[SapphireNight]

Please can you help! I need to collect some information about people’s perceptions of musicals which have both stage and film versions, for a university assignment. I would really appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to answer this short questionnaire.

This short questionnaire is referring to the stage/filmed musicals of Rent, Chicago, Evita, Cats and Joseph.
Please answer each questionnaire for one particular musical. If you can spare the time, please repeat the questionnaire for each of these musicals you have seen (or, any other musical which has both been staged in the theatre, and made into a film.)

Any help is much appreciated!

1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?
2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?
3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?
4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?
5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?

6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?
7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?
8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).
9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?

Thank you

[Vice]

1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?
I'm a fan of both.

2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?
The video.

3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?
I prefer the stage version, simply for Growltiger's Last Stand.

4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?
I'm dissapointed in the lack of a very (in my opinion) awesome number, and it leaves the character of Gus flat. I honestly RAELLY like the cg in Mistoffelees' number.

5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?

6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?
Senn them both.

7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?
Commercial audience.

8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).
Uh......

9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?
It loses some inpact....

[Reeza]

This one is for CATS.

1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?
Mostly the stage version.

2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?
I saw the film first.

3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?
I prefer the stage version.

4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?
I personally don't think the film is very good in comparison with the live show. The stage version has a lot of audience interaction which is missed with the movie.

Also, Growltiger is one of the best numbers from the stage version, and should not have been cut.

In addition, the film has atleast 30 or more mistakes and editing problems.

5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?

6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?
I saw them both.

7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?
I think the film brings in a lot of new fans- mostly younger. I would have never been introduced to the show had it not been for the video. It wasn't until I saw it live that I realized how much I was missing.

The movie also appeals to those that were already fans, but mostly I'd say that it appeals to newcomers.

8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).
It appeals to those that like theatre, and don't have the means to go and see the live show.

9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?
I'm not really sure. I see the video and the stage version as two entirely different things. I suppose it depends on which version someone prefers.

[Vanessa20]

1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?

Both


2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?

The film.


3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?

Both, but I'm mostly familiar with the film. I've only seen the stage version once.


4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?

The film and stage versions are basically one and the same, except the film cuts "Growltiger's Last Stand." It's disappointing that the number had to be cut. But casting 89-year-old Sir John Mills as Gus did add poignancy (I still remember my old babysitter crying and having to leave the room when she saw how old and pathetic he was), and he never could have handled it.


5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?

I'm glad that it's basically a filmed stage performance. It's good for people who can't see the stage version.


6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?

I've seen both.


7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?

A combination of both.


8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).

It appeals to the fan based audience by mainly sticking to the stage version, but it appeals to a wider audience by throwing in Sir John Mills and cutting "Growltiger" for his sake.


9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?

It's still true to itself.

[Yip1982]

1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?
I'm a fan of the stage version of CATS. While I know the film has striven to be faithful to the original show, I felt saddened because it was heavily cut.

2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?
I saw the stage version in 1993 and 1998, so this left an impact on me before the film was released.

3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?
I like the stage version because it gives you a "you are there" or "living presence" feeling that you can't get in the film.

4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?
Well - the film is the same except that the cuts and omissions sadden me, especially the omission of Growltiger's Last Stand (with its parody of Puccini).

5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?
No

6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?
I would still be, if I've heard that it has been carefully transferred to the screen.

7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?
I think it's trying to appeal to both types of audiences, but a little more to the audience of CATS fans and musical lovers.

8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).
I think that it keeps the look and feel of the original production but yet the cinematography makes it appealing to the mass-based audience who could never afford tickets to the professional productions.

9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?
I think that they don't quite intrude as much as others think, but nothing beats the feeling of knowing that the cats are behind you.

[SapphireNight]

Hey, I just want to say a quick thanks to the people who have been completing these questionnaires- Yip1982, Vanessa20, Reeza and Vice in this section. Thanks guys for being so quick in resonding, cookies for all!

I still need more, so if you can spare the time to quickly fill one out for Cats, or another film and stage musical, please do so. I need as many replies from people as I can get so that its accurate and generalistic- the more replies I get, the more the data I use will represent most people.

Keep them comming in, I've only got a few more days before I have to compile everything and use it in the project, so if youre thinking about filling one in, do it sooner rather then later. And dont worry, I'll be out of your hair soon!!
Thanks for all the help youve been giving me!

[Rumblepurr]

1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?
I would classify myself as being a fan of CATS, so I would select "both."

2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?
I was able to see the staged Tour company at the Shubert in Los Angeles in 1986.

3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?
I prefer the staged version due to the spontaneity of the action, and the aspect that I can watch any part of the show that I choose to focus upon. The film version restricts this ability.

4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?
The only major change to the story was the exclusion of Growltiger's Last Stand. Although the film used Sir John Mills as Gus the Theatre Cat and he was unable to perform the role of Growltiger, they still could have staged this scene by using Tony Timberlake (Gus Junior)...

5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?
None at this time.

6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?
I have seen the film, the US Tour and the UK Tour in that order.

7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?
The film most likely appeals to the fans more than the general audience. The most comments I have viewed in Forums indicate that the film allows them to watch the show at any time they wish. I would guess that one could say that the film is part of the souvenirs that can be collected.

8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).
The film's usage of closeups of the characters aids in creating a front-row viewpoint. Thus, there is a sense of being close to the characters that is not always possible with a live performance (unless you are very skilled at purchasing those seats...).

9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?
The only counterpoint about the film's appeal is that it prevents the "audience member" from choosing who or what they wish to focus upon. Because CATS is an ensemble production, smaller actions are taking place away from the major ones. Fans often attempt to see a show two or more times just to watch different viewpoints of the numbers just for this reason. Otherwise, the film remains somewhat true to the stage version.

Respectfully,
Rumblepurr
The Writer Cat.

[SapphireNight]

Okay, I'm just collecting in your replies now.
I've got to say, thanks so much all you guys who did this for me, youve given me a lot of information, so thats good news for my uni project.
Big thanks to Rumblepurr for your detailed answers, they were so informative, and its nice to see a familiar name after I've been absent from the forum for so long.
So thank you everyone who has responded, you have been a great help!

ps, is anyone interested in seeing the final project, once its done? It presented as an informative poster- so its quite visual, as well as information loaded, so I can put up a picture once its finished.

[Flash Kid]

1. They're both good, but I like the stage better.
2. I saw the film first.
3. I prefer the stage.
4. The CATS film had a lot of cuts and a few of the lead's voices were dubbed. And Growltiger's Last Stand was cut out. Also in the DVD, the keys of the songs were somehow changed.
5. Actually, the musical wasn't adapted from a movie. It was adapted from a collection of poems by T.S. Elliot.
6. I saw both
7. I fell it's trying to appease older musical lovers because there were a few older people in there.
8. John Mills as Gus and Elaine Paige as Grizabella.
9. I certainly do. It's very close to the London version, but the cuts ruin it.

[Jelliclaw]

Here's mine, for CATS.


1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both?
Both.

2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first?
The stage version.

3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more?
Probably the stage version.

4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work?
I dislike the cut songs from the film, I think they should have been included.

5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted?
No, sorry.

6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why?
Not applicable to me.

7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience?
Probably both, it has something for everyone.

8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can).
Unsure.

9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself?
Yes, it's true to itself.

[Alonza0]

For Cats
1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both? both
2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first? I saw the film first.
3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more? There are aspects of both that I like, however I'd have to say I like the video version more. I like how there's so much going on that every time I watch it I see some new dimension. In the stage version, you can only see one thing going on and you miss the background action, but in the movie, you see all of the action.
4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work? I think the film is a pretty good representation of the stage version.
5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted? The camera angles - I like them.
6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why? Saw both.
7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience? I think it's trying to appeal to... everybody. It can be enjoyed by both fans and newbies.
8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can). Oh the camera angles, the energy of the cast, the attention to details, the ellaborate dance scenes...
9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself? No, I don't think so. The musical is still pretty true to itself in my opinion.

For The Phantom of the Opera
1. Are you a fan of the film, stage version, or both? Stage version
2. Did you see the film first, or the stage version first? Stage version
3. Which do you prefer/enjoy more? Stage version
4. How do you feel the film compares to the stage version? Eg, changes made- are they warranted; do they work? The film cannot hold a candle to the stage version. It's a disgrace.
5. Do you have any other comments on the way the musical was adapted? It was terrible. I liked the scenery, but that was about it.
6. If you haven’t seen one version (ie, only the film, or only the stage version), are you interested in seeing the other? And why? Saw both
7. Do you feel the film is trying to appeal to a wider/film/more commercial audience, or to the musical’s fan based audience? It's definately trying to adapt to a wider film audience.
8. Briefly, can you describe how it tries to appeal to this audience (if you can). They brought in a man known for his movie acting to play the Phantom even though he couldn't sing. Not to mention the Phantom isn't supposed to be attractive, but they turned him into a sex symbol. The costumes were altered to center more on the sex appeal of the actors and actresses.
9. Do you think that the methods used to appeal to that audience get in the way of what the core of the musical is in itself? Ie, is the musical still being true to itself? Yes, I do. The audience member is supposed to relate to the Phantom and identify with him because of his tragedy, not because he's hot. Christine, the heroine, should have come across as modest, young and confused, but yet they have her wearing skimpy costumes. How can she be the innocent, modest Christine that we are supposed to pity if she's acting like a slut?