| Do we actually know what was and what was not Crawford's fault? |
|
Posted by:
 |
Ali 01:31 am UTC 12/05/08 |
| In reply to: |
So quick to blame Michael Crawford, However - rockfenris2005 01:15 am UTC 12/05/08 |
|
I'm a bit of a novice here so, just as a quick survey, does anyone know who's idea any of the following were?
That whole first scene with the mushrooms
(by the end of it I was hoping that some of them would turn out to be poisonous)
The dancing garlic
(shudder)
The Italian accent
Madame von-Krolock
(what the hell was that all about?!)
The bat
(not necessarily a bad idea but very badly executed)
Various misguided attempts to add comic lines in places where the general tone of the thing is supposed to be genuine pathos, creating a sort of mixed up tapestry of emotion in which the audience have no idea whether they're supposed to be laughing or not. (This was probably the biggest problem I had with it).
You got the impression that every comic line that got improvised in rehersals (by a cast who'd read the thing forty times and had lost all sense of the emotion of it all), was somehow allowed to make it into the musical.
I'm genuinely interested to know, does anyone know exactly how much of this came from Crawford and how much was other people.
And I do agree with the point about the production team and especially the director having a responsibility to rein Crawford in. I still think he's a tw*t though.
Ali
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
So quick to blame Michael Crawford, However - rockfenris2005 01:15 am UTC 12/05/08 |
| Next: |
re: Do we actually know what was and what was not Crawford's fault? - Smeghead 11:52 am UTC 12/05/08 |
|
| Thread: |
|