not logged in
| re: BOOHM Preceptions | |
Posted by:  |
RadioMaster 05:22 pm UTC 08/28/08 |
| In reply to: | re: BOOHM Preceptions - Smeghead 05:07 pm UTC 08/28/08 |
> No as a journalist it is your job to properly impart the > facts. What Journalism school did you go to? You don't > say it is a Meat Loaf musical when Meat has Fuck All to do > with it. Hold on a sec! I wasnt saying it should be promoted as a "Meat Loaf Musical", I just said that you cant expect everybody talking about it to deny that the name Meat Loaf is connected to the project. If you must drag Meat's name in to make it > understandable to the audience then you can say it is a > Musical that uses the songs Jim Steinman wrote for Meat > Loaf's Bat Out Of Hell Album. I'd be happy with that. > Calling it a Meat Loaf musical makes people believe Meat > is writing it or appearing in it... neither of which is > true. Or that it uses the songs 99% of the public associate with Meat Loaf. > > Just look at Jim's past projects: BOOH: Meat, WDTW: ALW, > > TDV: Polanksi. > > All successful. TDV extremely so. WDTW moderately so... > it did run for like 2 years on the west end and was > something like the longest running show at the Aldrych. Misunderstanding here! I just said that the promotion always relies on the most famous person involved with the project: Bat out of Hell (musical) - Meat Loaf Whistle down the Wind - Andrew Lloyd Webber Tanz der Vampire - Roman Polanski In all (press) coverage Jim's name is always mentioned second. So (as I said before) it would be stupid not to promote the BOOH musical with the name Meat Loaf. If Jim doesnt want that he shouldnt call it Bat out of Hell, but Neverland. Now you say calling it BOOH will grant more publicity, but if want the BOOH fame you have to deal with the Loaf as well. > > You cant call everyone an idiot who's not as big a > > Steinfan as you are. > > I didn't. I called the Journalists who didn't bother to > do a tiny bit of research idiots. > I agree. Although most of them write numerous articles a day. go to a newspaper office and take a look how they work. If it's not a background story with weeks of preparation, you cant expect them to know, let alone mention, every single fact about a topic they have to deal with maybe an hour, and then move on to the next. > (and btw as a journalist, that sort > > of offended me) > > Then you need to get a thicker skin. As a journalist you > should be offended by other journalists sullying the name > of your profession by putting out such shoddy journalism. > was only half-seriously here. My point is you shouldnt make a whole profession bad and judge them on stereotypes. May I ask, what execlty is your problem in the BOOH press coverage so far? Because I (from the 'professional' point of view) cant really see a flaw in it so far. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: BOOHM Preceptions - Smeghead 05:07 pm UTC 08/28/08 |
| Next: | re: BOOHM Preceptions - Dr_Rock 06:46 am UTC 08/29/08 |
| Thread: |
|