Wildhorn's Wonderland is Coming to Bway!- Page 6

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 1:15pm

Ah, the one thing I was talking about has been revealed. I was certainly taken aback by what he did, and so rudely to the cast.

While that appears it was for money, he still could have easily released the recording, but has chosen not to. Frank's opinion was the least important to the team of DRACULA which thought that expensive sets, elaborate costumes and flying/special effects were what was needed. By the end of an already over budget production, Frank was forced to cut back his orchestra. A lot. And it showed. Hampton & Black along with McAuff had top opinion on pretty much everything.

Was it right for him to go behind the cast's back? No, not at all. If people disliked him for this, then I would understand. But no one ever mentions this. And if they mention it after this, it's only because it's finally been re-stated.

No one wanted to record the cast of a flop show. None of the producers wanted to record it either. While I realize what Frank said in regards to the show's life, he's a composer. It's what he's after... He couldn't get the money required to do a Broadway Cast Recording, so he did the next best thing he could do. Was it right? No, but that's just the logic.

Darren Ritchie has often said that Frank Wildhorn was his favourite composer growing up. He's from Sarasota, and was able to catch the world premiere of Svengali, which had him hooked. He auditioned for Camille Claudel and got cast as ensemble/one of the statues, and after talking to Frank (Camille is pretty much chamber style-d), he asked what was next, and of course it was Dracula. A few of the cast still are OK with Frank -- Tracy Miller, for example, whose done a few demos and concerts with Frank (including The Mad Hatter). Some act as if Dracula just never even happened, and then there's the others (like Chuck Wagner) who have completely cut off ties with Wildhorn. If I remember Chuck wrote a nasty message to Frank on his website.


It still baffles me that he is so overlooked. Flop or not, as someone posted in this thread, he's the "energizer bunny of Broadway" always coming back. So to someone like you ghostlight2, I accept your demise of Frank. People like these young kids who couldn't name a song in Frank Wildhorn show, I don't get the hate. Do they want to look cool? I'm all for defending my favourite composer, but it still is so confusing all the hate.

Wonderland has potential to build a huge fanbase -- it's catchy tunes, light & fluffy, and is relatable, to a point. Am I saying it's going to be a runaway hit? No, I'm not anticipating it at all.

If you have ever met Frank, I think you will see he really isn't in it for the money. I'm aware the comment he made re: Dracula album, but I've never gotten the impression of "We can make a bunch of money off of this!" His latest projects reflect this -- I think he's officially on the "If they like it, they like it. If not, on to the next one" type mentality.

[morosco]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 1:26pm

Let's say you are the long-dead author of a 19th-century novel. Along comes Frank Wildhorn, the Broadway composer responsible for such lavish spectacles as 'Jekyll & Hyde' and 'The Scarlet Pimpernel,' and he's looking to adapt your book. What can you do as Mr. Wildhorn thrashes through the Signet Classics on the way toward your work? In the public domain, no one can hear you scream.
Cue the Pop Ballad, Warn the Critics

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 1:42pm

Morosco does bring up my only other issue with Wildhorn. Can't he pick a new gimmick?

And Tracy Miller? Tracy Miller who was in the ensemble of Dracula and was 1st alternate vampiress? Tracy Miller whose only other Broadway credit was a replacement of Hairspray? I'll rephrase my statement, then: nothing against Ms Miller, but I don't know of anyone from the Dracula cast who can find another job who would happily work with Wildhorn again.

"While that appears it was for money, he still could have easily released the recording, but has chosen not to."

Honestly, that makes no sense at all. Why didn't he, then? Because of the backlash? Unlikely. The most likely reason that album was never released was because of the Barbour connection, and by the time that blew over, nobody cared. Had Wildhorn done the right thing and waited only a few weeks after Dracula's closing, he could have had the OBC for a fraction of the price, and it still would have sold - but he got greedy. I get that you like the guy's work, but don't make him out to be a hero here.

"If I remember Chuck wrote a nasty message to Frank on his website."

While I think he would have been absolutely within bounds to do so, your recollection is faulty. What Chuck Wagner did was post the contents of a memo that Wildhorn wrote to the cast after his deception was discovered. Needless to say, Wildhorn didn't expect that to get published, and it didn't show him in the best of lights. Wagner was later pressured to remove the memo from his website, just as Kelli O'Hara's comments on this very site regarding Wildhorn's actions during Dracula were removed shortly after being posted. I think it's very unfair of you to cast false aspersions on Chuck Wagner in defense of Wildhorn.

"if you have ever met Frank, I think you will see he really isn't in it for the money."

Philly? How do you think I know all of this?

"His latest projects reflect this -- I think he's officially on the "If they like it, they like it. If not, on to the next one" type mentality."

Now that's the truth. The man has the skin of a rhinoceros.

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 1:47pm

DRACULA, the musical as it appeared on Broadway really shouldn't be used as the big thing here. Frank hated that production. Hated it. So much so that he found more producers to take the show to Europe 4 months after it's close in HIS version of the show, which got incredible reviews (Well, it is Europe). You can hear Frank's version on the 2008 Original Graz Cast Recording. It's actually fantastic, but it is in German.

From Frank's Wonderland bio: "was represented on Broadway by Dracula: The Musical (written with Don Black and Christopher Hampton)." Doesn't sound like someone too happy with the way it worked out.

I think many would agree the responsibility for that lays heavy upon Black & Hampton. McAuff's direction which I have seen applauded on this board by some was atrocious. If it were not for the major talents of the actors (most especially Melissa Errico, Tom Hewitt, Kelli O'Hara & Don Stephenson), this show would have been even worse. The only good direction came when the flying effects were put into place. The cast looked out and sang every song into the audience - very Linda Eder esque, which I believe a few pages back was bashed. The authors CHANGED the ending (nothing to do with Frank), had some of the worse lyrics ever ("If I could fly, I'd fly away from you" etc etc), and the direction was horrible. Listen to the Graz recording - you will see, the music could have been fantastic.

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 1:56pm

ghostlight, perhaps I was wrong about Wagner, but I remember him not having nice things to say with the whole situation. Didn't he post on his own message board, which in turn got deleted very quickly?

The Barbour thing has been brought up a lot about the album, and while no official explanation has been given, I think it's safe to assume it was part of the problem but not the entire thing, considering they still have been using him to record new things. I don't think as many people care about his situation as much as the fans and detractors of those giving him work do. The guy's got one of the best voices out there, I don't think anyone would be in denial of that. (No, I am not endorsing Barbour's crime. He was 100% wrong no room for leeway in that one)

As I posted above (while you were posting yours) Frank was never proud of the Broadway production. Perhaps didn't want the cast to be recording using the expected horrendous orchestrations of synthesizers and of course there were several new songs on the album.

[backwoodsbarbie]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 2:01pm

Can somebody explain what Kelli O'Hara said that was removed from the site?

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 2:15pm

"ghostlight, perhaps I was wrong about Wagner, but I remember him not having nice things to say with the whole situation. Didn't he post on his own message board, which in turn got deleted very quickly?"

Why on earth would he have anything nice to say about the situation, which even you, a Wildhorn apologist, admits was not his finest hour? Yes, it was on Wagner's own site, and yes, he was pressured to delete it. That's what I said. As to O'Hara, she said essentially the same thing that I have: the truth, that Wildhorn told the cast that he was working on funding for an OBC even as he was looking for people to sing on the concept album. She was very civil about it and to this day I don't know why she backed down from her statement.

That's how Wildhorn got found out, btw. One of the actors Wildhorn contacted was friends with a Dracula cast member, and having more of a conscience than Frank, called said cast member to inform them of the betrayal.

Philly, you're hurting my head. I'm almost at the point of giving in to say you're right, Wildhorn is a brilliant composer, and everything that's ever gone wrong with one of his shows was somebody else's fault - however - I take huge exception to your characterization of McAnuff's direction as "atriocious" and "horrible". It was, aside from the cast (and what, no love for Chris Hoch?), one of the few good things about the show. Well, that and the sets.

Sure, you're entitled to your opinion, but it's a little amusing that in your rush to defend Wildhorn from bashing, you're doing quite a lot of bashing yourself, and in Wagner's case, completely incorrectly.

"DRACULA, the musical as it appeared on Broadway really shouldn't be used as the big thing here. Frank hated that production. Hated it. So much so that he found more producers to take the show to Europe 4 months after it's close in HIS version of the show, which got incredible reviews"

You do know that those European producers were involved with Dracula from day one, right, and therefore were part of the team that only a few posts ago you were bashing for not wanting to record the OBC because they had overspent on sets? In fact, they were the sole reason that the show stayed open as long as it did, for after a certain date, the rights to show Dracula in Europe went to them. Wildhorn did not find them. They were there all along.

Defend his music, but please stop defending his actions, at least not without the proper ammo. You like him, fine, but please stop spreading misinformation.
Updated On: 8/5/10 at 02:15 PM

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 2:33pm

You are correct with one of the producing teams. They joined on in 2003, however, after the first major reading and announced it for Broadway. I didn't know about the time frame however it being open to get the rights...


"That's how Wildhorn got found out, btw. One of the actors Wildhorn contacted was friends with a Dracula cast member, and having more of a conscience than Frank, called said cast member to inform them of the betrayal."

"She was very civil about it and to this day I don't know why she backed down from her statement."

The actor contacted a female star if she was doing the album or not. Tracy Miller, a vampire mistress was the only one to reprise her role form the Broadway production.

Errico does not even speak of Wildhorn or Dracula. She was wonderful as Mina, but had trouble vocally - a problem with Wildhorn scores. Many of the Wildhorn fanatics still support her, I know I do. She's one of the best actresses.

O'Hara atleast used to give some credit to Frank for "getting her start" - she starred in the Broadway national tour of Jekyll & HYDE and made her B'way debut in Jekyll. Also - she was not going to be with the show for the whole run, I believe she was only contracted through January or maybe February, as she had already planned to leave for Light in the Piazza. I believe she filled in for Lauren Kennedy, who was pregnant I believe. I don't remember who was supposed to take over after O'Hara. Who knows if it was even in O'Hara's contract to do the recording, as she was planning to leave.





Updated On: 8/5/10 at 02:33 PM

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 3:55pm

"You are correct with one of the producing teams."

No kidding. And yet you and Jeremy Roberts, Wildhorn's partner in the Dracula concept cd, blame the producers for Dracula's failure and use them as a rationale for Wildhorn's deception - but then you turn around and credit Wildhorn for "finding" those SAME producers to make Dracula a success in Europe.

I don't see any reason at all why Ms O'Hara, Ms Errico, or Chuck Wagner should speak well of Wildhorn ever again or give him credit for anything. I also don't know why any Wildhorn fan wouldn't support O'Hara or Errico. They didn't do anything wrong. I can assure you that Ms O'Hara did expect to record Dracula. Generally, an OBC recording is exactly that. The only exception I can think of is Joan Jett not being on Rocky Horror, but I'm sure there are others.

Below are two older threads about this subject, in which Jeremy Roberts blames everyone else for the delay in the Dracula concept cd, mentioning Barbour's troubles as one of the main reasons. Also, quite amusingly, he repeatedly calls me a liar and threatens to sue me for libel for speaking what you all know now was the truth. Who knows what was said to O'Hara and Wagner, who as performers, are far more vulnerable than I. There is, btw, a brief, not at all nasty excerpt from Chuck Wagner's website on one of the threads.

And now, I think I'm out. Sorry for the semi-threadjack, but I'm not very good at letting falsehoods pass by unchallenged. Carry on with the Wonderland thread. I wish the production well, but if I had business dealings with Wildhorn, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?thread=888481&boardid=0



The Dracula cd debacle Updated On: 8/5/10 at 03:55 PM

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 4:36pm

No I don't expect them to think of Wildhorn favorly at all. Although he has helped their careers, if only as foundations. Chuck got a few opportunities due to doing Jekyll, Kelli got her debut star performances, and well Errico...got squat. Re: fans supporting them: Plenty of times a composer's favourite stars in a show, and then the fans of the show don't follow the actors around in their other endeavours. Wildhorn fans have been known to see X to see Y in it.

It was either the album would have gotten recorded, or it wouldn't have. They got X amount of money, and couldn't afford to do a Broadway album. As every artist wants his or her art exposed to a higher degree of people, it was natural to get it out there. Was it right that he did it DURING the run of the Broadway production? No. I never said it was right, and I have frowned upon this in the past. It's not going to affect my opinion on his music, or his determination as a composer.

I have never in anyway attempted to defend what he did, but give his reasoning, or as I believe it. I'd be upset as well if I was in the cast, but look at Frank's shows -- they thrive because of the recordings.

It's not worth fighting over anymore - in the end, the recording was never released. You, who are clearly biased towards the cast solely, are going to take it as Frank was after the money. I still say if he was after the money, that recording would have been released - regardless of Barbour. I think this was a great excuse, which has been brought up before.


end.

[PB ENT.]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 7:17pm

WOW...I think this thread has gone waaay beyond the looking glass and soon it will be "Off with its HEAD"!!! and rightfully so.

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 7:56pm

A colleague who worked on one of the recent readings really loved what they've done with it, at least in the newest draft.

My only personal experience with the show is the b-roll footage from Tampa and the concept recording, all of which seemed like a convoluted mess to me, but it looks like they're at least making a big effort to fix the problems that are most apparent. For the sake of the quality of the season, here's hoping they're able to do just that.

From what I've seen and heard of the material, Kate Shindle (who has a history with Wildhorn) would be an ideal replacement for Nikki Snelson in the Mad Hatter role.

Updated On: 8/5/10 at 07:56 PM

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 8:15pm

I was thinking Coleen Sexton would be incredible. If The Mad Hatter is stil a big dancing role, not sure if Shindle could pull off the dancing - but I only saw her dance in J&H chorus and the Legally Blonde Remix.

There have been some big changes - some for the better!

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 8:26pm

philly03, I think the "new direction" they're going with the role is making it less dance-based.

That would be the only reason I could see them getting rid of Snelson, considering how long she's been involved. I noticed that any mention of a requisite dance ability was removed from the most recent breakdown for the October reading, though it was included for the other role they're re-casting.

While she's certainly a dynamic personality, Snelson's performance looked to be a bit all over the place. Someone like Shindle would bring a much more focused energy to the table.

Updated On: 8/5/10 at 08:26 PM

[philly03]

Posted: 8/5/10 at 8:37pm

Snelson was one of my favourite parts of the enter show. She can be dramatic, she can be funny, snarky or sweet. It's a shame she's gone - but perhaps they didn't let her go, she may have left on her own!

It still said she had to be "Lady Gaga to Helena Bonham Cater"-esque from what I remember reading. The "Nick of Time" song, a big dance number, I would assume would still be in the show since it's sort of the climax for the Hatter, and I would think they'd be dancing. I could be wrong, whose to say!