What has happened to Broadway? — Page 3

---

Updated On: 2/7/06 at 10:44 PM

---

Updated On: 2/7/06 at 10:55 PM

As Danny Kaye sang in White Christmas, "The theatuh, the theatuh--what's happened to the theatuh?"

---

Munk, the critic, cant handle a difference of opinion. His postings often involve name calling and insults. If you think I am kidding, just check the various threads and read his attacks on many different posters. Here is one of Munk's recent attacks on another poster: re: Who (if anyone) will replace Harvey Firestein?
Posted On:5/7/05 at 11:44:40 PM


Coming from the Queen Fag Hag herself. (written by Munk)


Munk----
You seem to have way too much free time and even admit in one posting to being bored. Well, there are hospitals and other places which seriously need volunteers. Try it. It might help reduce some of that anger. By the way, this is what I have written and what seems so difficult for some here to comprehend: "Bway should be able to attract a wider ticket buying base and thus provide more jobs. I have often stated here that an elitist attitude about which shows are "worthy" is dangerous for our community. Some folks want Sondheim and more seem to want Mamma Mia and Disney shows. There should be room for all tastes" I don't see a condemnation of serious plays in any of my postings. I simply urge my fellow posters not to put down a genre of show as they then appear elitist. Guess I hit a nerve with some of them. Well if the shoe fits........Have a good night all.

Updated On: 5/7/05 at 11:27 PM

Anger? I'm not angry at annyone. I get annoyed at certain posters on this board for posting the exact thing OVER and OVER - in otherwords, you. You post over and over this theory you have about "theatre elitists." What are you even talking about? It's the biggest load of bullsh*t. Something can be enjoyable, but not award worthy or very meritable.

Like CHITTY CHITTY BANG ME. Very enjoyable - generally well put together, some decent performances. But is it deserving of any Tony Awards? No, not really - except maybe for best scenic design. Does that make me a theatre elitist? No. Not one bit. This "elitist" group you speak of isn't even a genuine thing.

From the sound of your posts, the only shows you've ever seen are things like MAMMA MIA and THE LION KING. Fine. But if you're going to insult me for liking shows greater than those, I could turn right around and insult you and say that you're mindless and dumb. But I don't, because it's irrelevant.

And yes, Mr. Petty Childlike Arguments, I openly declare that I have a lot of time on my hands, particularly at night. I'm a college student and often find myself sitting at my desk. I don't have to defend myself to you - you seem to be incapable of any sort of basic comprehension, so I'm going to stop.

---

My point has just been proven. Our self appointed critc cant handle another view. He cant even understand what it is that he is mad at. Take care all.

Aw, funny Lou. I remember hashing out the "elitist" argument with you a while back. Looks like you haven't changed a bit. So if Munk's the "self-appointed critic," are the "self-appointed arbiter of populism"?

One difference between Broadway in the 60's (when I got involved) & now is back than some performers took their craft more seriusly & unless they were on their deathbed did 8 shows a week

Some performers now take off for the slightest little reason. If you are not sick, show up. People are paying good money to see you.

---

There's no doubt that Broadway has changed since the 80's. The star-driven musical is dying and the so-called "theme park" musicals are much too popular. I guess that all started when Broadway began to cater to the tourist trade and began merchandising with t-shirts, coffee mugs and kitchen magnets. I'd also like to add to that list the computerized set changes that seem to take the sincerity out of the shows. Do you remember how exciting it was in SWEENEY TODD when Mrs. Lovett's bake shope swirled out to Sondheim's music? It was propelled by manpower not winches.

I also lament the lavish scenic designs in today's shows. They overwhelm audiences with color and details but forget the fact what many of us sitting in those overpriced seats have imaginations. It was such a thrill to see that revival of OUR TOWN a few seasons ago. It was done on the customary bare stage and there was nothing to distract from enjoying the fine acting and Thornton Wilder's wonderful prose.

I also lament the advent of amplified sound in the theater. There are times when I have a difficult time hearing which character is speaking and what they are saying because the sound is so distorted. It's gotten to the point where I hunt out shows that aren't miked. Funny how I can hear even the most delicate pianissimo in an opera house without aid of amplification.

Oh, and remember how we used to DRESS for an evening or afternoon at the theater? Somehow I felt better putting on a jacket and tie to attend a performance. It was as though I was showing my respect for the performers and the material they were acting in.

Still, there is good theater to be found in New York. You have to hunt around for it, though.

---

Wow, now I have the honor of being one of the 2 most offensive people here? Wonderful! You really do my non-existent personal attacks on posters proud. So in addition to being the all-knowing arbiter of what is populist in theater, you're now the expert on levels of offensiveness in posters? Lou, you're my new idol. I wish I could be as omniscient as you, just by saying I am.

Dollypop, in defense of sound designers, who I'm sure really do try hard to ensure the greatest integrity of sound possible when amplifying, I can see other factors going into the fact that the words of actors are being garbled. The big one is that enunciation simply isn't valued very much when singing pop/rock. Any attempt to sing along with modern artists on the radio without having the album sleeve at one's disposal is bound to result in a lot of "la la las" to fill in the bits you can't make out. Maybe actors/singers nowadays don't get as much training as they used to in pronouncing things clearly. You can't blame a micropone for that.

Updated On: 5/8/05 at 04:18 PM

Look, in pop's defense, it's not really about the words the way musical theater songs are. In musicals, the words are absolutely vital, because the purpose of the song is to express character motivations, feelings, and to advance plot. In pop, the purpose of the song is to a) get you dancing or b) express one feeling strongly, like anger, sadness, or joy. The lyrics are secondary to the music- it's not very often that it's the other way around.

I've recommended this book on other threads but it's worth repeating here as well. THE RISE AND FALL OF THE BROADWAY MUSICAL by Mark D. Grant is an important book about the current state of musical theatre because Grant offers very specific analyses and evidence to support his argument--and it is a most compelling one. Anyone with a love of musical theater should pick this up!