Young Frankenstein IS a Good Show!

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 4:41pm

I am disgusted that Mel Brooks' ego has possibly ruined the survival chances for a wonderful show with a great cast and a better score than The Producers. I adore this show and find it sad that the critics couldn't see past the ego.

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 4:45pm

Give me a break.

It didn't get panned, every review for the most part had a few nice things to say.

You're obviously in the minority, which is fine, but don't go lambasting the critics citing Brooks' ego as the reason for the bad reviews.

The show not being amazing is the reaosn for the bad reviews.

[Bwayfan4]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 4:54pm

It's a good show...but there's no way I would pay full price to see it. I saw it from the balcony for $60 and I'd say it was worth the ticket price. Had I paid more, I would've been disappointed.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 5:57pm

Ny News was a qualified OK as was the Post which liked it more

AM NY , a free paper, called it a monsterous bore

[shermanslave]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 6:00pm

It will still have a healthy run due to what it is. Reviews won't make that huge a difference. Anyway, how could it ever live up to the hype of the Producers?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 6:22pm

I wonder how many people who have tickets now will go to the box office for a refund. How many will be disappointed they have to see it?

Will Mel try again with Blazing Saddles or will he hang it up?

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 7:02pm

If he brings down the ticket prices, it will float I bet. It is entertaining I bet. It's not everyone's humor and he has to face the fact, he didn't put a whole lot of new stuff into it. It has a good cast and that is selling it more so than just being another Mel Brooks show.

I cannot even imagine Blazing Saddles on stage. We rather see, Spaceball's the Musical instead! Seriously though, it would be better for Mel to invest in something a little more Broadway worthy. Men in Tights is better than Blazing Saddles the Musical.

He needs to cut down on all of this fluff and just put on a good show. Then he has to take into account his audience and how much can Americans really afford to pay to see a camp musical like this one is? It isn't monumental, like Les Miz or Wicked. It's a popular Movie, so he would have had to really reach I believe, if he wanted to capture an expensive Broadway ticket buyer. More people in general will respond to a show like The Producers than one that is purely based on Halloween type Monsters. I think it is a funny idea and I'll see it eventually but many people will find it silly and lacking in drama.

Like the Grinch, it probably has more of a limited audience and depends a lot on the season it is presented in.

He had a chance to take his material and come up with some really exciting musical numbers but he let his ego get in the way . He let others tell him what a genius he was and he should be writing musicals. Too bad. Hopefully he will learn now to collaborate more and reach for a higher scale.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 7:30pm

I just think a few critics turned into gossip queens in their reviews. Yes, Brooks has an ego, but is it a critics responsibility to comment on that? They should be reviewing the show, which in this case, is pretty damn terrific.

They should have taken the St James and give Grinch the Hilton again.

I think Robin Hood: Men in Tights would play better than Blazzing Saddles.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 7:44pm

It's not so much that it's a bad show; it's just mediocre. I don't think anyone's going to be in pain seeing it, just disappointed. Me, I'll take Xanadu any day.

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 7:57pm

BB, I see your point. I think it is difficult to ignore Mel's own comments on how he was doing most of the work to make even more money. He doesn't need it that badly and in return, he gives us mediocre stuff. He just doesn't have enough experience or really even talent to challenge some of the great music writers and composer we have out in the industry.

I mean, if he really didn't care how wonderful a production it will be, as mentioned in example, take a smaller house or barn and put on your little show. Charge a meaningful price and make some more money for Broadways stars. That's great and it probably would have been judged by those standards.

It isn't The Producers, except in the fact that it is a comedy. When Mel can make albums that sell millions than maybe we can talk about his scoring Musicals. Until then, he really should bow to those who understand what makes music so great. People have to pay a lot more to see a Broadway show so of course they are going to expect a lot more from any show put up on a stage out there, right?

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 7:59pm

Its a very average show and pales in comparison to the producers

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:00pm

I disagree. I think Brook's work here is miles more complex and funnier than The Producers.

[Mouses Magic]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:07pm

^^ Please tell me your kidding...just please tell me that was a joke. I have not SEEN the show, but have heard all but two songs. The Producers score is LEAPS and BOUNDS above YF. YF's score is Juvenile and banal. Im not saying its a horrible show, but the reviews are DEAD on about the music. You seem to enjoy the show, and that is great, but don't try to take down the critics reviews just because you enjoy the show. Its universally stated between EVERy critic, that The Producers is a better show. You are entitled to your opinion, and I respect that, but don't hate on the critics.

[Mouses Magic]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:10pm

^^ And ill do it for you so you dont have to....yes my name is "Mouse's Magic". I already made the joke about myself, therefore you don't have to. :)

[FutureAladdinOnB'Way]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:29pm

Actually I agree about Young Frankensetein's score being better than the Producers. After seeing both, Young Frankenstein's score was more memorable to me than the Producer's score(IMO) with the exception of a few songs in the Producers!

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:32pm

See, I found The Producers score good but I think the Young Frankenstein score is funnier, twice as clever, and sings at all the right moments.

I just find it funny that Spamalot got raves, yet YF, which is a zillion times better, is a fun, tuneful, hilarious evening of theatre.

And since you haven't SEEN the show, I don't think you should be commenting based on illegal bootlegs.

[FutureAladdinOnB'Way]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:38pm

^I agree! songanddanceman, have you even seen Young Frankenstein?
Updated On: 11/9/07 at 08:38 PM

[Pippin]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:42pm

I agree with bobby. the score is better in terms that it is more atmospheric, portrays character better, and just more enjoyable, in my opinion. you can definately sense that Brooks has improved from his first outing.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:52pm

I mean come on:

"Please Don't Touch Me"
"He Vas My Boyfriend"
"Role in the Hay"
"Together Again (for the first time)"
"Deep Love"

Great numbers that fit the moments perfectly.

This is all Brooks backlash. If another composer wrote the score we wouldn't be having this discussion. I agree that Brooks is sinking the score but there is so much great stuff about it.

[Little-Lotte]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:53pm

The score is very mediocre, as is the book. There are maybe two or three songs which are even memorable. I adore the movie and like many can quote the whole darn thing, but it did not transfer well to the stage.

The Producers was a much better show, in my and it seems many people's opinion overall. For the first time I actually agreed with everything the critics said and they definitely didn't pan it or react harshly in the slightest. It's a decent show, but I saw it once and probably won't see it again unless I'm interested in seeing a later replacement cast member.

It's great that you enjoyed it, but don't expect the other members of this board to agree with you. And the only other Mel Brooks movie that should ever see the footlights of a stage is Robin Hood: Men in Tights! Mel should just keep his hands off his other film properties, because it's gonna be a trainwreck if he doesn't!

[iluvcioffiiluvtea]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:55pm

Oh, I love "Together Again For the First Time"! My favorite!!

I love your avatar, Bobby!

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 8:57pm

"Like Laurel and Hardy
Like Coke and Bacardi"

Great lyric. I also love

"Like Meatballs and Spaghetti!"

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 9:01pm

I think Young Frankenstein is funnier too. I expect to be bombarded with pamphlets from those wonderful spammers who can't believe there is nothing wrong with my sexual performance. This alone has driven me to postpone the show until all the loonies run out of paper at least. A lot of people too never saw The Producers as a Movie so to many it really was something new.

I don't know how long a run it will have but it isn't easy to put something on stage that is well known on Television and the Movies. Just ask the Mermaid folks. This though isn't a show that you can take the kiddies to. Grandma may not like the off colored humor and Grandpa may not want to try and explain Mel Brooks to them at all. Older kids expect something different and get bored easier. I honestly don't see this even above Legally Blond in it's style and humor. Only the price of the sets and talent keep it in the upper stratosphere.

So it's audience has some limitations. That is why I was a little surprised he is selling all of these seats above Market and giving us a show that is too much the same old thing? Puttin on the Ritz is the most popular tune and it is as old as the hills. Hardly original. Even the dance style is said to be what is expected of the number.

If he wants to make lots of money, he should sit back at his desk and give us something a little more complex. I agree some things must stay but some areas could have been explored more to offer a few surprises. Just changing who is sexually repressed isn't much of an improvement to me.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 9:08pm

Well, its far from a fangirl show, which I find refreshing. Having sat through screaming banshees at Wicked, Sweet Charity, and The Wedding Singer, its nice to be around actual adults during a musical. The tweens aren't going to watch the film or get any of the acidic humor.

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 11/9/07 at 9:45pm

That I agree with! Ah well. It is just I would pay more for Mel to really get his creative gloves on. I am not knocking his talent at all as a writer and comedian. At least this I would pay to see. Legally Blonde? The Movie was enough. If there was nothing else to watch maybe I would?

I guess you just have to want to pay a lot to see the same show. This is what many of us fear though when Movie's translate to a stage. Unless they are originally a Musical, as in most of Disney's films, it really is wonderful to find some new twist or insight to the characters, both in the staging and the songs.

So I do understand why you like it better than most of what is out there. I find it difficult to pay a lot for someone to leave me throughly depressed. Unless it is going to challenge me historically, I rather go out and have fun.

The biggest rant seems to be over the prices for the show. When those go down, I hope this show will be seen in a better light. As a light comedy that has a great cast that are all in it just for the fun of it.

Really, they should have gotten all bloody and gross when building the Monster. Then every surgeon in the World will be there to critic it and all the teenage boys would want to be in the show. Not gritty enough I suppose.