"Twilight: The Musical" - Urinetown meets Spring Awakening

[Elphie3]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 1:15am

Ok guys, I HATE "Twilight" (sorry, no offense) but this is BRILLIANT! Think "Spring Awakening" meets "Urinetown". I SO wanna see this live! Finally someone does something brilliant with this material! LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/user/BellaandtheCullens#p/c/C8C2506205AEBD68/0/rO9ZK_Vu64s

[Kad]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 1:42am

It's no "A Very Potter Musical".

[Elphie3]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 1:54am

They're two different entities. This one is using a very different structure. I LOVE Stephanie Meyer narrating! And Bella rocks!

And have you SEEN "I Imprinted on an Infant"? OMG (I think it's Act 2, part 7)

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 1:58am

They're two different entities.

Yeah, but you can obviously see they're trying to emulate it...

[Elphie3]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 2:01am

Oh come on, you can be inspired by and riff off an idea!

The bottom line is I think it's brilliant, hilarious, and very entertaining. Who cares who they were inspired by!

If they were directly copying and doing another Harry Potter musical, that would be different. "A Very Potter Musical" wasn't the first, and it won't be the last. What about "Evil Dead: The Musical" or "Toxic Avenger: The Musical!'

My point in posting was how entertaining this show is, outside of its potential influences.

[darquegk]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 9:16am

The "no-budget, no-fourth-wall parody musical" genre was actually started by Mad Magazine, which ran into copyright troubles for publishing scripts to many of these in its Sixties and Seventies heyday, including an infamous Star Wars one that is still circulating the internet today, often misattributed to Charles Strouse. It's called "filk musicals."

Before Potter, there was "The Darq Knight," several Star Wars musicals, one or two stagings of "The Princess Bride" with parody songs and an increasingly-ironic script, and more. It's just that with Youtube, filk musicals are becoming a bigger and bigger deal.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 9:19am

Why do I get the feeling that exposure from BWW is going to lead to this being removed from YouTube? I get they are calling this a pardoy, but everything about it makes it look like a straightforward adaptation (just because they're playing it for laughs doesn't make it a parody. It seems like they names, places and plot points are exactly the same as the book).
Updated On: 9/30/10 at 09:19 AM

[Elphie3]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 9:57am

Youtube is a different medium. "A Very Potter Musical" did the same thing - no names were changed.

Now if this were up and running as is on Broadway, that would be different.

And thank you darquegk! Perfect point!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 9:58am

Youtube is a different medium.

Different from what?

[Elphie3]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 10:05am

From a live performance where people are paying for tickets. There are dozens of parody performances on youtube that use all the real names etc. You can do it on youtube - but not onstage where you're making money off of it.

If this were asked to be taken down you'd also have to take down A Very Potter Musical, and the Sequel, and any other parody musicals - including The Hillywood Show

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 10:11am

But the clip you posted in them doing a live performance. With an audience. I've never seen a very Potter musical, so I don't know about the correlation.

I don't really care one way or the other, and I'm no legal scholar, but I think people don't always understand the definition of parody.

[Elphie3]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 10:13am

A Very Potter Musical was performed live over several performances.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/30/10 at 10:15am

K. I don't know why you keep talking about Harry Potter. Updated On: 9/30/10 at 10:15 AM