Why was Bare disliked? — Page 3

I too, am with Theatreboy33. The story of Bare and it's conflicts were very familiar.

The score did not have one standout-stand alone song.

(Someone, thinking that I actually had money, approached me half-heartedly about investing. My remark after saying "With what?" was that they needed to go write a couple of good commercial songs, get them on a disc and get some airplay. The audience for this show would hear a good song and the DJ would say "...and that's from the musical Bare...")

I didn't think it would be a financial success, and definitely would not if it was produced by the book instead of outside the box. The investor who pulled out did so to the tune of half the budget.

The cast was good, in some cases very good, but the whole show wasn't enough: good enough, memorable enough, heartbreaking enough, tuneful enough, funny enough, unique enough--you know, enough.

The show wasn't hard to sit through, but I wonder how I would have felt if I had paid 80 bucks.

The audience loved it. But it was a small theatre packed with PLU (People Like Us).

---

magic8ball, I'm glad you took so much time to disect my entire argument. THough, i believe the thread was started to ask why Bare was disliked. I merely stated my opinion, and didn't ask for someone who (from the overused "christ motif" apparent in your icon) obviously loved the show to counterattack me. I dont really see this as a debate. I was answering why I didnt like it. Also, to assume this means I wish Broadway to be taken over by recycled jukebox musicals is moronic. Search the boards a little and you'll find my opinion of that crap too. Im just one person hoping Broadway maintains high enough standards to keep certain things off broadway--where BARE belonged, IN MY OPINION, NOT THE WORD OF GOD. PLease dont bother to critique this either.

I thought the ATA cast was flawless. In my opinion, the lyrics were brilliant, and the music was wonderful.

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

Cause the show is great. I will admit that the show its self isnt the greatest thing to hit Broadway nd as my friends says "they tell you how to feel not show you." But, as a performer, techie, nd designer I am in love with the voices, sets and costumes. The set changes were incredibly smart and I loved the trash costumes that were ingenious.

Sorry I know this has nothing to do with BARE but I have actually seen BKLYN so i will shut up now.

We saw BARE on our NYC trip last April. I left the theatre thinking, "I'm glad there's some young people striving to work within this medium. However, I think they could benefit with a little more awareness of dramatic form, music vocabulary and writing depth of character." As far as any 'cliched' aspects of the piece, the only thing that really bothered me was the ending. I just personally didn't like seeing yet another case of unfulfillment for the protagonist at the end.

Ultimately, in an atmosphere where so many decry the dearth of original musicals, I'm not willing to lambaste someone for at least making the effort. Encouragement and guidance go a lot further than judgement and ridicule.

It makes me wonder how someone who appreciates the shows on your list (most of which I completely agree with) can fail to acknowledge "Bare" as a good piece of theatre...

"And as for backing up my opinions--that's exactly why after each of my points came a detailed reasoning."

Ummm... followed by me telling you why half of your points aren't even valid.

"you will never convince me to change my opinion on Bare. Give it up. Its closed."

I have no intent of changing your views about this particular show. This may come as a shock- brace yourself- but I actually don't care about influencing the views of someone I don't know and will probably never meet outside of the context of a Broadway message board. I don't CARE whether or not you like "Bare". The only reason why I responded to your post in the first place was to defend a good show against defamatory claims that are unfounded and unfair.

---

Let's not get into a HAIRSPRAY debate (although I will say that HAIRSPRAY revels in its own intentional, fairy-tale clicheness -- it's self-conscious and self-mocking, like Shakespeare often is in his Green World comedies).

I very much liked BARE but I recognize that it certainly wasn't revelatory theatre. But, like DGrant, I appreciated the show for its youth and energy. Besides the great cast, I also enjoyed the direction: Kristen Haggi's staging was very smooth and dynamic, even if she used the crucifix motif to death; the stage was always in movement and always interesting or even surprising.

---

BARE was liked and disliked...equally. I believe a lot of fans fell in love with the ATA production because of it's cast...which they continue to follow around the city with every step they make-including taking a piss in an alley.

Then there are those who actually love the story-the music-can relate to it, or just are entertained and moved by it. It's concept...it's message.

BARE also had a following previous to ATA because of the LA production.

Could it be cliche....sure. Isn't 75% of theatre today cliche?
Does it have a stand alone song?..in my opinon-yes, a few. Does "Defying Gravity" get radio play? NO! No Broadway does-so whomever made that statement about a show needing a song to get radio play is way off-track.

The 11 song demo is was a move made by the producers. It does not reflect the sound and finished product of the show. The ATA production was FAR OFF from what the creators intended the show to be.

FACT: Dodgers made a lot of changes to the show at the ATA(as they did Dracula) that were against the intent of the creators. But when you're paying the money-you get your way.

FACT: There is no controversey with why the show didn't happen. The Catholic church wasnt involved, and NO one was worried about Bare making money. The Dodgers were (and still are) in bad shape financially. The other producers failed to make their have of the budget, and because of the state of Dodgers, they were not able to make up for it. They were dishonest to the creators by constantly postponing, until they could no longer hold back and told everyone the show had to be postponed indefinately. That simple.

FACT: The new production of BARE that was to open was DRASTICALLY different than the ATA. The direction was different, the book and score had been tweaked-many of the elements of BARE in LA were returned. The cast was 80% the same, but the additions were a great improvement. But that production never happened. SO, no one got to see BARE as it was intended by the creators. I am sure some people still wouldnt have liked it-it's not for everyone-and people can hate or dislike anything-it's relative. However,when speaking about the success of BARE-it's only the ATA production that anyone can comment on-a glorified workshop as someone mentioned above.

There will be a recording one day-which will reflect the show, at least musically, as best as intended.

FACT: It's NOT coming back to NYC. Please please accept that-and if you hear otherwise-quickly correct the messenger. It's not coming back. It's sad that it never got it's chance...but sometimes you have to just let something die. And hopefully the recording will be released sooner than later, and the show can be mounted on a professional level.

WatusiJenkins, thanks for your input. I just have one question:

"FACT: It's NOT coming back to NYC. Please please accept that-and if you hear otherwise-quickly correct the messenger. It's not coming back. It's sad that it never got it's chance...but sometimes you have to just let something die. And hopefully the recording will be released sooner than later, and the show can be mounted on a professional level."

How can you say for certain that the show isn't coming back to NYC? The fanbase for the show here is extremely strong, and I don't think that "Bare" would be an unwise investment on behalf of ANY producer. I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I just wanted to know why you seem so sure of this... Everyone with any knowledge of the business aspects of the show that I've talked to has seemed optimistic about its future in the city.

---

BARE was liked and disliked...equally. I believe a lot of fans fell in love with the ATA production because of it's cast...which they continue to follow around the city with every step they make-including taking a piss in an alley.

Yawn. WatusiJenkins, your schtick and personal vendetta against John Hill, et.al is getting so old. Why not try sticking to the topic at hand for once instead of adding in your sad little disgruntled opinion about the cast? That would be a nice change of pace for you. 2005 - new year, new you perhaps?

We can only hope.

---

You shouldnt feel so obligated to defend performers against someone's opinion-you're not their press agent-you're just a fan.

Not defending any performers here WatusiJenkins, but rather your little dig at the fans of the cast who continue to support them at non-Bare events.

And the only people who had an issue with my witty remark about following the cast around...is those who do. :)

Sigh. Why do I bother? I really can't figure it out. But I guess I'll add in a smile at the end to try and be cute since others are now trying that tactic. :)

---

Updated On: 1/13/05 at 01:24 PM

Damn, my invitation to watch them pee in an alley must have gotten lost in the mail. There's no love.

Thankfully I got mine. Michael will be peeing on the corner of 47th and 9th tonight. You bring the binoculars, I'll bring the chips.

---

Updated On: 1/13/05 at 02:50 PM

Saw BARE last April. Loved it. Finally got to meet Damon after a year of chatting via e-mail. Great guy. I really hope to see the tweaked version of the show. But According to some things I have read, that won't be anytime soon. And that's ashame.

---