not logged in
Posted by:  |
|
| But I actually think Meat shouldn’t have any involvement at all. I used to, many years ago, but then I realized. I look at "Bat" as a genuine theatre piece and "Bat" came out of "Neverland". There have been plenty of different actors who, e.g. played Curly in "Oklahoma!", Professor Higgins in "My Fair Lady", Jesus in "Jesus Christ Superstar", Benjamin Barker in "Sweeney Todd", Count von Krolock in "Tanz der Vampire" etc. etc. All Jim's greatest songs are supposed to go back to "Neverland" anyway and Meat Loaf wasn’t the only person to sing them. If you want to listen to Meat’s interpretation, there are plenty of copies of "Bat" still available out there just like you can listen to Michael Crawford in the Original Cast Recording of "Phantom" while David Shannon plays the role in the West End. Any Meat Loaf involvement, for me, should be like this: "Based on the two successful albums featuring vocals from rock legend Meat Loaf". Meat turns up to opening night, says Hi and goes home. The next time we see him with Jim is when they record the proper Bat conclusion. If only...(it was so, these are the loneliest words I know...)
> At the risk of dredging up a three and a half year old (at > least) argument; Meat showed quite litigiously (sp?) that > he considered Bat out of Hell to be 'his'. So there is a > legal dimension to all this that must be observed lest all > the lawyers get their panties in a bunch and everyone ends > up sueing everyone else's Grandma... yawn. But from a > creative point of view; we all know how big Meat's ego is, > for better or for worse, so for the show's independence > and Jim's reputation it'd be a good idea to keep Meat's > involvement to a minimum, perhaps endorsing from afar or > 'bigging up' Jim. > > Just my pocket change'orth. > > > > Funny how (lots of) people will always think of Meat & Jim > > > as a 'double-act', which I think the musical producers > > > should bear in mind when it comes to promo? > > > > I think that the Meat Loaf Factor is one of the most > > difficult things the producers are facing. Especially when > > you consider that the musical is called "Jim Steinman's > > Bat Out Of Hell: The Musical". Of course people are going > > to think of Meat when they see it advertised. Of course a > > lot of people who buy tickets are going to be Meat fans. > > The show is "Jim Steinman's" but, as you say, people see > > them as a double-act. "Jim Steinman's" means that Jim is > > the creator (and it really is his vision - music, lyrics, > > story, book, speeches, detailed set descriptions, etc.) > > but there will be an inevitable Meat Loaf association with > > anything called "Bat Out Of Hell". I think the producers > > problem is: do they include him in the publicity or do > > they try to keep him completely out of the picture. Which > > would be better for the show at the end of the day? Maybe > > some posters have an opinion about this dilema. If they > > include him in publicity, they might sell a lot of > > tickets. They could do a casting show on telly (for > > bikers, stunt people, Peter and Hook) and make Meat one of > > the judges. But on the other hand, the show is a vision > > that Jim has nurtured since he was hanging out with Barry > > at Amherst (long before he met Meat). Jim may decide that > > Meat's inclusion in the publicity will somehow take away > > from the fact that this is "Jim Steinman's Bat Out Of > > Hell". Its a very difficult problem. Perhaps they should > > at least invite Meat to opening night. > > | |
