not logged in
| re: Apollo Victoria For Sale | |
Posted by:  |
Smeghead 09:43 pm UTC 06/24/09 |
| In reply to: | re: Apollo Victoria For Sale - Scaramouche 06:51 pm UTC 06/24/09 |
> Who knows what the story/show (now) requires, and I think > it's probably a long way away from Neverland circa 1977, > which may be clouding your thinking? I'm sure it is... because the more it becomes about spectacle instead of story the more I think it will be unremarkable. > > > $15 million didn't make DOTV a success and spending a > > huge wad of cash to put a noisy load of flash on stage > > won't make Bat a success... it will just make it harder > to make back enough investment to make it a successful > > show. > > I would suggest $15-$20 million for a big musical is > probably average nowadays, and whether they waste it in a > 'noisy load of flash' remains to be same? $10 million is the budget for an average Broadway musical... and because that budget is so exorbitant producers will only sink money into known commodities like Musical versions of old movies (which is why that is all you see nowadays.) Because $10 million is difficult to make a profit on producers play it safe with commercial garbage like Legally Blonde the Musical. If shows would make due with smaller budgets then they could be successful more easily. > > The fact that Jim has mentioned Gerald Scarfe, ILM & Marc > Brickman gives me hope that the staging & spectacle > elements will be classy and complement the story? I always dread that kind of stuff until I see otherwise, because it generally is used to replace story rather than compliment it. > > Who says it's gonna be a crappy story? I just worry what they will do to something I love... DOTV did it to Tanz and I'd hate to see BOOH do it to Neverland. I'm hoping Jim has > written something great (he says he has), Like he'd say anything different? and at the same > time I think he's trying to push the boundaries of what > you can do inside a theatre. That's what I'm afraid of... Just tell a great story... > > It's all about getting the right balance between ground- > breaking spectacle and traditional stage show, and I hope > he manages to do it. I don't expect that will be the case. Ground breaking spectacle sounds like code words for shite...Hopefully it won't be. I know that 1977 Neverland can be improved... and would have to be made a bit more accessible to be a commercial success... but I'm afraid they will throw out everything that makes it truly amazing and turn it into something they THINK will be commercially successful. That is exactly what happened to Tanz... They stunt cast Crawford just like people suggest they should do with Rhydian... they tried to deny what they were and be something they were not... they tried to be the Producers with Bats... and they are very likely to do the exact same thing with Neverland... If it was a smaller show with less spectacle and a smaller budget you wouldn't have 10 producers with their hands in the stew insisting changes be made. It is the way things work in the art world. The more people that are investing in a project the more people you have telling you what needs to be done and they are seldom if ever right or artistic in any way. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Apollo Victoria For Sale - Scaramouche 06:51 pm UTC 06/24/09 |
| Next: | re: Apollo Victoria For Sale - Venom 06:28 pm UTC 06/24/09 |
| Thread: | |