Why was Bare disliked?- Page 2

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 1:12am

To answer the original question: BARE was hugely popular with audiences, but not so with critics. The New York Times gave it a lukewarm review and it was slammed by the Post (but who reads the Post??). Reviews online were generally good.

I loved the show when I saw it (twice!) in May. In terms of feedback I've heard, the show drew some polar opinions: people either loved it or loathed it. Those that loathed it criticized BARE for its predictable, almost-cliched storyline (it is the typical "gay boi tragedy") and an initial observation by many was that the score was not catchy. I even found that so, until I heard the songs a few times over and finally got hooked.

One component of the show that was universally hailed by critics and audiences (whether they liked the show or not) was BARE's cast; everyone pointed out young, energetic and extremely talented cast that made the show emotionally thrilling to watch.

Personally, I don't think BARE's coming back to NYC anytime soon, and certainly not in its original off-Broadway staging. I also think that the cast -- the show's strongest asset -- has long moved on to other projects and will not return to reprise their roles.

[bjivie2]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 1:14am

Nice quoting of lyrics at the end of that, even if it was unintentional.

If the show isn't coming back to NY, are they looking at giving it another run somewhere else? Or are they thinking about giving out the rights?

[dancindramadude]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 1:18am

I really wanted to see it when I just recently went to NYC and was really sad to see that it wasnt there anymore. I really want to get the CD. What is the basic story line of the show (cause I didnt even know it was about a gay couple until last night when they played a song on the Broadway radio). Maybe that could have been a factor in it not being around ne more. Not just that it was about a gay couple but it also brought in the Christian Aspect.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 1:47am

after the dodger theatricals drama, the primary investor for BARE backed out.

The story focuses on five high school seniors at a catholic boardings chool and what happens to themd uring their senior year.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:11am

Nice quoting of lyrics at the end of that, even if it was unintentional.

By golly, I didn't even notice that. You see, subconsciously I'm a genius.

If the show isn't coming back to NY, are they looking at giving it another run somewhere else? Or are they thinking about giving out the rights?

I think someone on the board mentioned that they knew of a regional production being mounted, but that was never substantiated. I personally think it's an untrue rumour -- Damon never mentioned anything about having the rights to the show available.

Maybe that could have been a factor in it not being around ne more. Not just that it was about a gay couple but it also brought in the Christian Aspect.

Well, off-Broadway is pretty liberal soil, but who knows? Maybe the investors felt like the material wouldn't sell anymore, given the gay marriage backlash. Still, I think the fact that the investors pulled out has more to do with the economical and managerial situation at Dodgers rather than with the subject matter of BARE.

[TheGaIsSilent]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 9:19am

/thinks the investors voted for Bush/

Thanks for the feedback, though, everyone, especially BlueWizard.

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:16am

Not everyone enjoyed bare people, sorry. Some great performers though, credit is due there (notice how they're almost all working elsewhere...).

[scotty]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:16am

is there a place I can hear this, 'bare'? Updated On: 1/12/05 at 11:16 AM

[magic8ball]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:20am

You can download eleven songs here:
Bare, a Pop Opera

Updated On: 1/12/05 at 11:20 AM

[centerstage]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:22am

i have thought of it over and over again as to why Bare wasnt able to make it, and heres my primary thought..its just opinion and i KNOW it probably has no basis in fact or anything

I think that the catholic church may have had a hand it it...god knows that my mom had a really hard time accepting the fact that it was in a catholic setting..maybe ppl found it offensive to the church, and chose to believe that there was some underlying message about how bad the church is and that upset them. People may have chosen to hide under a rock and say "no this doesnt happen!" but really, i think it does

just my opinion, sounds sooo stupid writen down

[scotty]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:23am

thanks heaps for the link. Updated On: 1/12/05 at 11:23 AM

[magic8ball]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:26am

I think that a lot of people probably share that opinion about the Catholic Church setting. It's unfortunate because they're too narrow-minded to see that the show doesn't CONDEMN Catholicism; it condemns some of the hypocritical intolerance inherent in some Catholic beliefs regarding homosexuality. This message should be CLEAR from the presence of characters like Sister Chantelle (sp?) and songs like "God Don't Make No Trash". Ugh. Whatev.

Updated On: 1/12/05 at 11:26 AM

[scotty]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:45am

can anyone provide me with a synopsis?

cheers.

[magic8ball]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 11:49am

Check your PMs.

[apdarcey]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 12:59pm

in regards to the original posting... bare received some very mixed reviews by critics, especially concerning its book and score... the popular public did not like it... i've heard numerous negative reviews of the show saying that it should be stopped dead in its tracks... now i realize that many people on this board do like the show a lot and i myself have the "11 song cd" and enjoy some of the music... however, just because this select group of theatre people likes a show does not mean that the general public will (which in my opinion is a shame about this show)... true, the dodgers is holding the theatre open, but i think that is hopeful thinking, the show will probably not get the financial backing it needs and many people in the cast have moved on... however there's always hope and we can keep crossing our fingers... but i just wanted to point out that this board is very jaded because of the people that inhabit it and that you can't take "our opinions" as the rule... to conclude though, i would like bare to come back... and here's three cheers about a chorus line revival! andrew

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 1:17pm

I wouldn't necessarily say that the popular public did not like BARE -- the ATA run was sold out. Then again, the theatre only had 120 seats.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:01pm

I for one, couldn't stand this show. The performers were wonderful. The show was not. So why did I dislike it?
-Cliche: THis story has been told time and time again. Oh wow, the quarterback is actually gay! Wow! The fat girl has a self esteem complex! Wow! The mother is in denial of her son's homosexuality! Give me something where I can't predict every action two hours in advance, and then you've got a start.
-The Score: As far as I can recall, a whole lotta power ballads still doesn't make for a good show. A wowing display of talent? Yes, but not a musical theatre score. Songs were unmemorable, nearly all yelled, and poorly staged.
-Overuse of Christ motif: Often times I think film and stage critics try to insert this motif in too many places where it clearly does not fit (Anyone remember the Graduate church scene?). But Bare actually consciously uses it...and uses it...and uses it... It's a catholic school, ok. The catholic church looks down upon anal sex, ok. I dont think anyone going into Bare couldnt figure out this area of conflict from the very start. The set was designed with a gigantic stain glass window as its centerpiece with a nice big cross in its center. As if this wasnt enough, on about four numbers, the concluding pose was with Mr. Arden silhouetted, arms out in "the position" in front of the glorious window. If this play was to suggest Arden's character as a gay chirst figure, I'd rather see Corpus Christi anyday over Bare.

So, contrary to what the majority of this board claims, there were a few who did not enjoy Bare. Am I upset that the talented performers are/were out of work? Absolutely. Am I sad it's not running on Broadway as we speak. Absolutely not.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:10pm

I DO think that due mentions hould be made of the fact that BARE was not a finished show ATA. It was NOT a commercial run. It was essentially a glorified workshop.. a developmental run not meant to be a pulitzer prize winner, but to figure outw hat was working and what was not.


side note -- EVERY show can be classified as 'cliche' in some way using that criteria... there are only a few basis storylines and they get repeated over and over in different forms. it's a cop out answer.

[AndSoItBegins]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:20pm

Being from Texas I have never seen the show. I have however received a CD of the music (which I am sure you all have as well). I think the score is quite good. From what I understand the score on the CD is out of order but just based on the lyric and music composition I was quite impressed. I wish I would've gotten a chance to see the production.

Of course JENNA LEIGH GREEN stood out quite a bit on the album. MICHAEL sounds amazing as his voice has blossomed in the last 5 years to become quite incredible.

I do hope to see a remount in the future.

[AndyHardy]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:25pm

I didn't see the show, but am happy that so many here liked it. I have seen the cast perform many numbers at benefits and they sounded reasonably good -- plus looking at Adam Fleming for two hours is like a heaven on earth (hi, broadwayguy2 :))

That being said, I remember reading some TERRIBLE reviews. The one that stands out was in New York magazine (I believe). They said that the show was so bad they were going to tell you the ending so you didn't waste your time -- and they did! That kind of mean-ness in a major publication reeked of ulterior motives, I thought.

Updated On: 1/12/05 at 02:25 PM

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:30pm

There is no big church conspiracy here. If the producers thought it was going to be a successful production financially (which is very hard to do, even in a smaller venue) it would have gone up again as scheduled. The pope did not call and tell the producers to pull funding, just like the republicans didn't close Assassins. It has to do with money, and the financial potential of the show. Which, in this case, it seems the producers had second thoughts about.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:30pm

not LIKE.. it IS.


eh.. there were issues with some reviews/reviewers in my opinion.

[magic8ball]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:42pm

"Cliche: THis story has been told time and time again. Oh wow, the quarterback is actually gay! Wow! The fat girl has a self esteem complex! Wow! The mother is in denial of her son's homosexuality! Give me something where I can't predict every action two hours in advance, and then you've got a start."

Ummm... nothing that you just described is considered the "action" of the play. And this show OBVIOUSLY isn't attempting to "keep you on your toes"- it's not a murder mystery, for Christ's sake. It's a slice-of-life piece meant to portray homosexuality in a different light to people who may have a negative connotation of it otherwise, and it's meant to show a specific demographic that they are not alone in the problems that they face in everyday life. It's a very poignant, significant work that deserves more exposure than it got. Period.

"-The Score: As far as I can recall, a whole lotta power ballads still doesn't make for a good show. A wowing display of talent? Yes, but not a musical theatre score. Songs were unmemorable, nearly all yelled, and poorly staged."

Wow. It's true that this is a matter of opinion, but... wow. The score is amazing, and deceptively complex. Listen to the demo track "Role of a Lifetime" and tell me that the score is unimpressive. And most of the lyrics are equally good. For example:

"He went to you for guidance.
You hid behind a screen,
Knowing how much empathy might mean.
Did you know how much in love...?
Did you know how much he cared...?
Lost in the teaching was a... boy,
So all alone and scared.
Father, we were so in love,
And that's what I find so odd...
Our love was pure and nothing else
Brought me closer to God..."

How can you possibly say that those are not deep, powerful lyrics? That's just nonsense.

And what on earth are you talking about with the "power ballad" comment? There are two power ballads in the entire show, I think... "Warning" and "All Grown Up".

"-Overuse of Christ motif: Often times I think film and stage critics try to insert this motif in too many places where it clearly does not fit (Anyone remember the Graduate church scene?). But Bare actually consciously uses it...and uses it...and uses it... It's a catholic school, ok. The catholic church looks down upon anal sex, ok. I dont think anyone going into Bare couldnt figure out this area of conflict from the very start. The set was designed with a gigantic stain glass window as its centerpiece with a nice big cross in its center. As if this wasnt enough, on about four numbers, the concluding pose was with Mr. Arden silhouetted, arms out in "the position" in front of the glorious window. If this play was to suggest Arden's character as a gay chirst figure, I'd rather see Corpus Christi anyday over Bare."

While I tend to agree with you on this point, I think that it's way off-the-mark to suggest that Peter is representative of a "gay Christ figure". Nowhere is that ever suggested. What IS suggested is a parrallel between the unjust condemnation that Christ received and the unjust condemnation of homosexuality by modern social mores.

In any case, as another user mentioned previously, the show was a glorified workshop. It still had a lot of things that needed re-staged and reworked. This is something that I definitely think would have been addressed had the Dodger production gone through.

"So, contrary to what the majority of this board claims, there were a few who did not enjoy Bare. Am I upset that the talented performers are/were out of work? Absolutely. Am I sad it's not running on Broadway as we speak. Absolutely not."

Right. Because "Good Vibrations" deserves a spot on the boards over this show.

Updated On: 1/12/05 at 02:42 PM

[AndyHardy]

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:42pm

There are many reasons that could be assumed for the negative reviews -- political, religious, or otherwise. But I have seen some shows that were total cr*p and they were not thrown to the lions like BARE was by some reviewers. I assumed (at the time of reading them) that it was personal attacks rather than political or religious.

And yes, if a show is thought to not be able to re-coup its investment that is the STRONGEST reason that I know for financial backers to pull out.

*note: I realize that my grammar for most of this post is the pits -- but don't have time to fix it. :/

Posted: 1/12/05 at 2:42pm

I'm with Theatreboy33, except for one thing. I saw it in Los Angeles, touted as "the second coming" (pun intended). It just wasn't that good. I agree with everything Tb33 says except the performers. Now mind you I am sure they grew into the roles and were much improved, but out here in LA, they were just awful. Over dramatic, with a self-consious "look at us, we're crying and serious and acting the hell out of our parts" style that was quite distracting.

Songs not very memorable, story we've seen before and better.

Glad you all like it, but there are reasons why it didn't hit.

Now, having said all this, the mystery as to why BRKLN is still running is simply baffling.

Peace