musictheatre00
|
Sequels to MusicalsAre they do-able? If so how would you make it do-able?And what sequels would you make?
I think a musical in long parts like sequels could work. But There would have to be one overlying problem that never gets solved until the end of the last part, like a musical in four parts, with each part released every couple of years. And the fun thing is that it could have reprises from earlier shows and totally new songs, maybe songs that change in style as time moves own in a show, like how the Harry Pottermovies have been getting darker BUT NO HARRY POTTER MUSICAL...EVER!
|
PappyCat
|
In my opinion Sequels only work if they are complementary to the first and are completely stand alone. They don't finish the story, they just add to it. The first needs to come to a satisfactory ending, and the second needs to develope it's characters just as much as the first did (in case someone sees only the first, or sees only the second.)
This isn't like movies where you can go out and rent the first one if you missed it, or just need a refresher. Also, the actors will probably be different.
|
musictheatre00
|
| PappyCat wrote: | In my opinion Sequels only work if they are complementary to the first and are completely stand alone. They don't finish the story, they just add to it. The first needs to come to a satisfactory ending, and the second needs to develope it's characters just as much as the first did (in case someone sees only the first, or sees only the second.)
This isn't like movies where you can go out and rent the first one if you missed it, or just need a refresher. Also, the actors will probably be different. |
good point
|
JeffF
|
Generally, sequels have not worked. In fact, theyv'e often been disastrous, as in "Bring Back Birdie".
I saw "Annie 2" before it was "Annie Warbucks" when it toured in Washington on its long road to New York and the end of Act I was the only time I've ever heard an audience boo! Yes, it really was that bad. The second act wasn't as awful, but by then half the audience had left. By the time it got to New York, the whole script and most of the songs from DC had been replaced.
Read Ken Mandlebaum's section called "Don't Do Sequels" in Not Since Carrie and you'll see more reasons not to attempt them.
|
Salome
|
both Annie WAARBUCKS AND bRING BACK bIRDIE WERE BIG FLOPS.
|
sopranodespair
|
No. I just dont think it could work. I usually dont even like movie sequels, sometimes, but not usually
|
musictheatre00
|
How about a musical spin-off, about a small character in a musical who makes a big impression,but we don't really find out much about them?
|
windscreen
|
I think pappycat is spot on. We are following up A song for Europe with For the love of Hannah Same family but different story set two years on.....
|
jackissensational
|
So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea?
|
bigballinick91
|
| jackissensational wrote: | | So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea? |
Who decided Phantom of the Opera was a good idea?
|
sopranodespair
|
| bigballinick91 wrote: | | jackissensational wrote: | | So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea? |
Who decided Phantom of the Opera was a good idea? |
[list=]
Burnnn...
Actually, I like Phantom, but that was a great comeback[/list]
|
Set_Buildin_Dad
|
| bigballinick91 wrote: | | jackissensational wrote: | | So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea? |
Who decided Phantom of the Opera was a good idea? |
The folks who have grossed over 600 million dollars on Broadway alone (not to mention London, tours, etc.) probably think it was a pretty good idea.
Edit: To clarify further, Wikipedia lists worldwide grosses as 3.3 billion dollars. Wish I had done such lousy job!
|
lottielou22
|
Nunsense has, like, 27 million sequels, doesn't it?? Or maybe just 5.
|
Mistress
|
| jackissensational wrote: | | So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea? |
Webber, evidently...probably because the novely was based directly off of the musical, so it didn't require him to put much work to actually writing a story.
|
BroadwayObssessed
|
| musictheatre00 wrote: | | How about a musical spin-off, about a small character in a musical who makes a big impression,but we don't really find out much about them? |
Wicked seems to be doing pretty well.
|
musictheatre00
|
| BroadwayObssessed wrote: | | musictheatre00 wrote: | | How about a musical spin-off, about a small character in a musical who makes a big impression,but we don't really find out much about them? |
Wicked seems to be doing pretty well. |
I NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT!  
|
Kiwi
|
| lottielou22 wrote: | | Nunsense has, like, 27 million sequels, doesn't it?? Or maybe just 5 |
So, 27 million give or take, 27 million?
|
Not Dead Yet
|
| Set_Buildin_Dad wrote: | | bigballinick91 wrote: | | jackissensational wrote: | | So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea? |
Who decided Phantom of the Opera was a good idea? |
The folks who have grossed over 600 million dollars on Broadway alone (not to mention London, tours, etc.) probably think it was a pretty good idea.
Edit: To clarify further, Wikipedia lists worldwide grosses as 3.3 billion dollars. Wish I had done such lousy job! |
Wow. Impressive.
Too bad I could care less about how much money a musical makes. Art isn't about who sells more tickets.
|
Set_Buildin_Dad
|
| Not Dead Yet wrote: | | Set_Buildin_Dad wrote: | | bigballinick91 wrote: | | jackissensational wrote: | | So who decided Phantom of Manhattan would be a good idea? |
Who decided Phantom of the Opera was a good idea? |
The folks who have grossed over 600 million dollars on Broadway alone (not to mention London, tours, etc.) probably think it was a pretty good idea.
Edit: To clarify further, Wikipedia lists worldwide grosses as 3.3 billion dollars. Wish I had done such lousy job! |
Wow. Impressive.
Too bad I could care less about how much money a musical makes. Art isn't about who sells more tickets. |
I agree, but someone must like it. If not, they wouldn't pay to see it. BTW - I have thoroughly enjoyed POtO. I'll reserve judgement on the sequel until I see it.
I do find that people tend to bash financially successful endeavors. What makes good art is in the eye (or ear, or experience) of the viewer. It seems to me to be awfully elitest to dismiss the approval of so many as being irrelevant. You may find it not to your taste, but that doesn't make it bad.
|
Not Dead Yet
|
| Set_Buildin_Dad wrote: |
You may find it not to your taste, but that doesn't make it bad. |
Which is what a lot of people fail to understand.
I don't like Phantom, for many many reasons. I usually don't care if you do or don't, as long as you're educated and know why you like it.
I used to just "like" certain musicals for no reason. Until I realized that I didn't really like them, I only pretended to because it was all I knew. Now, I know better, and I know what about a show makes me like it as opposed to just.. "liking" it.
And I do hate to be closed minded, but I've already decided I wouldn't like Phantom of Manhattan. Sorry, can't help it.
|
musictheatre00
|
Speaking of the value of art, anyone read The Picture of Dorian Gray
|
Not Dead Yet
|
| musictheatre00 wrote: | | Speaking of the value of art, anyone read The Picture of Dorian Gray |
*nods*
|
