Musicals.Net
http://musicals.net/forums/

Does it follow the Bible?
http://musicals.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=62310
Page 2 of 3

Author:  krisavalon [ Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:52 pm ]
Post subject: 

Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
yes. there's nothing wrong at all with Superstar. if anything Godspell is the sacraligious one, but Christians are more willing to accept that, just because of the history and title of Jesus Christ Superstar. many have not seen a good production, but I encourage many doubters to see the Ted Neeley tour.


Man, I wish I could see that. I saw it with Ted Neeley and Carl Anderson (as I often boast) in 94, and it's one of the few things that I can truly, vividly remember from my childhood. I don't know that Godspell is sacrilegious, but I know I could never get into the music.

Author:  Peritombry [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:29 am ]
Post subject: 

It kind of makes me laugh when people complain about the show not showing the ressurection. The entire thing is from Judas' point of veiw and he hung himself before it happened. Of course he didn't see it. :lol:

Author:  Salome [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:51 am ]
Post subject: 

I think the original poster meant to talk about Tim Rice not ALW.. Rice wrote the show..ALW did the score.

Author:  Robinflamingo [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:05 am ]
Post subject: 

Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
yes. there's nothing wrong at all with Superstar. if anything Godspell is the sacraligious one, but Christians are more willing to accept that, just because of the history and title of Jesus Christ Superstar. many have not seen a good production, but I encourage many doubters to see the Ted Neeley tour.


I love the music to JCSuperstar. I have the original concept album because I'm old. I've known and loved the music since before most of you were born. It did NOT start out as a stage play, OR a movie, but a concept album. However, I have seen the movie and several versions of the stage show.

I love Godspell. I have the original album because I'm old. I've seen several productions of it, been in a couple and directed one.

Peritombry wrote:
It kind of makes me laugh when people complain about the show not showing the ressurection. The entire thing is from Judas' point of veiw and he hung himself before it happened. Of course he didn't see it. :lol:

Let me ask then how anything at all was seen after his death. If anything was seen, the resurrection could be seen. With your theory, the show should end abruptly at Judas' death.

I'm a Christian. Specifically, a Lutheran, so you won't think this is from a pentecostal point of view. The issue most "religious" people have with JCS is the lack of a resurrection. That's it. On the *original concept album* there is no resurrection and no indication of one.

As for people having more problems with Godspell, I'm at a loss for this one. All the songs are directly from hymnals, most notably the Episcopalian hymnal, and most of Jesus' lines are direct quotes from Matthew and a few bits from the OT prophesies. Act One is his ministry, and Act Two is the passion, with implied resurrection at the end.

Both came about during the Jesus Freak movement, and "traditional" Christians had problems with everything in those days.
This is the historical perspective from the inception of both works.
Thank you.

*gets her walker and thumps out of the thread*

Author:  Brother Marvin Hinten, S. [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:11 pm ]
Post subject: 

She's right. Also, both of them are very much Bible-based shows. In fact, for all the hemming and hawing about JCS being blasphemous, except for a few character pieces embellishing the characters of Judas and Mary Magdalene, and minor changes for purposes of plot (for example, Pilate having the dream instead of his wife, and much earlier in the show), it's closer to the Bible than people gave it credit for.

Author:  Peritombry [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:39 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm also religious but I still like the show. The final song isn't exactly realistic. It's more like a conclusion IMO. If that makes sense.

Author:  Jekkienumber24601 [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

krisavalon wrote:
Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
yes. there's nothing wrong at all with Superstar. if anything Godspell is the sacraligious one, but Christians are more willing to accept that, just because of the history and title of Jesus Christ Superstar. many have not seen a good production, but I encourage many doubters to see the Ted Neeley tour.


Man, I wish I could see that. I saw it with Ted Neeley and Carl Anderson (as I often boast) in 94, and it's one of the few things that I can truly, vividly remember from my childhood. I don't know that Godspell is sacrilegious, but I know I could never get into the music.


Godspell takes the subject matter too lightly and often goes for slapstick and vaudvillie like fun rather than teach and let the message get across.

Author:  Robinflamingo [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:16 pm ]
Post subject: 

Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
krisavalon wrote:
Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
yes. there's nothing wrong at all with Superstar. if anything Godspell is the sacraligious one, but Christians are more willing to accept that, just because of the history and title of Jesus Christ Superstar. many have not seen a good production, but I encourage many doubters to see the Ted Neeley tour.


Man, I wish I could see that. I saw it with Ted Neeley and Carl Anderson (as I often boast) in 94, and it's one of the few things that I can truly, vividly remember from my childhood. I don't know that Godspell is sacrilegious, but I know I could never get into the music.


Godspell takes the subject matter too lightly and often goes for slapstick and vaudvillie like fun rather than teach and let the message get across.


And Herod's song is serious? I agree that Act One is lighthearted, but the slapstick and the vaudeville disappears for the most part in Act Two, which is the Passion.

Author:  Nettik [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:48 am ]
Post subject: 

Robinflamingo wrote:
Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
krisavalon wrote:
Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
yes. there's nothing wrong at all with Superstar. if anything Godspell is the sacraligious one, but Christians are more willing to accept that, just because of the history and title of Jesus Christ Superstar. many have not seen a good production, but I encourage many doubters to see the Ted Neeley tour.


Man, I wish I could see that. I saw it with Ted Neeley and Carl Anderson (as I often boast) in 94, and it's one of the few things that I can truly, vividly remember from my childhood. I don't know that Godspell is sacrilegious, but I know I could never get into the music.


Godspell takes the subject matter too lightly and often goes for slapstick and vaudvillie like fun rather than teach and let the message get across.


And Herod's song is serious? I agree that Act One is lighthearted, but the slapstick and the vaudeville disappears for the most part in Act Two, which is the Passion.


I personally can't sit through the first act of Godspell, it's too much "fun" for me and not enough just getting the message across. The second act's definitely more bearable. And other than "Herod's Song" in the second act, JCS definitely focuses on getting the message across, but "Herod's Song" makes for comic relief in the second act as things begin to get heated.

Author:  Robinflamingo [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:59 am ]
Post subject: 

I really wish you had seen our production of Godspell. The young man who played Jesus was so amazing - and truthfully, he has the bulk of the lines in Act One and they are nearly word for word from Matthew, so I imagine the production you've seen (or if you are basing it on the movie >ACK<) was probably pretty heavy on the added improvisations that many productions of Godspell get totally ruined by.

Author:  Jekkienumber24601 [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 9:01 am ]
Post subject: 

Nettik wrote:
Robinflamingo wrote:
Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
krisavalon wrote:
Jekkienumber24601 wrote:
yes. there's nothing wrong at all with Superstar. if anything Godspell is the sacraligious one, but Christians are more willing to accept that, just because of the history and title of Jesus Christ Superstar. many have not seen a good production, but I encourage many doubters to see the Ted Neeley tour.


Man, I wish I could see that. I saw it with Ted Neeley and Carl Anderson (as I often boast) in 94, and it's one of the few things that I can truly, vividly remember from my childhood. I don't know that Godspell is sacrilegious, but I know I could never get into the music.


Godspell takes the subject matter too lightly and often goes for slapstick and vaudvillie like fun rather than teach and let the message get across.


And Herod's song is serious? I agree that Act One is lighthearted, but the slapstick and the vaudeville disappears for the most part in Act Two, which is the Passion.


I personally can't sit through the first act of Godspell, it's too much "fun" for me and not enough just getting the message across. The second act's definitely more bearable. And other than "Herod's Song" in the second act, JCS definitely focuses on getting the message across, but "Herod's Song" makes for comic relief in the second act as things begin to get heated.


At least Jesus was sent to Herod, he demanded miracles and mocked Jesus and sent him back. Godspell skims over all of this.

Author:  Jekkienumber24601 [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 9:03 am ]
Post subject: 

Robinflamingo wrote:
I really wish you had seen our production of Godspell. The young man who played Jesus was so amazing - and truthfully, he has the bulk of the lines in Act One and they are nearly word for word from Matthew, so I imagine the production you've seen (or if you are basing it on the movie >ACK<) was probably pretty heavy on the added improvisations that many productions of Godspell get totally ruined by.


I know it's based off of Mathew. I just think the music doesn't deserve the script in that show. Jesus' lines are ok. It's how he makes everything a game makes it take longer to get to the next song and often isn't really funny as intended but childeshly annoying.

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/