| re: An example of this Neverland thing/argument |
|
Posted by:
 |
Smeghead 10:20 pm UTC 04/30/08 |
| In reply to: |
re: An example of this Neverland thing/argument - Jsteinfan 12:14 pm UTC 04/30/08 |
|
There is a difference, I think. But it isn't important that they sell it as Neverland... just that they don't hide it... That said, I think it would be awesome to sell it as Neverland. Because otherwise, Unlike Rent and West Side Story it will simply be seen as a Meat Loaf Jukebox musical.
> Rent = la boheme
>
> I totally Agree w/ Pud and Ry on this. Wow. must be a
> full moon
>
> > Also West Side Story is based on Romeo & Juliet, and Kiss
> > Me Kate is inspired by Taming Of The Shrew, without ever
> > advertising the fact, people figured it out.
> >
> > > "The Lion King" is "Hamlet" but it's not advertised as
> > > "Hamlet". "Bat Out Of Hell" is "Peter Pan" but it's not
> > > advertised as "Peter Pan". It's advertised as "Bat Out Of
> > > Hell". The story is original enough and unique to Jim's
> > > vision that a) you don't have to call it "Bat Out Of Hell:
> > > Adventures In Neverland" and b) The audience will figure
> > > it out on their own. I think most connoisseurs of the "Bat
> > > Out Of Hell" albums realize that it was originally
> > > intended as a Neverland musical. I haven't seen one
> > > history book that's failed to mention this.
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: An example of this Neverland thing/argument - Jsteinfan 12:14 pm UTC 04/30/08 |
| Next: |
re: An example of this Neverland thing/argument - Jsteinfan 02:26 pm UTC 05/01/08 |
|
| Thread: |
|