is "Bullets" or "The Producers." But anyone expecting that kind of glitz and glamour hasn't been paying attention. I think the comparison to "Billy Elliott" is apt, although this is miles better than the latter IMHO, mainly due to Sting's contribution. I left "Billy Elliott" praying I would never hear that score again; Sting's score is by turns melodic, moving, powerful and haunting. As interpolated, I don't think that "All This Time" works particularly well. "And Yet," when you listen to the lyrics, are specific to Gideon's character and situation. "All This Time" is thematically right, but the pop lyrics don't always make sense -- and you can barely understand what Michael Esper is saying at times. (And it was hard to get Sting's voice out of my head, a distinct distraction.)
But I had a great time nonetheless. The show is staged and performed very, very well; at times the energy and theatricality of it all are quite thrilling. Here's an original musical in which the characters and their conflicts are engaging and honestly drawn. The Gideon-Meg-Arthur triangle makes sense, and I clearly understood their conflicting emotional struggles and desires. The sense of the community and its needs is palpable, far more so than in "Bridges," for all the blather of how important it was to that show's concept. Bottom line, I bought into the world that Sting, Logan, Yorkey & Mantello created, and felt for all the people they've chosen to inhabit it. So, in that sense, the show worked beautifully.
The cast is universally strong, particularly Applegate (whom I have always felt was too schtick dependent in the past) and the fabulous Rachel Tucker. What a powerhouse she is! Esper I found quite sympathetic, as was Lazar, who has the easiest role. Collin Kelly-Sordelet, in his dual roles, is quite effective. All in all, this is a show well worth seeing. I enjoyed it for its strengths far more than I was distracted by its weaknesses.
Is the show "dreary?" I suppose, if what you're looking for is "Bullets" or "The Producers." But anyone expecting that kind of glitz and glamour hasn't been paying attention. I think the comparison to "Billy Elliott" is apt, although this is miles better than the latter IMHO, mainly due to Sting's contribution. I left "Billy Elliott" praying I would never hear that score again; Sting's score is by turns melodic, moving, powerful and haunting. As interpolated, I don't think that "All This Time" works particularly well. "And Yet," when you listen to the lyrics, are specific to Gideon's character and situation. "All This Time" is thematically right, but the pop lyrics don't always make sense -- and you can barely understand what Michael Esper is saying at times. (And it was hard to get Sting's voice out of my head, a distinct distraction.)
But I had a great time nonetheless. The show is staged and performed very, very well; at times the energy and theatricality of it all are quite thrilling. Here's an original musical in which the characters and their conflicts are engaging and honestly drawn. The Gideon-Meg-Arthur triangle makes sense, and I clearly understood their conflicting emotional struggles and desires. The sense of the community and its needs is palpable, far more so than in "Bridges," for all the blather of how important it was to that show's concept. Bottom line, I bought into the world that Sting, Logan, Yorkey & Mantello created, and felt for all the people they've chosen to inhabit it. So, in that sense, the show worked beautifully.
The cast is universally strong, particularly Applegate (whom I have always felt was too schtick dependent in the past) and the fabulous Rachel Tucker. What a powerhouse she is! Esper I found quite sympathetic, as was Lazar, who has the easiest role. Collin Kelly-Sordelet, in his dual roles, is quite effective. All in all, this is a show well worth seeing. I enjoyed it for its strengths far more than I was distracted by its weaknesses.
Updated On: 10/8/14 at 11:40 AM
#150
Posted: 10/8/14 at 11:44am
LucyEth, thanks for sharing your comments.
"The sense of the community and its needs is palpable, far more so than in "Bridges," for all the blather of how important it was to that show's concept. "
This is so true and hasn't been stated yet. Great point.
"The sense of the community and its needs is palpable, far more so than in "Bridges," for all the blather of how important it was to that show's concept. "
This is so true and hasn't been stated yet. Great point.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95