dracula nudity cut?- Page 2

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 8/3/04 at 10:14pm

Rose: Kelli and Melissa are Kelli O'Hara and Melissa Errico, the women involved in the "Dracula" nudity in question.

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 8/3/04 at 11:03pm

i dont really see the point in the nudity..or less they think it will draw more men in. Updated On: 8/4/04 at 11:03 PM

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 8/3/04 at 11:24pm

apparently when the schedule goes Tue-Sun, there will be full boobage on the lord's day, but still out Wed and Sat mats

[Jaynrand]

Posted: 8/3/04 at 11:40pm

Praise to Buddah! (a Rodgers & Hammerstein reference.)

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 4:06am

Whats the difference in having nudity in the evening but not afternoon?

[Musetta1957]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 4:19am

Probably the assumption that more kids would be at the matinees.

[midtowngym]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 10:24am

As of 8/3/04, Kelli O'Hara is fully nude--it's quick and tasteful. Melissa does flash her celebrity boobies for Tom Hewitt (wouldn't you?) They are both way too talented for this, however. My well-connected theater friend said Melissa's agent will no doubt get on the phone and but a stop to her flashing before the opening (she's game, but why should she give it up for this fluff?)

[magruder]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 10:31am

Melissa got naked in Sunday in the Park With George too. Maybe she likes it.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 1:05pm

If the show will have nudity in the evening but not in the afternoon, what's the point of it then, if it can be excised so easily? It's obviously gratuitious and unnecessary.

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 2:58pm

BlueWizard, you keep saying that and you may be right but think. Nudity may not be necessary for the story but can be a good stylistic effect. This show is trying to be dark dangerous and daring. Sex and tits fit into that genre well. Someone did "design" this show. How far is this case from the nudity in the Statue of David? Could the Dracula designer has some of the same things in mind as a painting or statue? Updated On: 8/4/04 at 02:58 PM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 6:04pm

True, but then why have a different show in the evening than in the afternoon? Besides the fact that then the matinee audiences wouldn't be getting the full show (pun intended), if it's such an important "effect" how can it be so easily cut out, with no seeming effect on the entire musical? The statue of David illuminates the beauty of the male physique; if that's the purpose of the nudity in Dracula, then why cover it up in the daytime? I just think it's a little hypocritical to say, "This nudity is important and justified!....but we're cutting it for the matinees."

(But maybe this is just a result of our post-Janet's-boob world. God forbid that some T&A is shown before 8pm.)

Updated On: 8/4/04 at 06:04 PM

[Elphaba984]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 6:07pm

can someone so kindly explain what is going on to me? i still don't know what in dracula you are talking about? what is this nudity thing in the show that everyone is making a big deal of?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 6:09pm

It was still there today....Melissa and Kelli are in great, great shape. The nude scene with Melissa lasted much longer than Kelli's. She's standing there in a nightgown, then her dress disappears, leaving you to see her back. Then, she turns around and walks to a chair where she lies down, waiting for Dracula to come (no pun intended) and scoop her up in his cape. Melissa exposes her breasts in a passionate kissing scene with Dracula and she leaves them out for about five minutes (give or take).

[midtowngym]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 6:15pm

However, that arithmetic doesn't work out to 2.5 minutes/breast. Each breast gets a full five minutes.

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 6:24pm

I think it's stupid to make the show different for the mattinees and evenings. It probably can be easily cut and won't change much of the show. It's just an extra little "spice." Breasts are more interesting to look at every now and then instead of a top like we always see. How about one breast covered and one exposed. That's also a nice stylistic effect. I'd like to say they should do all or nothing but I think the nudity is a good idea.

[SMichaelK]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 7:36pm

While I'm not for or against this move, and rarely is nudity necessary, but I just don't get it, I mean I go to canada and have seen full frontal on basic cable, and had friends go to france, and they said nudity was easily seen on TV... I guess to me the body is art, and why take art out of a show... whatever... I'd rather my kid see a breast than have them watch someone be shot on live television... Sorry bout the rant everyone.

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 7:46pm

I just don't understand what would motivate them to include the nudity to begin with. Obviously it isn't integral to the scene since they can so easily cut it out of the matinees. So why bother potentially offending and alienating people in the audience who may be on the conservative side or watching with younger children. I wouldn't want my kids to catch their first glimpse of full frontal at a bad musical, they should experience it through scrambled cable porn and Dad's hidden magazine stash like everyone else.

I understand wanting to take creative risks, but sudden nudity in a live musical has a powerful ability to overshadow and divert attention away from everything else onstage, no matter how artfully staged.

If they're doing it as a selling point, they're pandering to the wrong crowd. Given the demographics of Broadway devotees, a few glimpses of breast is hardly going to get the pulse racing for most of the audience.

What they SHOULD do is have Tom Hewitt as Dracula whip "it" out for a few minutes. Hell, it could even be at intermission or curtain call! THAT would be a risk, and it would definitely guarantee them some return customers (many of whom are on this board, no doubt.)

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 9:01pm

I have nothing new to contribute, but I wanna say, I loved your post, Broadway Matt. Yay scrambled cable porn!

Updated On: 8/4/04 at 09:01 PM

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 9:30pm

Blue Wizard, I love that you loved it! nudity and musicals are two things I feel very strongly about. and a big high-five for the scrambled cable porn, pre-Internet of course. I can't even begin to calculate how much of my life from ages 10-13 was spent squinting, going "It's a boob, it's a boob! Or an elbow...no it's a forehead..."

[mominator]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 10:01pm

If th ebig concern here is (and please correct me if I am wrong) is that more children will be at an afternnon performance. My question is why would any parent bring a young child to see a show called "Dracula" in the first place? This is no Mary Poppins for heaven sake. This is gothic, dark, scary and sensual. Just re-read the Stoker book.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 10:16pm

Yeah, some said this already, but a lot of families may not want to drag their kids to a night show, as they can get tired and fidgety, so the matinees are full of kids. When school starts, the theater may have lots of visiting schools - on the Wednesday matinees.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 10:29pm

That's a bit presumptuous, though. A lot of young children are taken to evening performances. And a lot of adult theatregoers go to the matinees - they'll miss out on the boobies!

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/4/04 at 10:30pm

Poor adults...

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 8/5/04 at 2:41am

Just keep the damn tits in the show for crying out loud!

[Copeman63]

Posted: 8/5/04 at 2:46am

If Melissa's agent is anything like her publicist... She's screwed.