Want a show to be a sure-fire flop? Make it about vampires.

[I <3 NY]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:52pm

was Lestat really as terrible as all the reviews make it out to be?
Updated On: 4/28/06 at 06:52 PM

[Phantom2]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:54pm

Not at all. I really liked it. Hugh Panaro is awesome.

[Fabrizio2]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 7:26pm

I have not seen it. I was going to but due to the recent reviews, I sold my tickets. Now I wish I had them back.

It doesn't look bad at all. Most of the music sounds nice, and it seems as if there is magnificant talent within the cast.

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 7:32pm

I really liked it. It has such great music and a GREAT cast, the book sorta sucks. I usually don't go for these types of musicals, despite my username, but I had a great time at Lestat. In fact, I've been watched the video constantly to listen to the music, especially "I Want More." I love Allison!

[Renthead#1]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 7:33pm

Why does Broadway hate about Vampires so much?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 7:33pm

I don't for one second buy the notion that a vampire musical can't be accomplished. I didn't see any of the 3 vampire musicals, but it sounds like they were not executed well.

Some topics may take a defter hand in delivering them. There are countless musicals that could have absolutely bombed. Think about Sweeney Todd---in lesser hands, it could have been crap. The source material for Bram Stoker's Dracula and Anne Rice's series are hugely popular, and I would be willing to say worthy literature for dramatization--as countless films and the famous Frank Langella production of the play would indicate.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:05pm

Well said jrb! A musical's subject matter can pass for a masterpiece no matter how morbid or strange as long as the creative team is good.

[All_For_Laura]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:33pm

*Agreed.

I see it next sunday, I will let you all know how I feel after that.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:41pm

How about a jukebox vampire musical ?

Something tells me will like Lestat

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:47pm

Well, as I say in another thread, even just listening to the music in the clips of the show on Broadway.com, it's immediately clear that Elton John was 100 percent the absolute wrong choice to musicalize Anne Rice's VAMPIRE CHRONICLES. His style is pop de la schmultz, not gothic or brooding. Andrew Lloyd Webber would even have been a better choice, and I'm sure there are many other composers who could have come up with a score that succeeded in musicalizing these characters.

I don't think "Vampire" musicals are damned - they just seem to attract really poor creative teams.

[All_For_Laura]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:06pm

Next up:

Queen of the damned, the musical.

Wait for it :-p

[Katurian2]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:17pm

lol- I sure hope not

Andrew Lloyd Webber would have been an interseting choice to compose for Lestat.

[H.Higgins]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:21pm

If "Dance of the Vampires" had been executed with the same dramatic, serious, and sexy tone that it had in Europe with "Tanz der Vampires," I believe it would have been a success. Steinman's score is simply stunning and the original musical had a storyline and book that honored the Gothic elegance and sexuality of the true vampire genre. The madness that took over when Michael Crawford put enough money in the show to have creative imput is what I tend to believe damned this production. He saw that the book was turned into absolute camp and the show became something entirely different and failed.

I wish we could have had the show that "Dance of the Vampires" could have been...

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:23pm

I have no idea what the show was like in Germany - but even without Crawford's involvement - it was doomed the minute they played "Total Eclipse of the Heart" -

[pandajen14]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:26pm

I think so. I didn't like it at all.

[jimnysf]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:29pm

"was Lestat really as terrible as all the reviews make it out to be?"

Yes! It was/is.

[broadway4me]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 10:40pm

No, Lestat is not as "terrible" as the reviews make it out to be. Like others have said the cast is amazing and their voices are gorgeous. Even though the music may not be "Gothic" enough for the material, it is still very beautiful, with several powerful numbers. To be honest, I enjoyed the music in Lestat so much more than the music in many of the current hits that are now on Broadway. An example would be Lion King. That show does have positive qualities, but for me, I found the music to be pretty boring overall. (and yes, I know that LK is Elton John, too )
Updated On: 4/29/06 at 10:40 PM

[Just_John]

Posted: 4/29/06 at 12:59am

Everyone should just go see the show and see what you think. I think its worth going to see just for the actors and effects. I didn't love the music but some songs were not bad at all. And people are definately making it seem alot worse than it is.

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 4/29/06 at 3:24am

Seeing these kind of threads, the title alone, makes me want to bash my head into a wall until it bleeds.. and eventually just lops off altogether.

I, and so many others, have said this so many thousands of times you could count less grains of sand at the beach.

* Dance Of The Vampires, the beautiful and haunting subtle show in Vienna (still running strong, through-out Germany, ten years later) was trashed and destroyed in its Broadway production. Everyone who's a fan of Jim Steinman and the original show know that. I believe if they had have stuck with the initial idea it would have been a phenomenon.

* Dracula, that was actually good in its first draft. It had an appeal which could have worked.. as a sort of chamber opera. Again, they trashed it and did not listen to the composer and writers when they tried fixing it.

* Lestat, that was built from the ground-up. All of these musicals were cursed through bad circumstance. I believe if the producers stick with the idea and do *not* tamper with it we could have something.

I am working on an operetta of Nosferatu, have been doing so since 2001, and will be taking it straight to the screen as another remake of the Murnau film.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/29/06 at 3:34am

good for you, rock! And don't let anyone try to crap on your idea. It's a shame what happened to these three shows.

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 4/29/06 at 3:35am

Thanks.

And yes, it is.

Just saw the video-clip for LESTAT and I was impressed

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 4/29/06 at 3:45am

I'm actually ancient enough to remember seeing a vampire show on Broadway that was a huge hit. Back in the late 70s there was a revival of the nonmusical play DRACULA that starred Frank Langella that ran nearly a 1000 performances. It was the play that originally made a star of Bela Lugosi in the 30s and was the basis of the classic film (also starring Lugosi) that really launched the vampire craze and led to dozens (hundreds?) of vampire themed films and tv shows over the years. The revival played up the campy melodramatic aspects of the story (it was quite funny) but still gave you a credible, romantic, sexy vampire whom the audience loved and was drawn to even as he was biting the necks of his victims. A great, fun show.

So there's nothing inherently wrong with the notion of a vampire-themed show. When done well, it can be terrific and be a huge popular hit. But the recent three attempts just weren't done well and had creative teams who just didn't understand what the basic appeal of a vampire story is to audiences, which is partly the sexual nature of such an exotic creature taking control of you and forcing you to submit to his will -- mix with romanticism and a touch of humor and you have a story that will intrigue the masses. These recent shows also had lousy scores and staging that was misguided. Too bad, too. Their failure means we won't see another attempt at a vampire show for a generation. Done right, this basic story can be and has been widely appealing to audiences many many times over the years.