Archive for Musicals.Net Musicals.Net |
| Eponine93 |
Me too. I was at the center of this debate. And the quoting. And the annoyingness. And the being stupid. Sorry.
One of the main reasons people like Wicked, I think, is because its easily accessable. Wicked mania is EVERYWHERE where I live in Northern NJ, at least when you're in middle school. Most people my age haven't seen any Broadway shows beside Wicked. I confess, I've only seen a few other shows (on Broadway) beside Wicked. One of the board members I was constantly debating with- futureMUNGOJERRIE- has probably seen a lot more musical theatre than I have. However, I think the point of Wicked is that everyone has their own opinions. I like Wicked. Other people don't. I don't understand why people hate it to their guts, but I don't want to find out. If I did, I probably wouldn't get the enjoyment out of Wicked that I do now. And that's what theatre is for. Enjoyment. Can you really put to words with detailed example why you dislike something as well? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Asha |
I do like the musical (love the songs, anyways), but sometimes it bothers me for the sheer fact that all the political,economic and emotional depth seemed to be sucked out of it, out of the book. It makes sense, because it has to be a bit commercialized, I suppose, but I...still love the book before the musical.
One more time, though...THE MUSIC ROCKED. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Kaiana |
Back to the original topic, I don't like Wicked. I don't hate it like I hate world hunger or something, but I do intensely dislike it.
I admit I joined in on the hype, I bought the CD and everything (was never a fangirl though). I enjoyed listening to the music. It was something fun and silly to just listen to and it was catchy. I saw it on Broadway with Shoshana Bean I think, and went in with a completely open mind. I left very unhappy. I was not impressed at all by the book, (the script, not the novel) it was very forgettable. However, the ending made me SO ANGRY! SPOILER: The witch is frickin' supposed to DIE! She is not supposed to come out of a random trap door with her true love and talk about how she "wishes she could just tell Glinda". That was utter and complete cheesy crap. And it REALLY p*ssed me off. One of the main things I dislike about Wicked is that it is fluff and doesn't want to admit it. I believe it is fluff mainly because of the book and to some extent the score. Also, it vaguely attempted to deal with important issues but it did not really try very hard to pursue these issues. I believe if it had committed itself to either cheesiness or seriousness it would have been better. Some shows manage to do both, but Wicked did not succeed in doing this. So basically, I think Wicked is a marshmallow. Except it's a really stupid marshmallow that doesn't realize what it is. With any luck, eventually this wicked marshmallow will harden and get really stale and no one will want ot eat it anymore. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
Thank you. | ||||||||||||||||||
| What Is This Feeling? |
Well, I too hate the ending of Wicked! But ,I still like it. First off, we wouldn't have all the hate if Wicked wasn't in The top 5 bestselling shows on Broadway every week, would we? | ||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
What does that have to do with ANYTHING? and where is second off? PS. Wicked's tickets are on average about $20 more than other Broadway tickets. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Bianca. |
Wikkieboppers. | ||||||||||||||||||
| Baker |
That was random. Thanks. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
To a person who know next to nothing about Wicked (like me), this seems to make much sense. |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
This goes back to the age old argument - what makes something good? Popularity or Different? (Glinda or Elphaba?)
As a composer and Musical Theatre student, I can say that technically the score is not weak. The melodies are strong, the harmonies are interesting and the orchestrations are fantastic. Whether or not you enjoy the score or not doesn't mean you can say the score is weak. Sure, there are weak songs (Something Bad doesn't work on the CD), but the use of character leitmotifs, music that is uncategorisable and the score as a piece of theatrical writing (not just music) is pretty strong. I have the entire score on my computer, and have studied it very carefully - and there's some clever stuff going on in it. I won't go into detail about it here - but, there is. The fact that Wicked is now the biggest grossing musical in London's history means something. It may not mean it's good - but there is no right answer to whether it's good or not. I must admit I do find the screaming idina and wicked girlie fans annoying and in a way, I am glad Idina is no longer playing in the West End - it will be a true test to see how people will react to Wicked without "you-know-who". Wicked is certainly a Phantom for the new millennium - and people don't like to see theatre become popular that isn't Sondheim or Rodgers and Hammerstein. The fact that no Sondheim show ever made it's money back, and Wicked in London is making up to 2 Million dollars a week makes a lot of people angry. We must remember we're living in this "Post 9/11 era" where musical comedy is always going to be more popular than a serious musical drama. Not that Wicked is a textbook example of a musical theatre, but - it certainly has one of the best comic numbers of the past 10 years (even people who I know who hate Wicked - or not even know Wicked - say Popular is a great, great song). People are flocking to see this show because it's a new twist on one of the greatest films and novels of all time. So, it's something new based on something old which makes a modern audience comfortable. No one is going to be paying £55 to see a musical based on an unknown story with unknown characters. That's a fact. (Rent may be used as an example - but that wasn't a worldwide success) People will always hate things - and people will always love things. The fact that later on this year, there will be 9 productions of Wicked around the world surely means it's doing something correct. What is it doing that's correct? I don't know. Just consider this: It's filling the biggest theatre in New York It's filling the biggest theatre in London It's on a US tour It's opening in LA It's playing in Chicago It's playing in a theme park in Japan People don't like to see that when their art form is not being used to the fullest and most intellectual extent. Sad thing is - people don't like to be intellectually challenged. They like big shiny things, with celebrities and a big orchestra. Sad - but true. Sorry if my post made no sense - I Just wrote down my thought process - but, take of it what you will |
||||||||||||||||||
| ClareBell |
Wow thats a good read, I agree totally with you...
People just can't accept the theater is becoming more popular and more accessible, with bigger shows touring. I mean my boyfriend who had only ever been to a football match in his life went to the theatre for the 1st time when he booked tickets for my birthday for Wicked in London. He loved it... it was all new to him, we came back to Manchester and he immediatly booked tickets for Chicago (when we saw that a gorup of ladies were in for a hen party) and Starlight Express. He was instantly hooked, he's now got a list of what he wants to see... Avenue Q, We Will Rock You, Chitty... it's all the new popular musicals (bar Starlight but thats been redone) that are grabbing people and getting people into the theatres. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
these "strong" melodies are weak and stolen the "interesting harmonies" are written too plainly the "orchestrations"...are just orchestrations.
There are a LOT of weak songs. The only good songs are The Wizard and I and Wonderful. Defying Gravity is written poorly. Popular is too cliche. For Good's harmonies are boring.
look at Phantom of the Opera. How is that the longest running musical on Broadway when the much superior Phantom didn't even run for longer than 3 years?
What makes me angry about it is the fact that such a second rate show is making more money than such great works as Merrily we Roll Along and Pacific Overtures.
Musical theatre is changing. Musical drama is making a come back. And I don't agree about Popular.
It's a bastardization of the book which is a twist on the movie. People seem to be shelling out the dough for Spelling Bee. And Spring Awakening. And Avenue Q. And The Drowsy Chaparone.
RENT has been in almost as many countries as Les Miserables.
that's just embarassing. |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
I am glad you took the time to comment on my comments. This is an interesting discussion.
By the way, I am not an obsessed Wicked fan - I am just talking as a Masters Musical Theatre (non performance) student and a composer/lyricist: To comment on a few of your points... Popular is meant to be Cliche - that's what makes it a strong comedy song. Much like Wonderful is a pastiche of the area and times the Wizard comes from - very Vaudeville and Soft-shoe. We are even greeted with a hint of this kind of music early on when we meet the mysterious bald guy for the first time. The harmonies in For Good are actually quite unconventional. There are some interesting chordal choices and key changes. Don't EVER say that orchestrations are orchestrations. As someone who has a degree in music and has been orchestrating for nearly 8 years, I don't like that comment. William David Brohn is probably the greatest orchestrator in the business at the moment - and he works some magic with the synths and instruments provided. What makes a good melody? All melodies are stolen - this has been happening since the dawn of time. I agree with you that "The Wizard and I" is the best song in the show. But, when I talked about the score - I mean it as a work of theatre writing (convoluting character, story, lyric writing, strong scansion, good book numbers and entertaining breakaway songs) The opening is a strong example of the good writing. It introduced inter weaved themes in a short amount of time - much in a Paul Hindemith style. Your "Phantom of the opera" comment made no sense. I wasn't talking about the length of running - I was talking about the records Wicked is breaking in London. "look at Phantom of the Opera. How is that the longest running musical on Broadway when the much superior Phantom didn't even run for longer than 3 years?" Please explain this comment further. I can't comment on how it refers to the book. My guess is more people have heard of the movie than the book, so they will go and see the stage show on the fact that it relates to the movie. They will probably then read the book afterwards and appreciate the differences. Spelling Bee and Avenue Q are all gimmick musicals. The first based on a spelling bee (something the US audiences understand very well - how it will travel in other countries will be interesting) and Avenue Q is based on Sesame Street; it only does well because it is puppetry. If it weren't - the show of course wouldn't have the same catharsis. Rent may have been in as many countries as Les Mis - but it hasn't caused a huge phenomenon like Wicked has. You can't deny this. Rent failed in London - and that is the proof that the musical does not travel well. It's a very American musical and only suits American Audiences...and they can have it. Why is the fact Wicked is playing in a theme park in Japan embarrassing? They're doing it because Universal Studios can and that the Japanese know nothing about OZ there. It's a full scale Broadway show - just shorter - kinda like a teaser. When these people go to Universal Studios in Osaka - they get a Broadway musical included in their entry price. That's not embarrassing... |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
Is this meant as a defence for the show? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
i was confused too. | ||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
I am not trying to defend it or offend it. Just commenting on what the general public like and dislike. | ||||||||||||||||||
| loulx |
I took this to mean that some people (whether they work in the buisness or not) dislike the big budget musicals because they seem to gloss over the 'important' issues and go for the big happy ending. (and however much I like wicked, the transcribing of it from a book to a musical is a prime example here). But audiences, the wage-paying public, cry out for this type of enteratinment... and I think that there is a place for it. I've seen some good, edgy new stuff recently, and I've seen wicked. I saw a hard-core dramatic piece and I saw phantom. I enjoyed the west end hits more, even though I work in the buisness. Some people I know describe phantom as hard-core- its all a matter of personal opinion. |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
I couldn't have said it better myself...albeit, I actually didn't...but - yeah - that's what I meant. | ||||||||||||||||||
| lostquiche |
FutureMUNGOJERRIE-
Why must you keep trying to force your opinion on people? You're restating your same, one-sided points over and over again. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Little_Nell |
Nick - I think you put your argument across very well. It was intelligent, insightful and actually quite passive.
futureMUNGOJERRIE - You're sounding like a broken record... we all understand that you dislike Wicked. Point well and truly taken. But enough already... Please!? *smiles* |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Thanks, Nell. I am just saying what's true... | ||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
That seems more like a matter of experience and knowledge rather than of opinion..? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
This is so needed...
It's hard to not sound like a broken record when you guys are defending this giant pink marshmallow[which are quite disgusting] using the same arguments. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Little_Nell |
I'm not defending anyone or anything. I'm having a snipe at people who just don't know when to call it a day. 
|
||||||||||||||||||
| lostquiche |
and doing a good job of it. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
Read the novel.
Listen to john & jen. Watch The Spitfire Grill. |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Simple harmonies?
That's some of the music played when the monkeys are flying. That's not simple. Also may be worth noting the bass part is the leitmotif of the Wizard head's entrance...but I doubt you're interested in hearing that. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
oh boy.
minors. |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Are you commenting on the intervals in the music?
Or stating that we are merely minors? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
That the "harmonies" are just minors. | ||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Yes - some are minors - congratulations on picking that up.
The smart writing is in the ingenuity and the execution. It's written in a Bach fugal style - which, when paying close attention to proper harmonic structure and ruling is difficult to achieve well. Let's not get into a debate about the musical aesthetics about "Wicked". You're obviously in the minority here, so - stop looming around the forums where you have no interest in being (if you obviously dispise "Wicked" so - then don't discuss it). |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
I am free to browse wherever I please.
The forum topic asked for insight into why people hated it. So I have been giving my insight. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Little_Nell |
I have. And? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Emmanya |
My gripes: I found the musical a little bit stale and I didn't get the feeling the audience was enjoying itself and I was in the stalls so I imagine my suprise when it got a standing ovation. I thought the song "Sentimental Man" wasabsolutely atrocious - it had no build up and came out of effin nowhere and made me cringe. Making Boq and Fiyero the tinman/scarecrow is not as clever an idea as the writer thinks. Making people say words with "ation" added on to the end does not make people laugh. It's not that funny.
Plus! Despite Wicked being all about the spectacle - I went to see Spamalot the night before and found myself amazed by half the 'tricks' they did and wondering how they managed that - wheras with Wicked I was like 'oh - that's computer graphics' etc But - I don't think its the bastardization of musical theatre. It's fun. Some of the songs were really good - I was suprised at how much I enjoyed "As long as your mine", "No one mourns the wicked" and "Thank Goodness" - Annalene Beechely was a relatively calm Glinda and wasn't throwing the characterisation out of the window to get big laughs (I.e - Kendra flashing her knickers for no reason during Popular) I also found it did convey a message - The beginning of Defying Gravity "I hope your happy" worked really well after seeing Glinda running to the wizard's side after he tortured the monkeys. My friend was in tears by the end of act one which I totally didn't get but maybe I'm just not as suseptable to these things as some. I found the main problem to be that it took itself too seriously. It's so nearly a pastiche/cliche musical...like Spamalot?...at points (Popular, What is this feeling, cornfield scene, Fiyero's character) but it's just....off a little bit...It's close but....not. But I would like to see it again - nearer the front this time please! |
||||||||||||||||||
| Baker |
I've managed to largely stay out of this argument so far, but just saw a little bit I wanted to comment on. Let me just say though, that I did read your whole post and noted your positive comments - it's just the negative ones that I found something I wanted to say about.
Well, generally audiences don't give a standing ovation if they didn't enjoy the show. Nearly everyone, Wicked fans included, agree that Sentimental Man is poor. Fiyero becoming the Scarecrow is actually hinted at in the book, though never fully explored. Boq was just added to fully expand (it would feel lacking if we got explanations on the Scarecrow and the Lion, but not the Tin Man). [quote="Emmanya"]Making people say words with "ation" added on to the end does not make people laugh. It's not that funny. It's made people laugh everytime I've seen it. You may not find it funny, and I agree that sometimes it's annoying, but a lot of people do find it amusing.
Although sometimes it's true that Wicked may take itself too seriously, Winnie Holzman and Stephen Schwartz have admitted that Popular and What Is This Feeling are songs designed to play on stereotypes, which naturally leads them to being cliché. The cornfield scene is as well, but that's definitely played up in that manner - if anyone honestly takes a wand-spinning Glinda seriously, they've got problems. But I definitely agree with your statement on Fiyero - his character is awful compared to the great, interesting person he was in the books. |
||||||||||||||||||
| xsophiex |
WickedI read the book. i enjoyed it so much i just keep reading it over and over again. But the musical isn't supposed to be the same. I enjoy all of the songs (except sentimental man as someone said before) I do think it has depth, and i think people will disagree on me with that because maybe they've read the book and compared it. I like to think of them as two different stories. I'm thinking they couldn't make the musical as dark as the book. Let's remember, this is about the wizard of oz, which is lighthearted, not much is explored and it doesn't have much depth to the story. Wicked the Musical explains the backstory of the Wizard of Oz in a simpler form to the book. The book being converted would take much too long in my opinion.P.S Someone said they cried at the end of Wicked. I'm guilty of that aswell hehe. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Emmanya |
I know! They must have enjoyed it but I was shocked because the reaction the show was getting up til that moment didn't seem to be so overwhelmingly positive. I have read the book but...yeah she wants the scarecrow to be Fiyero but the point is - he's not and its an example of just how manic and how desperate she is at that point and how much she loved Fiyero that she wishes him to be it. It just doesn't coincide (sp?) with the movie's portrayal of the scarecrow and Tinman one bit is what ...I think... my point is! 
I thought of all the 'new' links the musical tried to establish - the flying monkeys release was the best one.
Drawing a parallel with films- what are the biggest crowd pullers? The big action packed special effects OTT popcorn flicks. What wins the oscars and the respect? The more intimate, character driven films. It's like the oscars last year when all 5 Best Picture nominees were films people hadn't really heard of or hadn't been no1 at the box office and the winner, Crash, had only grossed like £20 million or something. But it was Pirates of the Carribean or King Kong etc that had made like 10 x that. Wicked is a popcorn flick musical. Although to be honest now I'm answering why its succesful - not why its disliked. Or maybe it is disliked because it is so succesful? |
||||||||||||||||||
| katethegreat |
^
^ ^ That seems to be about right - its a successful, pop corn musical = not popular with v serious musical theatre people. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
I believe this answered the question:
Being successful and popular in addition to not use the devices of the genre to theyr most intellectual extent makes Wicked even easier to hate. It is, naturally, not impossible to combine popularity with intellectual content. ITW is one proof. |
||||||||||||||||||
| superdave |
The only problem I have with "Wicked" is that, in the great scheme of things there are way better shows on Broadway right now... Look at "The Color Purple"-- An AMAZING SHOW. Or "Avenue Q" another amazing show, that kicks Wicked in smart and funny. Even "The Drowsy Chaperone" is more cleaver than "Wicked" is. And the 12-18 year old crowd seem to forget all the other good shows that are out there. That gets on my nerves, when 14 year old kids say, "I love Wicked to death, It's the greatest musical on earth." Well, I want to tell those kids--do what I did when I was 14 years old. I listened to Lloyd Webber at the time, it was what introduced me to musicals, but I also explored other plays at the time--and soon found out, that Lloyd Webber in large, was crap. I only enjoy 3 of his plays now, Jesus Christ Superstar, Evita and about 40% of Phantom. That's because I expanded my horizion and found out that there was more out there than "Cats". And it's the same way with "Wicked". I bet these kids have never even attempted to listen to "Godspell" or "Pippin"--which are far better scores than "Wicked". I bet they dont even know who Stephen Schwartz is. (For the people that arent aware--he wrote Wicked--the lyrics and music-- His name is on the album... He IS wicked. Idina or Kristin arent wicked, he IS.)
I have the Wicked soundtrack, I listen to it all the time, I have never seen the show, but I am going to go see it in a couple of months. It's a good show, but it's not the be all and end all of shows for me. And that's my ONLY problem with it...People that make it the be all and end all of all shows. And If I have to be in one more show, where all the 18 year old girls, want to be Elphaba, I will throw up. If I have to sit through an audition and listen to "Defy Gravity" murdered and massacred--I will die. I cant tell you how many times I have had to burst bubbles and say, "You cant do it, dear... You cant belt like the role requires--And even if you could, There are 50,000 girls infront of you that would be more qualified. To do it." Uggh, that gets on my nerves...Everyone wants to be Elphaba. I have the same issues with Phantom and Rent (especially RENT) |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Yes, I agree with you my good friend.
I, as a writer, find it annoying when people over look the writers and credit the actress of actor for creating the role. I also dislike the Wicked-fan-girl thing. Here in London, for Menzel's last show, they camped outside for a week - including Christmas day. That's over the top and inane. Stephen Schwartz is a friend of myne, and I like a lot of his work. His lyrics for Disney and The Prince of Egypt (along with his music for that one) are very strong - but, it's nice to see Wicked has finally given him the commercial credit he deserves - as a theatrical writer. He is very happy about that. Of course, with every production of Wicked opening - they're constantly changing it, so good things will come out of its popularity. Let's just hope the Wicked-fan-girls don't take over the world. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
 I like you.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
Good. I like you too.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| superdave |
You are so lucky to know Stephen. I'd like to sit with him for a while and just talk about Godspell and Pippin all day... I have this reccuring nightmare, that when Wicked releases it's rights to highschools and community theatres--we'll have a billion little girls massacre the production. Good news is, I believe Wicked is going to be the next Phantom...it will run for at least another 5-6 years. Maybe, even longer... So, you know... it wont happen for a while. And those Wicked-fan-girls probably will be more mature, better performers by then. |
||||||||||||||||||
| akukama |
I am a Wicked fan. And a teenage girl. *dodges all of the sharp objects being thrown at her*
Nice to get that out of the way. Anyhow, as an adaptation of the book, Wicked is dreadful. As a musical, it's amazing. This is not because it has dazzling special effects. In fact, I was a bit disappointed by the special effects when I saw it. I loved the musical after hearing the soundtrack, before I had any idea that millions of people liked it. I don't think Wicked is perfect, and it's certainly not the best musical out there, but I like it. I think it has incredible music, aside from a few songs, like Sentimental Man and Something Bad, but those are tolerable, at least. Part of what makes me like it is the fact that the actors and actresses can make the characters whatever they want. The characterization is just loose enough that three different people playing Glinda can seem like three separate characters. Along with this, three different people watching the musical can see a character three different ways. Done by the wrong cast, and watched by the wrong person, Wicked can seem pointless and flat, but done and watched by the right people, it can be brilliant. *blinks* That made a lot more sense in my mind. And in case anyone was wondering... I've read the book and seen the play. I just think they're so different that I choose to view them as completely separate works. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Azaelia |
Eh, I don't know others, but the only teenagers I mind are the ones who don't even really care about talking about the actual musical - they just want to ramble about the brilliance of Idina Menzel... and are probably not even aware that there's more to the musical than Idina singing Defying Gravity.
So you're safe. 
You know, those are actually excellent points! I think you're right, though I also think there's general things people disagree on. The mere concept of the ending bothers me, and I think it always will no matter who I see in Wicked. But how it is played out on stage might make all the difference as to just how bothersome it is. |
||||||||||||||||||
| luckystar_30 |
I agree with what you both said above. I also really enjoyed the soundtrack upon hearing it the first time when I had no idea it was a so incredibly popular.
The one thing I agree with more than anything is the ending. It completly ruins the whole point - in my humble opinion. I remember loving the music, and I had read the book - but again, consider them completly seperate entities. But when I first saw the show with a friend of mine we just sort of kept looking at each other. Galinda's little bouncing across the stage during popular (the 'la la la la' part) is ridiculous - that number could have been so fun! And also the cornfield scene where they 'battle' with the wand and broomstick is absolutly ridiculous - as are all the Wizard of Oz references that had the audience peeing themselves! Again, the music is great - its fun and fresh and sometimes deeply moving - but the staging and the silly feel of the whole show really undermines what I feel it could be. |
||||||||||||||||||
| The Very Angry Woman |
There is no Wicked soundtrack. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Sweeney Hyde |
^^oh, brother...WE ALL KNOW WHAT THEY MEANT BY "SOUNDTRACK"! Send a pm if you want to embares them. | ||||||||||||||||||
| lostquiche |
I thought this thread was gone 
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
You are silly. And you can't spell embarrass. It's TVAW. ...duh. |
||||||||||||||||||
| The Very Angry Woman |
May I embares you? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Nick-Ko-Las Enigma |
Just knock it off. | ||||||||||||||||||
| xsophiex |
I think many people think the only reason Idina Menzel is appreciated is because of her "high status", and only by teenagers.
And I've never seen people argue as much about any other musical as they do about Wicked. Like about who's the best Elphaba. Oh my goodness. Anyone who likes Julia, Saycon, Eden, Kerry, Ana, Stephanie and so on are respected and aren't scared of expressing their opinion. Shoshana and Idina fans seem to have wars about who's the best.  It's quite sad actually. I don't see why people can't express their opinions without being kicked to the ground.
I think it's brought so many fans to love musicals, and the ones that already did, may not even call this a musical because of it's "poppy spectacular" status. But everyone is different, we're comparing people who bring different things to the role, good and bad, while bashing all the one's we don't particularly like. As long as people enjoy the show, what's so bad? Musicals are supposed to entertain. And about it's substance? It certainly has much more stubstance than the Wizard of Oz. It couldn't be too complicated considering it follows such a movie. Children who've seen the Wizard of Oz will want to see the musical, probably more than read the book. That's why the book can be so complicated, it's an adult book. |
||||||||||||||||||
| TR_Wolf |
My contribution:
I very much liked Wicked the musical. I thought the book was pretty good, but agree that the musical is very much different to the book, but not that it's a bad thing, they're both different but both enjoyable (the same with V for Vendetta movie vs book), plus I don't think the book itself would make a good musical... can you imagine Ama Clutch and Nanny having their own song or something whilst Tibbett and Crope dance a can-can in the background? Also, I like Andrew Lloyd Webber and Cameron Macintosh, I like their music, even if it is "pop", I like the spectacle and effects in shows, but by no means do I judge a show based on them, but they are impressive and make for an enjoyable show when present, but shows can be great fun without them too. I also detest this whole "ALW is rubbish, Sondheim is God" stuff, along with the "My Fair Lady is art, Phantom blows" etc. It's elitism, I don't care what anyone says, ie "I like the originals better, they're better than the new" etc, it's just snobbery to look down on someone for preferring someone you personally don't rate. I've heard and seen Sondheim, R+H etc, and yes some of their stuff I enjoy, but not all of it, and a good chunk I don't like, but just because they're more established etc doesnt mean I should automatically love them and be mocked for liking Wicked. At the end of the day, everyone has different tastes, if you enjoy Porgy and Bess then fine, if you love Jerry Springer the Opera, then fine, enjoy them, but dont berate others for having a differing opinion to your own, nor make them feel bad, stupid, or embarrassed for doing so! You wouldnt look down your nose at someone for their choice of eating habits, "oh you like Burgers? Theyre so hyped up, they're nowhere near as perfect as Pork loin"... ...it's ridiculous isnt it? So enjoy what you enjoy, let others enjoy what they enjoy, and DON'T make them feel they should have to conform to someone's opinion other than their own, nor judge them for it, and if you do, then shame on you! . |
||||||||||||||||||
| shakalakababy |
you couldn't be more right When I first started posting here I tried to act like I just liked what I supposed to like because I saw how wicked fans an ALW fans were treated but now i've gotten over that. I love Wicked, I love POTO, I love Jekyll & Hyde. and whoever has a problem with that can deal. and the people here are much nicer anyways
|
||||||||||||||||||
| katethegreat |
Me too!
Please make it stop
*EDIT* Have just read your post TR Wolf and I you've managed to say everything I was trying to say earlier in this thread. Except it makes sense and (hopefully) people will respect it. This thread turned pretty ugly and I'm not proud of some of things I posted here. I came to this board about a week after seeing Wicked and I wanted to defend it. I still do, but the way this board can be, I don't trust myself to without getting really nasty... |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
He is. Sondheim is the greatest thing that has happened to this world since Shakespeare. |
||||||||||||||||||
| TR_Wolf |
In your opinion. He doesnt enthrall me that much. But you must also realise that sure, you're entitled to think he's God or whatever, but you should NOT berate others for thinking otherwise, or liking someone you personally don't. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
 Oh the naivete of this all.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| katethegreat |
Shut up Matthew |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
Do Cameron Mackintosh write music? I didn't know.
Can you explain this a little bit further? Do you mean that nothing can be better that something else in any way? If so, do you have the same opinion when it comes to other sorts of art/entertainment, too? Is it elitism to say Shakespeare is a better playwright than Holberg, for example? (For the record: I don't think all ALW is rubbish, Im just interrested in understanding your point of view.) |
||||||||||||||||||
| Pounce |
I thought Cameron Mackintosh was just a producer.
In my opinion, in deciding the value of shows we have many measuring sticks. I think popularity coupled with longevity is a valid measuring device. People don't just like shows only because they are 'popular'. Ask any fan of a popular show if they think it is good, you'd probably get close to 100% saying yes. But yes I suppose there is an elitism among the serious theatergoers and those that study it. Thin plots and overblown productions probably eventually wear thin on those who frequent theater. I used to work in a music listening room at college. At first I played a lot of pop over the room's speakers but after awhile I got tired of it and started playing more 'alternative' music. But I don't feel justified in labeling 'pop' music a bad or rubbish. I suppose most people will eventually crave the more artistic, challenging, and creative works. As for my music choices today, I can't even listen to 'alternative' music. Now for me it's strictly Broadway.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Okay. Cameron Mackintosh is a friend of my family. He doesn't write music - but he certainly understands it. He can hear something and say "That's a good song" or - "that's not a good song - rewrite it".
Sondheim is a very nice and intelligent man and has made time for me in the past when I e-mail him questions I have. However, he writes for actors - not for any broadway performers. He will never write just a "love" song - he will write a love song for two conflicting characters in seperate eras who have never met but do one day will in a huge sense of dramatic irony... A famous qoute is I've recently used in an essay discussing enlightenment Vs entertainment is: "Theatre composers like Andrew Lloyd Webber prosper by writing scores for the music industry. First the record; then the show. Not Sondheim, whose dictum has always been: First the show; always the show" Richard Kislan. This proves that we're not alone in our musings on this topic; however - it will never be cleared up. Popularity will always win over intelligence - and sometimes you may get a show that combines the two. Now, as Kate clearly states - there's no point in getting into this debate again - as, as I've just said, it won't be won by anyone. My podcast will be doing an episode on "Popularity Vs Substance" soon...where we will be discussing this in greater detail. It's a very interesting topic indeed. Accept the fact Wicked is more POPULAR than Sondheim - but Sondheim may be more WORSHIPPED than Stephen Schwartz and WICKED. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
Precisely. But why is using one kind of measuring stick (for example the ones Sondheim shows measure up to) regarded as elitism, when using other sorts of measure sticks (for example the ones Wildhorn shows measure up to) is not?
Why this obsession with "winning" debates
The fun thing is to participate in debates (and possibly learn new stuff) not to win them 
|
||||||||||||||||||
| katethegreat |
Trust me, there are people on here that won't rest until we all bow down to Sondheim's genius
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
I don't need this from you. But direct addresses need commas. Sondheim is millions times better than Wicked will ever be.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Quique |
I like you Matthew but, not only are you showing your age, you're proving everyone's point about certain Sondheim fans thinking they're elitist with the way you're behaving in this discussion.
It's quite disconcerting considering you're doing the direct opposite of what Dvarg, a Sondheim fan, is trying to do; engage in intelligent discussion without putting people down. I'm a Sondheim fan as well. Maybe not as much as Dvarg, but I've loved most of his works since childhood, and I don't feel the need to push in everyone's face how supposedly stupid they are for liking Wicked or other such shows. Liking Sondheim doesn't make you more intelligent and not liking him doesn't make you a moron. I think that's what most people are complaining about here. It seems people have felt it's worth opening up about their feelings with Dvarg, but that's because he's rational and NOT acting elitist. It's very hard to be taken seriously when all you do is insult and make smart remarks. And PLEASE stop trying to mimic TVAW. Really, you're failing miserably. 
|
||||||||||||||||||
| shakalakababy |
It really annoys me when people come on here and say "Wicked sucks Sondheim rules!" If you feel that way, for god sakes have an intelligent discussion about it. Thank god for Dvarg |
||||||||||||||||||
| nickhutson |
Am I bad because I've recently seen a charity gala concert of Follies and also Wicked, recently in London? Have I betrayed the laws of Musical Theatre? | ||||||||||||||||||
| The Drama Queen |
I like both Sondheim and Schrwartz music...I don't see the problem.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
Come on, guys, you're making me blush 
But thanks
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Nick-Ko-Las Enigma |
[quote="nickhutson"]Am I bad because I've recently seen a charity gala concert of Follies and also Wicked, recently in London? Have I betrayed the laws of Musical Theatre?[/quote]
Apparently you are in violation of bylaw 78 subsection c second paragraph, so please turn in your cards and report to room 19 for further proccessing. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Pounce |
First of all I'd like to say that you have very impressive connections.
I guess what bothered me about Sondheim are the suggestions that he writes for actors not any Broadway performers and he writes first for the show. No mention of the audience. He seems to be demanding that the audience come up to his level rather than go down to theirs. I'm not sure what it means to write for actors and not any Broadway performers. Does he mean that he writes parts for an actor and not a specific person? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Salome |
writing ofr actors means that he write from an actors viewpoint. in the actors love and understand the material the audience will.
lke shakespeare. an audience will easily understand shakespeare if the actors understand it. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
I found this strange too. Aren't Broadway performers also actors?
Why do you think writing for the show instead of for the pop industry = not writing for the audience? From my position, writing for the show instead of the pop industry is writing for the audience, because I belong to the part of the audience that is more interrested in the theatrical/dramaturgical aspect of musicals than the pop music aspect.
Are you suggesting that the audience is stupid? Sondheim shows aren't that inpenetrable. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
My Sondheimism gets the best of me.
So does my OCD. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
Nothing wrong with it. *restrains true feelings* |
||||||||||||||||||
| The Drama Queen |
I'm thinking its meant as specific Broadway performers, like how the character of Glinda was basically written for Kristin Chenoweth to play. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
That makes the quote even stranger, as Sondheim is famous for being very careful about waiting to write much until he knows exactly who's been cast, to take particularly advantage of their individual strenghts. If I'm not much mistaken, Cora and Lovett were written particularly for Lansbury, most of Company's characters/songs were written specifically for the particular cast (most prominently Strich), Follies was written extremely close to it's cameo performers while Sondheim's most famous song, Send In The Clowns was tailor made for Glynis Johns and her limited range. The list goes on. I'd say it'd be more precise to critizise Sondheim for too often writing stuff that is hard to imagine being played by anyone else than the actor/Broadway performer it was written for. Personally, I don't think it actually is a problem, because most of those roles have been interpreted sucessfully by other performers than they were written for anyway. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Matthew |
Sondheim really doesn't care for actors is the funny thing.
He just wants to go play his board games. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Pounce |
Depends on what you mean by 'pop industry'. If someone is writing for the show, that would suggest to me that the writer is focusing on himself and what he wants the show to say. Which is fine but as I said in another thread, professional musical theater is a business and like the film industry, they want to create shows that the public wants to pay to see. The film industry does make some allowance for some art house films and so should the musical theater industry but not on Broadway. Broadway should be the musical theater industry's 'cash cow'. Sondheim has had success of course but how long have his shows run at most? About 2 years? Wicked by contrast is approaching 3 1/2 years with other productions in Chicago, London, and Los Angeles; not to mention the Tour and other international productions are planed for Germany, Japan, and possibly Australia, The Netherlands, and Canada. Writing a show like Wicked is what is good for the musical theater industry and it definitely belongs on Broadway.
As nickhutson mentioned and I agee, Sondheim is intelligent and has a very strong grasp of musical theater so anything below the level of Sondheim doesn't necessarily place one in the stupid category. I mean having Einstein write an explanation of his Theory of Relativity to the level of average public does not imply the public is stupid. And of course the material of Sondheim is not analogous in difficulty to the 'Theory of Relativity' but I think he does write at a higher level than your average Broadway show. But by doing that, he alienates a large portion of the audience. Passion was interesting but the material was heavy and Sunday in the Park with George, I found that material very heavy. Sweeney Todd works on a higher plane but it is understandable to the average theatergoer. It just surprises me that as well-known as Sondheim is, why don't his shows have longer runs? |
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
As I interpreted the original quote, the point was that composers like ALW is more concerned about pop music than theatre/dramaturgy when dealing with musicals - and that makes them different from Sondheim, who simply has another approach to musicals. I didn't know the issue of commercialism was the issue in this context.
True, Sondheim is intelligent, but I believe the musical audience is underestimating itself if they avoid going to his shows (except perhaps Passion and Pacific Overtures) because they are afraid they are too difficult for them.
Me too! Another reason it surpises me, is that I find those shows so incredibly great! |
||||||||||||||||||
| shakalakababy |
^ yay i'm quoted in your signature!
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
I think this is an ideological position one can agree with or not. To me, who has never even been to New York and experience musicals mainly through the mediums of cast recordings and books, Broadway doesn't represent a cultural industry. Seeing it from my position it is a symbol of the "Highest Quality Theatre Of The World", alongside London's West End. When asked the question "which shows should never have been allowed on Broadway?", I read "which examples of theatre represents the highest quality in the world?" Therefore our basic premises of such a discussion are different. Just a appropos, I also think it's not a good thing to "write down" to the audience. My impression is that this is exactly what for example ALW has mostly tried to do after AOL. I experience those musicals as intense attempts to draw an audience. (Before those shows, I only believe ALW had a taste for pop music charts moreso than dramaturgical coherence). Few of ALW's shows has been as unsuccessful as those post AOL shows. For example, although it experiments with thinks I don't really care about, I do believe Cats was more of an experiment on new ways to draw audiences (which I think ALW is genuinely interrested in) rather than merely an attempt to draw audiences - which are two different things. At the same time, I don't think Sondheim is actively trying to alienate the mass audience. I think that he writes about stuff he'd genuinely interresting in seeing onstage himself, and that he (like me, in a way) is not able to understand why what he personally is interrested in doesn't become popular among large audiences. I think Sondheim actually wants a large audience and is pleased when he succeeds. I also think that is the only way to write well: to explore something one is genuinely interrested in oneself. It's just that what ALW personally seems to be interrested in (for example hummable tunes, extraordinary visual effects and chart hits) happens to draw a wider audience than what Sondheim personally is interrested in ( for example dark and bitter issues and his way of storytelling). (As always, I'm just using ALW and SJS as examples - not as persons - because everyone knows what sorts of theatre/music the two of them by and large represent.) |
||||||||||||||||||
| Lena |
Same here. In fact, I absolutely ADORE both styles.... No, I have not SEEN Wicked yet, but the music is amazing .
It is quite obvious that a musical like Wicked has to be "spectacular" - anything set in a fantasy world/dealing with the supernatural is bound to have a different approach than most Sondheim musicals. If people are prepared to trash the show just because of that, then they should simply avoid the genre - it's got nothing to do with the musical itself.
I don't know, but most people I've met who share this (unfortunately very common) opinion, have yet to actually see a professional musical production. The very word "musical" is often associated with "hollowness" and "shallowness" - simply because songs are integrated in the plot. Whether it's Schwartz, Sondheim or ALW is of little interest to these people.
As I've stated above, I have not yet seen the musical and am not the best judge here.... But, generally speaking, I don't think that "a lot of flashy things..." decide whether a musical is good or bad. Besides the acting, music and direction, it is above all the script that - where I am concerned - distinguishes a "good" show from a "bad" one. I have no idea whether that is the case with Wicked..... But there are more than enough shows - especially newer ones - that claim to be a "musical" and lack all of the above, even though they do not include any special effects. *cough* High School Musical *cough*. BTW, the only reason I can think of why someone might genuinely hate the musical is because it seems to be very different from the book (which, by the way, is FANTASTIC!). I don't see why this would get in the way of enjoying a good show, but.... I don't know. I should shut up .
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
I don't think it's the spectacle as such people object to (remember several Sondheim shows too are quite spectacular in this sense, for example Follies and SITPWG). It seems to more the absence of substance. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Mistress |
I completely understand that Wicked is more a spectacle show used to attract big audiences, but I think even the most shallow of shows has something good about it. Lion King had those gorgeous costumes that took my breath away, Mama Mia was a fun sort of sing along thing that brought back memories for the older audiences...dunno, I think that these kind of popular musicals are just fun because everyone can get into them. As for Wicked, I love it, and I do believe it has a good message. It was just watered down to make it family friendly. It speaks of friendship, love, and courage I read the review for Wicked in Time magazine, and the reviwer said that what made the show so good was that it had a story that everyone could take seriously. Kids and adults could enjoy the humour and pazzazz, but adults could really get into the story...the link is here, I don't really remember what the reviewer said
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1006179,00.html Overall, Wicked may be glitzy and shallow, but it also has things we can all relate to -friendship, family problems, adversity, etc. ...I mean who can say a song like For Good or even No Good Deed or As Long As You're Mine is completely shallow? I have to go to Drowsy Chaperone and say that the Man in Chair was right in saying that musicals are fun, and can lift you out of the blues. I know listenig to music, specially my musical soundtracks/cast recordings always makes me feel better. I hope this makes soem sense
I'm greenified!
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Salome |
yes but Drowsy Chapaerone is good fluff. | ||||||||||||||||||
| Lena |
True, but - back to Wicked - if the show is ANYTHING like the novel (yes, the storyline may have been altered, but from what I've heard til now, it still contains the most important elements of the original story), then it definitely has some substance.
Even without having seen the show, just listening to "Defying Gravity" makes me feel better. And singing along even more so ! And this definitely applies to all (good) musicals - it was Lion King when I was an outsider in Kindergarten, MFL in eighth grade and Chicago in ninth grade (when the entire class laughed hysterically when I said the soundtrack was my favourite album) - and the music always managed to lift me up. And still does . Thinking about it, this probably is what defines a good musical - one that can evoke emotions in the audience; whether it's an "old" one or a newer one designed to "please the masses".
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Dvarg |
To get back on the original topic, I think this also can explain why theatre fans dislike the kind of show Wicked represents: in many people's opinion they demand very little of you. This makes such shows easy to like for a mass audience, which almost by definition includes a lot of people without any particular interrest in or knowledge on musical theatre. A taste for theatre that demands something of it's audience tends to be typical for many of those with a great knowledge of a particular cultural field. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Salome |
[quote="Lena"]
True, but - back to Wicked - if the show is ANYTHING like the novel (yes, the storyline may have been altered, but from what I've heard til now, it still contains the most important elements of the original story), then it definitely has some substance. quote] theres the problem the musical is nothing like the novel. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Lena |
Ah well, then that's probably all I can say to that . 
Will be able to comment again once I've seen it
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Salome |
dont waste your money seeing it. just read the script. you'll see what i mean. | ||||||||||||||||||
| Pounce |
I think Broadway does represent the epitome of theatrical talent because it is willing to pay for that talent and money will attract talent. But in return, these artists must prove their worth at the box office. Broadway is unforgiving like that. You'd probably find any new and experimental stuff in the smaller Off-Broadway theaters. That's how RENT and The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee got their start before demonstrating enough commercial potential for Broadway. Bat Boy never made it past Off-Broadway.
I agree that the intent of the question was probably somethi |