What is the animosity towards Wicked for?- Page 2

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:19pm

"I honestly don't think that Wicked's going to be as much of a classic as Les Mis is now."

Considering the lukewarm reception Wicked has gotten from the critics and the mixed response from the theatre-going public, I really don't see Wicked as a "defining" work of contemporary musical theatre. Hell, I don't even call it "fine."

But hey, who knows? Stranger things have happened. Cats ran for 18 years (though that says very little for the tastes of the general public, and I still don't call Cats a classic in any way...except "a classic case of bad taste.")

On another note, yes, this goes for everyone: punctuation is a wonderful skill to learn!

Updated On: 6/12/04 at 05:19 PM

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:21pm

I'd actually like to see Wicked in a venue more like the Marquis.....

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:23pm

My animosity towards it is that I don't think it is a very good show. Except for two songs there is nothing memorable. I know Wicked mascot MusicPos is always mentioning other song titles, but the day after the show I couldn't remember a single one of them save Defying Gravity or Popular. Kristin and Idina are talented. But the show bites, it betrays its source material and doesn't EVEN make sense within the context of its own universe.

And every time somebody here writes, "But people leave smiling!" I think, "Babies smile when they fart. Perhaps there should be 500 baby fart threads here too?"

Updated On: 6/12/04 at 05:23 PM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:25pm

I'd like to see Wicked in a dump truck! Ahahahahaha!

(Ok ok, I'll stop it. But I do love getting the "teeny-boppers" mad! Oh, there I go again! LOL!)

Updated On: 6/12/04 at 05:25 PM

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:27pm

Don't get them TOO mad.. they scream and it shatters glass!

(Imagining screams of 12 year old girls at Little Shop when Joey walks on stage.... they better have paramedics/more cops on duty.... those girls might RIOT when Audrey II eats Seymour!!!)

[CurtainUp]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:53pm

I truly only like 3 songs...two of them being the comedy ones. "Loathing" and "Popular" and I think Defying Gravity's wonderful. I actually really like the music, but think the lyrics are weak. It felt like Schwartz had to write it for school and cared about getting it done, not the quality of it.

I am a writer as well as an actress, so I'm picky about lyrics. The cheesiness works sometimes-"Popular", etc. But when they rhyme "Nessa" with "confess-a" it just feels so forced to me. I also feel like they Disney-fied it; I know it's not meant to be exactly like the book, but I feel like they should've kept the importance of Fiyero being African American. I also wish they hadnt made Galinda as central. I ADORE Chenoweth, but I wish they had gotten more of an unknown so the plot would be more similar. They totally flattened Fiyero, too.

My opinion was perfectly summed up at the Tony's- i think Menzel is AMAZING herself, but I'm just not a huge fan of the music.

[Becky]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 5:54pm

Considering the lukewarm reception Wicked has gotten from the critics and the mixed response from the theatre-going public, I really don't see Wicked as a "defining" work of contemporary musical theatre.

Well, I read an article about how the critics panned Les Mis when it first came out. Cameron talked about which of his houses he was going to have to sell because the reviews were so bad. So critics initial reaction to a show doesn't always forshadowing the lasting effect it will have on the theater community. Updated On: 6/12/04 at 05:54 PM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 6:29pm

Yes, it's true that the London critics panned the show when it first came out - but then Les Miz had phenomenal box-office sales due solely to word-of-mouth. The positive buzz was so great that it had to move to a bigger theatre. When it arrived in New York, of course, it received across-the-board raves and won 8 Tonys.

The situation was Wicked is notably different: lukewarm reception from critics and lukewarm reception from the theatre community. I wouldn't say the show has buzz - more like a gimmick (the Oz connection) to reel them in.

(By the way, the reaction to Les Miz from the London critics wasn't that the show was bad, but that someone DARED to tackle and trim Victor Hugo's masterpiece.)

I can't believe we're trying to compare Les Miz and Wicked here, because it's pretty obvious they're completely different.

Does anyone here actually think that Wicked is some great revelation to musical theatre, or that someday it will be seen as such? I really don't think it's good enough. Wicked is pretty standard fare - it just has the distinct privilege of being attached to a real seminal work, The Wizard of Oz.

Updated On: 6/12/04 at 06:29 PM

[bythesword84]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 6:30pm

It hurts me to hear someone say that Wicked is better than Les Mis but I digress...

Wicked is okay. Its the Wickedites that drive me nuts.




Although I will say the one thing that kills me the most, be it about Wicked, Q, any given show...I can not stand when someone proclaims a show to be his or her favorite based on a CD recording.
Dear people, please, please, please come to terms with the fact that a production can not be your "Favorite" until you have actually seen it!

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 6:35pm

"It hurts me to hear someone say that Wicked is better than Les Mis but I digress..."

Yeah, I know, I'm flabbergasted as I type. Next thing you know, someone's gonna say that Wicked is a more seminal piece of theatre than West Side Story. Let's face it, Wicked is no Les Miz, no West Story, no A Chorus Line.

But it IS the next "Mamma Mia!"....LOL!

[Becky]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 6:41pm

Yes, it's true that the London critics panned the show when it first came out - but then Les Miz had phenomenal box-office sales due solely to word-of-mouth.

Same happened to WICKED at the Gershwin. The sales skyrocketed due to word of mouth *after* they opened, and has millions in advance sales that it didn't have in the beginning -- even with the "Oz" gimmick attached.

You can call the audience reaction luke-warm, but that's not necessarily true. The audience/theater buzz has been quite positive. I'm not saying it's a classic or the greatest thing to ever hit the stage -- but discussing its long term fate just a short time after it's first staging is ridiculous. And I only used the Les Mis "critic" argument because you used the critics to base part of your argument as to how WICKED will do. I pointed out that it's impossible to tell from that, and it doesn't matter what Les Mis went on to do later - for who is to say that a few years from now critics won't be raving about WICKED. Just playing devil's advocate here. Not meant to be taken literally.

What irritates me more than the over zealous Wicked fans is when people state their opinions as if they are undeniable facts where the quality of a show is concerned. Positive or negative. Quality - like any other aspect of liking a show - is completely subjective.

**Edited to say that I'm simply bored today, and enjoying a little debate.

Updated On: 6/12/04 at 06:41 PM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 8:09pm

I thought the main point of my argument about Les Miz was that it has a certain universality and power that Wicked doesn't have. Hell, that the vast majority of musicals doesn't have - that's why Les Miz is a worldwide phenomenon.

I'm not really arguing how long Wicked will run (although its weekly running costs are pretty high, which is a detriment to its life), but rather its place in musical theatre history. Beauty and the Beast has run for over a decade, but I wouldn't say it has a place in the canon of musical theatre, other than being a statistic (and perhaps being known for initiating the Disneyfication of Broadway, but that's not a good thing). Personally, I really don't believe critics, artists or theatregoers will look at Wicked in 20 years and say, "My, that musical sure changed the face of Broadway forever!"

There's a really good article about the future of the American musical comedy. I've attached the link below. I don't necessarily agree with everything he says (particularly what makes good music and what doesn't - personally, I hate the scores to all those old-time musicals because they lack variety), but he has some very intriguing and important points.

And yeah, I'm bored as hell today too.
The American musical comedy

Updated On: 6/12/04 at 08:09 PM

[jezzebelle]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 8:27pm

I enjoy Wicked, I enjoy Hairspray and I enjoy RENT. However, by no means, do I think any of these are the second coming or the end all and be all of musical theatre. Personal taste is one thing, but to declare a show the best show in the entire world as a fact is a bit much, especially when you've never seen the show, only have the soundtrack. And after seeing a show only once, in my opinion, it makes no sense to say it's your favorite show of all time, but I digress.

Different people enjoy different things and variety is the spice of life. It's just annoying when people feel the need to preach and preach about how Wicked (or any other show, for that matter) is the most amazing show on the planet and preach this as fact and not state that it is an opinion. What turned me off to Wicked intially, was that it was ALL people seemed to me talking about. I had no desire to see it because of this reason...I know it happened with HS as well, but I usually can't get into shows until some of the buzz dies down, so I can check out the cast recording and see how it is for myself. I did see the show and I liked it very much, but I didn't feel the need to proclaim my undying love for it and scream the genius of the show from the rooftops.

[joeyjoe]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 9:08pm

CurtainUp, i don't recall anywhere in the book where Fiyero is mentioned as being African-American, only that he had dark skin tattooed with blue diamonds... I, too, have dark skin but i'm hardly African-American... Fiyero was actually a Winkie from the Vinkus... Updated On: 6/12/04 at 09:08 PM

[ChenoMenzel]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 9:16pm

Uhh...Fiyero wasn't african american. He was blue. He was tatooed with blue diamonds all over him...where did that come from?

[CurtainUp]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 9:20pm

ok so I'm a little embarassed-must have been a misread. However, my point still follows. I wish they had made his skin a different color. I remember one of the most touching parts in the book as a student saying "His skin is the color of ****" or such. I just wish they had made him more dimensional, and it seems like his character is just 2D.

[jezzebelle]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 9:36pm

I agree, Curtainup. Fieryo in the show is very one-dimensional, though I enjoy what Norbert brings to the character. Still, you can't perform miracles with what's not there to begin with.

[My Fair Lady]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 9:45pm

I like Wicked. I think it's a nice story with nice shows. But come on, it's not the only good show. It's really the threads that annoy people, not as much the show. I don't think it'll be a classic and there'll probably never be a revival, but it's a fun musical for now.

[wickedpopular]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 10:19pm

What i think is especially amusing about this whole topic is that so many of the critics haven't even seen the show .... it doesn't make any sense. I understand not liking all the hype but please, it's a bit childish to be so adament in criticizing a show you haven't actually viewed, and really takes away any merrit your comments might have.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 10:24pm

Actually, I think you'll find that most of the more vocal critics here HAVE, in fact, seen the show.

[wickedpopular]

Posted: 6/12/04 at 11:32pm

Regardless of whether or not people have seen the show I think everyone is being overly critical. I mean it's not the BEST show ever written, but it's moving, fun, and fairly innovative. I don't see why everyone has to be so negative about it. Maybe we could all be pleased by the press the show has generated and be pleased that perhaps its bringing the theatre to new people. All shows have their flaws. And quite really unless we're actually up on stage or behind the scenes of Wicked who are we to say anything?

Also to those of you who think the score is monotonous ... um, have you ever heard a Stephen Schartz musical before. It's his style, he incorporates certian themes throughout the show, reintroducing them frequently. It's just what he does.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/13/04 at 12:24am

I think most critics of the show itself have seen the show - that's how they're able to go into detail as to why they don't like it.

Again, our "overt criticism" stems from the dozens of threads and messages clogging the message board, and the rest of us going, "Woah, what's the big deal? It's not like Wicked reinvented the wheel!"

Some people are negative about the show because they hated it. Simple. I do appreciate the fact that Wicked is bringing in new audiences, but what kind of new audiences? "Mamma Mia!" is bringing in new audiences too - will these audiences want to watch other Broadway fare, will they be open to more experimental shows, or will they keep demanding the same overblown, oversized fluff? Will their attendance of these shows force producers to play it safe, and restrict more daring musicals from being made? There are no simple answers to these questions, but it's something to consider.

I personally find the Wicked score a huge disappointment coming from Schwartz. It could be argued whether it's in the same vein as his earlier work, but it definitely lacks the creativity and melodies of his past repertoire. I expected more, if this was to be his big Broadway return - it seems it only confirmed that he's lost it.

But again, I wish the Wicked fans would just take the bulk of their jabber to the official Wicked site, and not here.

Updated On: 6/13/04 at 12:24 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/13/04 at 12:24am

Ya know, ya gotta admire somebody who makes a point at 10:19, "What i think is especially amusing about this whole topic is that so many of the critics haven't even seen the show ...."

And then dismisses the point at 11:32, "Regardless of whether or not people have seen the show I think everyone is being overly critical."

It shows real growth and the ability to adjust one's opinions after taking in new information. Wait, no it doesn't.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/13/04 at 12:25am

FindingNamo, you're back! I missed you! Join me in this delightful thread, won't you?

[wickedpopular]

Posted: 6/13/04 at 12:35am

Multiple critics said they hadn't seen the show. If I was wrong than I was trying to correct things, as to not seem ignorant. I wasn't "dismissing" my earlier comment. It was still basically directed to the people who HADN'T seen the show. Anyone who inferred something else, well that is their problem. Later my point was supposed to be that I don't see why everyone is getting so uppety about a show, both those who have and haven't seen it. It's pretty offensive. Also I think it's extremely petty to go around attacking people for having a different opinion. That's what makes life interesting. It's awfully pathetic. I just thought if you were going to criticize a show see it first.