What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
#1What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 4:50pm
I know it's been discussed, but I'm listening to the cast album now, and I LOVE the music, the actors seem to fit the roles well, it stays true to the movie and book...so what was the problem exactly?
sweeneytodd2
Featured Actor Joined: 10/28/04
#2What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 4:54pmI never got to see it, but I agree that some of the score is great, and the cast recording is very well produced.
#2What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 5:01pmI never saw the Broadway production, though I heard it was way too small for the size of the theatre. The small production in Chicago was delightful, however.
#3What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 5:23pm
1. Terrible book and weak score. Did nothing to translate the magic of the novel/film to the stage. None of the songs were memorable.
2. Miscasting. When Will Chase was cast as Rob, the nebbishy music nerd from the novel and the film suddenly became this burned-out rock star type (think Roger meets The Wedding Singer). Jenn Colella had no chemistry with Chase or with Jeb Brown. None of the ex-girlfriends were memorable.
3. The Imperial is a barn, but I think the show suffered more from poor promotion than being in the wrong theatre.
#4What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 5:31pm
The theater was definitely far too large for this production. It might have done well in something mid-sized but the Imperial is enormous.
Also - it didn't help that there were no "big names" - except for the title "High Fidelity" to ride on the success of the novel and film.
I think it could've done well (or at least better) if:
- there was a "big name" lead in the cast - even as a featured role. For example, Jack Black (from the film cast). This "stunt-casting" is a trend now on Broadway and it does help sales.
- It had a big name producer or a movie company backing the production. For example, John Cusack (lead in the film) or Touchstone Pictures (film company). This is similar to Whoopi Goldberg and Oprah respectively producing Sister Act and The Color Purple, as well as Universal as a producer for Wicked. The stars draw some of their followers to the show and the huge movie companies have tons of $$.
- Nick Hornby himself had had a part in the making of the show - perhaps as a book writer. Again, he has fans and with his name attached they might be more interested in coming.
- It was made today, in 2011, instead of 2005. Back then Facebook was still pretty small, and there was no Twitter and all the social media outlets, so it was harder to get the word out there. All the buzz out there in cyberspace is cheap and easy and, when retweeted and shared and such, becomes free marketing from one consumer to another. I personally also don't think they had a very strong marketing campaign either.
-
ahhrealmonsters
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/11/10
#5What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 5:40pm
Agree with the character of Rob and how Will Chase portrayed him. I don't know if changing the location from London to NYC had any effect, but there was definitely some bad casting in there.
While I enjoyed the score, it was kind of bland and forgettable. The only song I remember is the Top 5 Breakup song (it's definitely not called that.) I think Jenn Colella, while insanely talented, was wrong for Laura.
#6What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 5:48pm
Did nothing to translate the magic of the novel/film to the stage.
I saw no magic in the film at all. The film bored me to tears, but I love the score to the musical.
I don't know if changing the location from London to NYC had any effect, but there was definitely some bad casting in there.
Aren't the film and the musical set in Chicago?
#7What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 6:24pmI loved this show. I think it's one of the best scores of its decade.
#8What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 6:41pm
Mister Matt, the book is set in London and the movie was set in Chicago. The musical is set in NYC, Brooklyn to be exact.
I adore the movie, one of my top 5. I felt like it captured it well through the cast recording, but like I said, I haven't seen the show.
DeNada
Broadway Star Joined: 7/7/07
#9What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 7:17pm
I love the album for this show too, but I think there are a lot of reasons why it flopped first time round.
The main male characters are music nerds. Why are they singing middle of the road pop-rock, the kind of music they'd despise, for most of the show? That's not going to appeal to people who loved the film or book - who were the only people who would go and see this kind of show.
Who do you market the show to? The film is a cult favourite, not a massive hit. It had no stars. It's not a romantic comedy, although it has romance and comedy. It's certainly not a traditional musical comedy. It's not a family show by any means. There was nothing to sell it on. It also opened near Christmas - not a good time for a new show with no tourist hook, I suspect.
The album's mostly great, but I have no idea what the book was like from listening to it which may have been the problem. It's a difficult story anyway - Rob is a dick, after all - but the thing that has really always confused me is that the "hook" of the original story (the 5 ex-girlfriends) is covered in about 30 seconds of a Bruce Springsteen pastiche song. Maybe there just wasn't room to musicalise the story well enough?
What kind of life has the show had in amateur and rep theatres in the States? I don't think it's made it over to the UK in any way as yet, which is a shame.
FindingNamo
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
#10What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 7:33pm
Jenn Collella was really hard and severe looking. Like casting Rachelle Rak as Thoroughly Modern Millie.
bk
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/20/03
#11What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 7:53pmThis is the same old tired thing - there are a lot of shows that sound great on the cast albums - big, fat flops that sound great on the recording. Anyone Can Whstle, Subways Are For Sleeping are two of my favorite cast albums and the shows are insufferably bad. And there are many, many more.
#12What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 9:59pmI saw it on Broadway.....and barely remember it.
#13What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 10:17pm
I love score as well, which is odd since I can't stand N2N.
"Desert Island Top 5 Breakups" and the 3 "I Slept With Someone..."s are some of my most played tracks on my ipod.
dramarama3
Stand-by Joined: 2/13/09
#14What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 10:39pmNone of what everyone's mentioned (marketing wise, theatre wise) would have mattered if the show was actually good. Which it wasn't. Some of the songs are ok (I'd have loved the opening number if it wasn't 4 minutes too long), but really, apart from the set (Which was incredible), the show was a long, tired, unmemorable bore. Considering just how lively the cast recording is, you have to have seen it to appreciate what a dull night at the theatre it actually was.
FindingNamo
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
#15What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 10:52pmSo, you saw it, Bruce? You have to admit it had the best "turn off your cellphone" announcement ever and held that title until The Intelligent Homosexual's Guide....
#16What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 6/30/11 at 11:14pm
The show was better in Boston. (Yes, I saw it there, both versions 1.0 and 2.0, and in NY). They changed the show for the better in Boston, and then undid much of the good work they did just in time for Broadway.
It was never a master piece, but with better marketing, a smaller theatre (the funny part is that the Colonial in Boston is huge too, but it didn't feel as uncomfortably large), and without the changes that hurt the show in NY, I think that it could have had a longer life than it had.
#17What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/1/11 at 9:47am
What was right about it? Will Chase is a mildly attractive yet charisma-free actor, Jenn Colella is a hard annoying screamer (who is already losing her high notes from bad technique); the book was a bore, the characters were two-dimensional, stupid, and unlikable, none of whom seemed to be pursuing any real goal. The leading man claims to be changing his horndog act to get the love of his life back and what does he do at the end of Act I? He gleefully boinks an unattractive walk-on character, just for the thrill of the catch. Why would I return for Act II after that? He clearly doesn't really mean what he says, and I would be utterly unconvinced by any smarmy epiphany he may experience in an 11:00 number, tearfully wailed into the lights.
The score is full of forgettable light pop songs, none of which enlighten the story or characters, but only serve as digressions from the show - for instance, "She Goes" is a song that tells us over and over and over the same old sentence.
It was a brightly gussied-up nonentity, and there were many great reasons this one closed in a heartbeat.
chewy5000
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/1/09
#18What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/1/11 at 9:58amI hated that book when I read it. I remember the first few pages being very well written and interesting, but it quickly became bland and boring. Oh, and was there a bit where they have sex in a car?
#19What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/1/11 at 11:17am
The score is full of forgettable light pop songs, none of which enlighten the story or characters, but only serve as digressions from the show - for instance, "She Goes" is a song that tells us over and over and over the same old sentence.
I love that song! I actually enjoyed how it initially defines his character at the beginning, but the nagging and celebratory repetition ultimately defines the attitude of the girl singing it and the relationship between the two. That number was PRECISELY how I would imagine that character to behave.
#20What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/1/11 at 2:27pm
Admittedly, I don't remember a lot of the show when I saw it on Broadway, but I remember I really enjoyed it, despite the flaws. I liked most of casting, except for Jay Klaitz, who I think manages to suck the soul out of any scene he's ever in. And the set was pretty cool too.
I think if the show had popped up in late spring, even early summer, it could have taken advantage of the late teen and older crowd who didn't have a lot of "rock" options on Broadway back then.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
#21What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/1/11 at 2:29pmI think that score was about as "rock" as High School Musical.
FindingNamo
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
#22What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/2/11 at 1:53am
Bruce! Bruce Kimmel!!! Did you find anything at all worthwhile when you saw High Fidelity? Me, I really loved the sets. When I saw it. In person. Live. In the theater. Bruce? What say you?
#23What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/2/11 at 11:39amI agree that the score in general was pretty middle-of-the-road, but I've always really liked "The Last Real Record Store on Earth."
finebydesign
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/17/07
#24What was wrong with HIGH FIDELITY?
Posted: 7/2/11 at 1:31pmI remember this being around the same time as "The Wedding Singer" and thinking these shows were exactly the same thing. Musicals made from movies way too soon after the film. Both were forgettable.
Videos