| re: "TANZ" VS "BOOH" | |
|
Posted by: |
steven_stuart 04:22 pm UTC 08/23/10 |
| In reply to: | re: "TANZ" VS "BOOH" - Tremorlor 09:32 am UTC 08/23/10 |
| Thanks for taking the trouble to read my overly long post. I disagree on some points but I found your comments to be interesting. > Like producers and investors that actually do something. They are doing something. Please understand that Jim's vision for this show is very ambitous. A lot of people have wanted to invest in a show that features the "BOOH" songs but they get scared of a story that features Peter Pan as a Marvel comic book hero and Hook as a kind of darkly comical Hitler/The Joker. I don't know why. I think Jim's basic story concept is wonderful and when it goes up Jim and the team will be very happy that they didn't bow to industry pressure. It will be worth the wait. > Crap idea anyway. Drop it. Perhaps a motor cycle ballet makes things too complicated. Is that why you think its a crap idea? Has it been done before? I don't know. I think they should do it if its never been done before. > Do explain what's so expensive about a pod in the sky. A > globe hanging over the stage can't be that expensive. It has to be an extra special pod. Especially if Meat Loaf ends up playing Hook. He's not going to climb into just any old pod. > Austria came first. You are quite right. Isn't "Tanz" the most successful show in German history? > And of course London is going to be more expensive than > the theatre complexes that have been build in the last > couple of years just on the edge of serveral cities > borders. Are you talking about British cities? Bill Kenwright would probably put a very scaled down version of Jim's vision in the West End for a few months and then tour it in the regional theatres, saying: "direct from the West End" and he would probably make a big profit. I really don't think that Jim is motivated by profit but it would be nice if "BOOH" made money. > It did help that VBW owns a number of theatres in Vienna > (Austria btw, not Germany) and that they produced it. Good point. > Vereinigte Bühnen Wien is not German. Get your facts > straight already. And considering DotV it may be a good > thing that it's not Jim Steinmans' Tanz der Vampire. Another good point. Why did he allow "DOTV" to be produced? They won't let Richard do his much more faithful English version of "Tanz" but they allowed "DOTV". > No matter how fantastic, is it realizable? Does it work? > Or is it going to be the Michael Bay of musicals? Huge and > expensive effects with shallow or non-existant story that > lacks any impact whatsoever? With added hurrah America > patriotism thrown in for good measure? I don't think there will be any patriotism. This is New York in decay after the apocalypse. Also, the story is not shallow. Jim has been thinking about it for forty years. It must have something going for it or Smeghead wouldn't have spent so much time trying to rewrite it. > And so it will remain. This is why I think Meat Loaf should play Hook. I am not the only one. You may be hearing more about this in the near future. > Likely it was, considering a whole lot of it was paid by > the state and not private investors. Lucky them. > Can clearly see that the website was very expensive. A 5 > minute job for a html illiterate. I agree. It was the ad that cost a fortune. > Wow, you can fail with recycling Beatles songs? Sweet. > Won't feel particularly sad for never seeing a show full > of Beatles songs. I would rather watch documentaries about the Beatles than see actors playing them in a show. Especially awful was the fact that the actors in couldn't play any instruments or sing. They just had to act like the Beatles and sing. > Then don't go ahead and announce crap 10 years before the > first casting takes place. That's true. I heard very little about "Gone With The Wind" before it was in rehersals. > Cut the bikes. Or go for a Spartacus arena spectacle. Actually, that's a brilliant idea. I will pass it on and I will make sure they remember who thought it up if they use it. Spartacus. I love that. There is some debate about arena show vs West End show. > Really comes as a surprise that Polanski had a lot of > creative control over Tanz... > Just a good thing that he didn't have much of creative > control over DotV, right? I was trying to point out differences between "Tanz" and "BOOH". The power held by the director is one. It is possibly, if you think about it, a reason that "BOOH" might be delayed. Of course it would have been wonderful if Polanski could have directed "DOTV" with Richard's more faithful translation of "Tanz". We'll never know how that would have worked unless Richard gets permission from the Austrians for a West End version with Polanski directing via video link. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: "TANZ" VS "BOOH" - Tremorlor 09:32 am UTC 08/23/10 |
| Next: | re: "TANZ" VS "BOOH" - Tremorlor 06:12 pm UTC 08/23/10 |
| Thread: |
|