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

Least Favorite Sondheim Show
http://musicals.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=89&t=73443
Page 4 of 6

Author:  RainbowJude [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:46 am ]
Post subject:  Whatever...

I'm not interested in your sarcasm and really wish that if you are as upset by this as you claim to be, so upset that you don't want to discuss the topic with me any more, that you wouldn't. You clearly can't put together an argument that supports your point of view, so you'd rather attack me or my style of posting or anything else but the topic at hand instead. I'm not interested in that and it's not what I'm here for.

Author:  EricMontreal22 [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:02 pm ]
Post subject: 

Passion is the Sondheim show that's closest to my heart. Few pieces of theatre really grab and gut wrenchingly move me the way it does. So I have a huge bias and freely admit that the fact I get it so personally makes me think things like--if someone doesn't like it they just find it too emotionally honest and that scares them, etc.

That said I knwo we all have different tastes and it's not to everyone's--but to call the show badly wreitten IMHO is just not true.

Author:  EricMontreal22 [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

LeocadiaBegbick wrote:
[
Well for someone who is so concerned about audience contact, the score certainly distances itself from the audience. Also, sophisticated is not necessarily better. We can all agree that a score to a musical does not need to be easily compartmentalized or "singable" in order to be good, but a score that is sophisticated for the sake of being sophisticated but does not soar or grab the audience is not going to serve the play well. Being technically well structured and sophisticated isn't enough to make it a good score.


As you so rightly said this is a highly personal matter. But I have to disagree--i thinkt he score is gorgeously rapturous. It's like opera but with good lyrics lol. I also think it is immediately accessible in a way--how it just kinda washes over an audience with its, pardon me, passion. And I think it soars in so many ways (some of these small like the use of the background piano medley which is reiterated just before Giorgio sings of his love to Fosca)

Author:  dolbinau [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:10 pm ]
Post subject: 

What does "badly written" mean anyway?

I think the only definition I can come up with is: a show that doesn't achieve what it intends to.

Author:  RainbowJude [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:29 pm ]
Post subject:  A bit limiting...

dolbinau wrote:
What does "badly written" mean anyway? I think the only definition I can come up with is: a show that doesn't achieve what it intends to.

There's the wider context of dramaturgy to consider. Anyone can say they've achieved what they intended in the writing of a show, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a good piece of work.

Author:  Disney-Bway27 [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:36 pm ]
Post subject: 

Badly written could also be technically written poorly, in terms of score and script, which we know isn't true for any Sondheim shows. I'm assuming in this case, LeocadiaBegbick meant it in dolbinau's definition.

Author:  RainbowJude [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Yip yip...

Disney-Bway27 wrote:
Badly written could also be technically written poorly, in terms of score and script, which we know isn't true for any Sondheim shows. I'm assuming in this case, LeocadiaBegbick meant it in dolbinau's definition.

Whichever way you look at it, saying or implying that Passion (as LeocadiaBegbick does) is badly written is, like Eric says, just not a true appraisal of the show's merits.

Author:  Disney-Bway27 [ Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:41 pm ]
Post subject: 

That's true. I obviously haven't delved too deeply into Passion but from what I'd understand, it's not poorly written under either definition.

Author:  shakalakababy [ Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:31 am ]
Post subject: 

Sorry but I would say Passion is my least favorite show of Sondheim. I don't think it's bad by any means whatsoever. It just doesn't capture my interests and engage me as much as the rest of his shows do. So no one attack me because I do acknowledge that it's a good show, it just doesn't do it for me as much as his other shows do.

Author:  thegirlfromack [ Sun Jun 28, 2009 5:32 am ]
Post subject: 

Not a big fan of Merrily We Roll Along. I'm not saying I don't like it... just not a big fan of this work in comparison to his others.

Author:  LeocadiaBegbick [ Sun Jun 28, 2009 8:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
Badly written could also be technically written poorly, in terms of score and script, which we know isn't true for any Sondheim shows. I'm assuming in this case, LeocadiaBegbick meant it in dolbinau's definition.'



Regardless of what my views on the show are, nothing gives RainbowJude or anyone else the right to insult or treat me condescendingly. I stated my problems with the show in earlier posts and while I have nothing against anyone disagreeing with my assessments, I will not tolerate being treated with such disrespect. RainbowJude's behavior is nothing short of disgusting.

Author:  RainbowJude [ Sun Jun 28, 2009 8:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Oh please...

At least I haven't spent most of my time on this thread driving the discussion off topic. Put together a decent argument that supports your point of view and I'll hear it out with pleasure. I'm not interested in an argument that states that a show is bad based on whether somebody likes the show or not. Liking something, or disliking a musical, is a completely different thing from a critical appreciation of it.

Page 4 of 6 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/