http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/magazine/11maguire.t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=theater
The picture on the first page is amazing.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/27/05
The article really paints him as a neurotic mess, doesn't it?
What I always dug about Maguire is that he gives the impression of being the exact opposite of someone who wrote something as sprawling, occasionally plodding but mostly wonderful as Wicked. I always think he'll be a pretentious bore but he always seems like a really likable guy.
Nice article. At first when he talked about being "Imprisoned in his childrens lives" I got a bit of a negative feeling about him. But I am sure he was being sarcastic. And I still have yet to read "Son of a Witch"
LOVE THE Pic. article was semi boring but its ok.
The previous criticisms of the article and WICKED's author notwithstanding, Maguire satisfied a creative urge within and is laughing all the way to the bank. Did people miss the fact that he had approval of the creative team that eventually brought the story to the stage? Good golly, people! This story is more signficant than 95% of the ridiculous WICKED threads that pollute this board. Read it. Be inspired!
Videos