Why is Wedding Singer on the rocks?- Page 3

[west end artist1]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 9:02pm

This is a great show with on e of the best ensembles ive ever seen.
Lynch is perfect in that role his comedy timeing was great.The rest of the cast also did great and the show has more energy than all the other shows on Broadway put together.

Broadway needs this show because after the shows i saw when i was there this was one of the standouts whilst so many of the others were just OK.

XX

[karatekid1]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 9:12pm

This was my first show on broadway despite seeing almost every major tour that comes to LA and i thought that it was amazing it is soooo much fun!!!! I hope it runs for years!!!

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 9:46pm

same here- it deserves to
and west end artist, i definitely agree with the best ensemble comment. from the moment the curtain raised and i saw them all dancing, i was like "wow, they really look like they're having fun", and they really danced their butts off!

[Jane2]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 10:04pm

"And making assumptions based on your own perceptions of 'audience reactions' is pretty flimsy in the first place."

Is this directed towards me? If so, it goes beyond my own perceptions of audience reactions. I have a long history of working in theater management.

[Rotel1026]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 10:28pm

I guess no one watches E! here? They have a quick blurb about the show, seen it a couple times. Most definitely not what you'd call a commercial, maybe like 15 second blurb after one of their shows like E News Weekend is ending.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 10:46pm

overthemoon419, you don't need to bold my name, I can read.

Our opinions were requested here, not once but TWICE by jdixon69, or I wouldn't have bothered to respond to offer my two suggestions of how the people who have put money in this show can maybe get it back. It seems with a show's gross dropping, there could be a valid concern.

Frankly I wouldn't want Mr. Morrison to appear in the show until they cleaned up the language, giving the jokes more innuendo and sparkle. This needs to be done in four or five places, maybe a couple more. The vulgarity was noted in the reviews. I don't mind bawdy, Shakespeare was bawdy. Unnecessary foul-mouthing is something else. It doesn't need a rewrite, it needs a minor polish by someone with good taste and a sense of comic style. Craig Lucas could probably clean the show up in two days with a little chisel. Minor work for a writer, that's what I truly believe.

An audience may laugh (this is for jdixon69) at a joke because of the good comic timing and delivery of an actor, yet still find it disgusting. (I don't laugh at disgusting jokes even with good delivery, but I listen harder to dialogue than many.) When they leave the theatre, even though they laughed, they will not recommend this show with foul jokes because they know a lot of people don't like to hear that, won't pay money for it or will be unhappy if they do, and they won't bring children to it. The other audiences I listed before will also not want to attend this show when they can be secure in not running into this problem at a Disney show or something like The Drowsy Chaperone--this competition has good taste. Drowsy has booze, implications of sex, a gayish lead in Man in the Chair and it's all amusing and not offensive. There's no offensive language in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels that I noticed, either.

Think back to the absurd fuss that was raised about Janet Jackson baring a nipple. I wouldn't give a damn if she ran around stark naked onstage. No big deal to me. But I would care if disgusting language and jokes came out of her mouth. You can IMPLY all sorts of weirdity and rediculousness. Just don't be disgusting about it. Leave some things to the imagination. It makes the jokes better.

While I enjoyed the show, I would only recommend it to people who could overlook the inappropriate language, often in the punchline. And that leaves out a lot of people who could easily have been included otherwise. It won't hurt the show to smooth that out. Updated On: 8/12/06 at 10:46 PM

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 1:33am

Great points have been made by overthemoon and John Popa, who said something I've been saying forever. I just feel like it's not the movie we've been waiting all our lives for a musical adaptation of. It was pretty much what it needed to be in its first incarnation. Didn't Oscar Hammerstein say that you should adapt material that almost works? Musicals enhance things. There's a reason we remember South Pacific as a musical rather than a book, and the book won the Pulitzer, didn't it?

But the best point of all? Craig Lucas... Matthew Morrison... Kelli O'Hara... maybe they should just bring in Adam Guettel to rewrite the music, Bartlett Sherr to redirect it, dump the source material and maybe get a nice novella, get some nicer costumes, see if Vicki Clark has some free time, they can call it The Light in the Piazza!



.........

HOLY S***, THAT'S A GREAT IDEA!!!!

-would like to hear Laura Benanti sing the title number from Piazza.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 2:15am

Perhaps Roninjoey, if you dig really deep, you can find an original thought and idea of your own to offer the person who began this thread.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 3:04am

Hm. I wasn't being mean. I felt like you were generally wishing for another The Light in the Piazza judging on what you were suggesting. I'd just like to point out that you reiterated what *I* said at one point during the thread without giving me credit--perhaps you should follow your own advice? The bit about Shakespeare. I just like to give examples from people who know better than I (and you, Oscar Hammerstein knows better than you). Also, I think I have and others have given several reasons why Wedding Singer is on the rocks, but if you need me to repeat everyone I can:

It's an arbitrary musical adaptation. It doesn't improve the movie or the story (which was slight to begin with). It just is. Competent but not a revelation. I'm not being mean. It's a fun show but movie musical adaptations of just this sort are everywhere you look. That's shelling out 100 bucks for a movie reenacted on stage. And we're not talking Gone With the Wind or Casablanca. Not Star Wars. We're talking The Wedding Singer. Because of this, there isn't much hype around the show.

Yes, the cast is good and it's a fun, energetic show, but most non-avid fans need some reason to shell out 100 bucks to see a movie reenacted on stage. Even The Light in the Piazza had hype. Hype is so much more important than just advertising, unless your advertising is completely ubiquitous.

And you know what? That's just my opinion. It's not worth anything because people will still go to the show, like it, and it will still enter the cannon and become hugely popular with high school and community theater at least for the next 20 years. The Wedding Singer is going to enjoy a popularity and will come to be known and loved by many more people than those who saw it during its respectable run on Broadway. Not everything has to be an earth shattering hit. You write a modest show, it gets a modest reception. Sometimes you write an earth shattering show and it gets a modest reception.

Although it may reference the 80s TOO much, and future generations may see it as a quaint relic rather than a cute evocation of an era. Do you guys think it's too weighed down by the referencing? Maybe they should retool the book when they release it to be liscensed.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 3:54am

Such a great show! It really just needs some press and word of mouth.

It's gotten press. The press says it's a bad show, not worth spending $111.25 on.

It's gotten word of mouth. The word of mouth is that it's a bad show and it's not worth spending $111.25 on.

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 7:31am

i thought that its gotten pretty good word of mouth, no ones just letting the words come out of their mouthes...

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 8:24am

People are not capable of "not letting the words come out of their mouth." It's just not human nature, if somebody sees something and they don't expound upon it, they obviously didn't feel too terribly passionate about it either positively or negatively.

If there is lack of word of mouth it's because it's not motivating people to talk about it, which in essence, speaks to the weakness of the show as a whole. If it was great, people would talk about it. If it was horrible, people would talk about it.

[overthemoon419]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 10:46am

nomdeplume, I apologize if I have offended you, but I bold names out of habit from another board. It's not meant to imply that you can't read, but merely to let your name stand out so you know you're being addressed, in case you're simply skimming the board.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:16am

Roninjoey, Craig Lucas is known for great comic writing (Reckless, which had a revival with Mary-Louise Parker a couple years ago) in addition to dramatic writing. He didn't suddenly appear out of nowhere in 2005 to write The Light in the Piazza.

Posted: 8/13/06 at 2:37pm

Yes, the Wedding Singer deff has the BEST ensemble. This show seriously has the most energy ive ever seen on broadway (from what ive seen). Its incredible that they can bring that much energy and excitement 8 times a week! they really have a blast doing this show!

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 4:19pm

overthemoon419, no offense taken. It's just a bit jarring to see my name bolded. Like a scream from the dark...

Roninjoey, sorry, you can't take credit for my thoughts regarding Shakespeare and bawdiness. They were independent of yours.

Wanna Be A Foster, exactly how I feel about Craig Lucas, and why I raised his name as an excellent writer of comedy. His Prelude to a Kiss of long ago was hilarious. He just happened to get in on Piazza and he was not the first writer to attempt it. The man just has the ability and sense of workhorse completion to get the job done. It was Lucas that laced Piazza with humor and SAW the possibilities of humor in it that helped catapult the show to excellence. I can't think of a better, classier writer that could clean up the bad taste jokes in Wedding Singer with a quick polish if he is willing and available.

Tchi4Lif188, I agree that the ensemble is talented, energetic and glorious, and deserves a long run to prance about in their great costumes and choreography.

jdixon69, as no doubt you are aware, Urinetown did some successful marketing by hiring the little billboards atop taxicabs all over town. Has that marketing tool been well-explored by Wedding Singer? I haven't been looking to see.