> Hmmm...I'm not so sure that a Bat out of Hell musical
> needs a concerted publicity campaign just to tell people
> who Jim Steinman is. By that I mean I don't think it's
> necessary in order to make the show a success (and if it
> is a success, then the reverse will be true - the musical
> will have acted as the vehicle to get Jim's name the
> recognition it deserves).
This part of the discussion started when Ryan said that TDE would have been too much exposure for the Bat Musical. I'm saying it wouldn't and can only help in people identifying who Jim Steinman is and what he's done.
> What are people going to expect (in the UK) when they hear
> about a musical called 'Bat out of Hell'? Well, they heard
> about 'Mama Mia' and they made it a massive hit musical
> without expecting to see Abba perform or the story of
> Abba. Likewise 'We Will Rock You' and Queen. So, why would
> they expect a 'Bat out of Hell' musical to be about Meat
> Loaf?
You've totally misinterpretted what was said. No one said the Bat Musical was about Meat Loaf nor did they say Meat Loaf would be performing in it. What was said was that people will automatically associate Meat Loaf with Bat Out Of Hell: The Musical.
Why does that matter you may ask? Well...when Meat Loaf wassuing Jim for $50Million for the use of Bat Out Of Hell for TMIL, they came to an agreement that Meat could, so long as Meat had nothing to do with 'Jim Steinman's Bat Out Of Hell. So obviously it's important to Jim that he's associated more with Bat Out Of Hell: The Musical than what Meat Loaf is.
Queen and Abba by the way wrote their own songs, Meat Loaf didn't, well not any good ones, but a hell of a lot of people still think that he did.
|
