not logged in
| re: Neverland & Smeg's Revamp | |
Posted by:  |
Smeghead 12:42 pm UTC 05/18/08 |
| In reply to: | Neverland & Smeg's Revamp - Scaramouche 12:29 am UTC 05/18/08 |
I think what Jim did really keeps the show close to Peter with an update. Peter just flies into Wendy's window with Tinkerbell... There was no need to slow down the story flow with an elaborate plan to break in. > > Why does Tink suddenly get upset after the ‘wedding’? I think I explained that in my script. His jealousy of Peter's love for Wendy. Exactly the same as in the original Peter Pan story. > Finale of Act 1 is a bit lame. Would they all give up that > easily? Peter gives up to save his friend... makes total sense to me. > I think ‘It’s All Coming Back To Me Now’ would work well > (in a new script) as the penultimate song; Baal returns to > entice (the older) Wendy back to Neverland once more. > The last song should be ‘We’re Still The Children We Once > Were’, Wendy & Peter return to Neverland and are greeted > by the Lost Boys & Golden Girls. That strays too far from the original Peter Pan concept and the whole point of Jim's script... Youth being a fleeting thing that is a great loss when it leaves. > > To send the audience out on a less sombre note, you could > encore (after the curtain calls) with a reprise of ‘Bat’ > or maybe ‘Rock & Roll Dreams Come Through’ (eg - We Will > Rock You doing Bo Rhap & Mamma Mia doing a medley; it > seems to be the done thing nowadays)? My point is that Neverland had something that todays commercial musicals lack. A deep meaning. I don't see any point in diluting that. If you really feel the audience needs to go out on a happy note you could use R&R dreams as a song Peter sings to Jane but it basically becomes a reprise of the Bad For Good scene... the only reason to do it would be to leave the audience "happy", as it would add nothing to the story. I prefer Jim's original ending... but that is because it has more meaning. > Real nice effort and your dialogue/song choices really > integrate well into the script (apart from the Christian > Video Dating stuff, which is naff). Sorry. The whole point of adding the video dating was to try and figure out why Jim had "The Want Ad" in act 2. I didn't want to remove things from Jim's script as much as have them make sense. This being the case I updated it to Video Dating as a newspaper publication didn't seem to fit the futuristic setting. SO in figuring out why Wendy would be on a dating site(or newspaper) after being taken from the Lost Boys and Peter the only thing that made sense was that her parents wanted her to find a "respectable boy"... someone like dear old dad... to make her forget Peter and his wanton ways. This being the case it seemed that her parents would hook her up on a "christian" dating site... but that didn't work with the text of the Want Ad... so it became a Satiric Piece... commenting on the hypocrisy of religion. I felt it worked quite well... > > To summarise, I don’t think ‘Neverland’ will be anything > like ‘Bat’, as it is just too bizarre to get investment > and be a commercial success. ‘Bat’ will have elements of > ‘Neverland’, but a totally different story. Unfortunately I agree. However, I feel that Neverland is a deep and meaningful piece... I fear that making it commercial will tear out it's soul and make it just another love story action piece. > > In regards Jim giving you rights, I don’t think he will > let you do a ‘Neverland’ until ‘Bat’ has been up & running > for at least a couple of years? I don't think he'll ever let me do it. > > If he ever does give you certain rights, I think the > script (albeit re-worked & condensed) could work best > (bearing in mind your budget) as a 4-handed costumed > cabaret (Historian/Pianist, Hook, Peter & Wendy), with > maybe a keyboard player for backing? I would have no desire to do it as a caberet. I find caberet boring. You don't need a big budget to do things onstage. The original show had no budget. I've seen stagings of big shows done on very small budgets. It just requires an audience not expecting to see Broadway. I have friends who won't watch older British Sci Fi because the sets and costumes and special effects aren't as good as American stuff (not really the case in the last few years)... but I can enjoy Dr. Who or The Tomorrow People or Red Dwarf, even if it doesn't match Star Trek or Battlestar Galactica in terms of budget. The best productions of certain mujsicals I've seen were not always the ones with big budgets... many times they were smaller budgets but better direction. Thanks for all your comments. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Neverland & Smeg's Revamp - Jsteinfan 01:02 am UTC 05/20/08 |
| Next: | re: Neverland & Smeg's Revamp - Scaramouche 11:05 am UTC 05/19/08 |
| Thread: |
|