| Operas Vs. Musicals | |
|
Posted by: |
steven_stuart 04:06 pm UTC 09/22/08 |
| Smeghead wrote (about DOTV):"Nothing wrong with Jim's translatioins of the songs. The problem was Jim's manager convincing him to change it from a Sung Through Musical to a "Joke"-fest with songs and dialogue." DOTV should be a sung through if it opens in the West End. Like Les Miz. Although with Jim's "Wagnerian Rock", it would almost certainly qualify as a great opera. That's why Polanski (who hates rock)wanted to direct it. The same is true for BOOH. I am sure that Jim has written a really good book for it (and he may end up collaborating with a book writer). But it seems almost unnatural for one of the greatest lyricists ever to be writing dialogue. Jim has the talent of both George and Ira Gershwin. If he decided to turn BOOH into a sung through it would be a fantastic work of art. The extra lyrics would almost certainly contain memorable gems. The successful sung throughs of Andrew Lloyd Webber are not really operas. Jesus Christ Superstar and Cats (for example)are linked pop songs. Aspects Of Love was the closest he came to opera but the lyrics were boring and it bombed. Jim is quite different because he writes amazing lyrics and operatic rock. I think only Pete Townsend is in Jim's league. And I have read that Jim is a fan of both The Who and Tommy. Tommy was a hit album twice with different versions. A sung through BOOH would stand a better chance of being a hit album than a collection of BOOH songs by various performers. The same with DOTV (which is already a sung through - so I hope any West End producers will keep it that way and it might eventually have a second chance at Broadway). | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Is Mr.Egg back on the board? - tragichippy 04:29 pm UTC 09/23/08 |
| Next: | re: Operas Vs. Musicals - wordnix 04:56 pm UTC 09/22/08 |
| Thread: |
|