I still don't understand the full story with DOTV. Steinman seems to have a whole different story than the Press did. Who instigated the changes? It looked like it was already going to be a different piece before Michael Crawford got involved. He just made things worse, I think.
I'll venture (waaay out, mind you) with my little theory. Steinman wasn't happy with the changes that were going to be made. However, he saw that he had an opportunity to stage his dream Broadway musical. "Batman" was also in development and everyone presumed that "Vampires" would have succeeded and helped greenlight "Batman". So Steinman wasn't *that* passionate about the whole thing (Of course not, his beloved show was in Vienna.) He started recycling anything & everything to get the job done, half-hoping it would succeed somehow.
I don't know. Ken Mandelbaum should uncover the whole sorry saga. All we have is a bunch of misleading articles and PAN reviews across the world from that period. That's all. The only thing that comes close to telling the whole story is Michael Riedel's review. But he's full of shit, IMO.
I'm very torn about the virtues of a through-sung musical as opposed to those with dialogue. I think it all depends on the subject matter. Kunze is a visionary, and he's way ahead of everyone's time on Broadway. The Europeans are making the real theatre, not the Americans, IMO. Kunze's through-sung shows are amazing but I also love Steinman's dialogues. They're so weird and creepy and eerie.
|
