19,650 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 1, 2016 8:37:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2016 10:34:42 GMT
I caught a couple of clips this morning and on initial glance I wasn't bowled over, will reserve judgement though until i can see and watch the whole thing  |
|
|
|
Post by DebbieDoesDouglas(Hodge) on Feb 1, 2016 11:19:35 GMT
The bird playing rizzo looks like that old dude who is in into the heights and frank in rocky horror at the cinema recently! I'd assume he was her dad if it wasn't for the fact it says he died just before and not sure if the heights dude has children IF YOU GET WHAT IM SAYING
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Feb 1, 2016 12:10:59 GMT
I have just finished watching and whilst I admired the energy and commitment, it didn't quite work as a piece of television.
The constant present of the audience meant it never felt fully engaging. I know performers are lifted by crowd reaction - but that doesn't always make for good TV.
Some really bizarre choices in terms of staging. The Freddie My Love sequence really didn't work with the sense of the song. There was a lot of over-blown dialogue (mostly intended to help transitions between sets) but it made the whole thing last far too long.
The script was probably the weakest part of the event. They were trying to shoehorn in extra comedy such as Sandy's line about having no idea why people would want to watch amateurs dance live on TV. And it just didn't work.
Having said that, the new song for Frenchy was terrible. No sense of period style to it at all. Did nothing for character or plot - and was clearly there just because she is a 'name'
The casting was patchy in terms of age - nearly on a par with the movie version. But it wasn't too distracting.
I like the nods to the original with Doody and Frenchy reappearing.
A very mixed bag.
|
|
677 posts
|
Post by westendcub on Feb 1, 2016 12:53:06 GMT
Will be a interesting watch later this week, I actually haven't seen 'Grease' stage version since Dominion back in 1994!!
I must say it must have been very tough for Vanessa (Rizzo), handling the sad passing of her father just 24 hours before the live recording.
|
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 1, 2016 14:08:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2016 14:20:20 GMT
Call me shallow but frankly I'm only interested in the bits when Aaron Tveit is thrusting his hips. The more suggestively the better.
|
|
19,650 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 1, 2016 14:30:18 GMT
Is it possible to sing Hopelessly Devoted WITHOUT sounding like Olivia Newton John? I swear to God when I sing it myself it could actually be her. I look good in an Alice band too  |
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Feb 1, 2016 14:33:30 GMT
The general consensus seems to be positive and much better than the NBC live musicals. I'm sure ITV will be phoning Paramount to license this for a UK version at Christmas.
|
|
|
|
Post by DebbieDoesDouglas(Hodge) on Feb 1, 2016 14:53:47 GMT
So they just staged the film then? Wouldn't it have been cheaper and less creatively retarded to have not just shown the film? On the plus side I liked the bit when Danny sang into Sandys vagina. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2016 15:18:22 GMT
Well, no, they didn't *just* stage the film, there were some changes. And really, you're on a theatre website, do you not see the ridiculousness of saying you might as well watch the film rather than a new version with a wholly different cast? Surely if there's one thing theatre fans understand more than TV or film watchers it's the simple joy of seeing a different actor's take on a role you're already familiar with. |
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Feb 1, 2016 15:23:13 GMT
Given Paramount Television were producing and it's the version most people are familiar with, it's unsurprising it's closer to the film than the stage version.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2016 15:34:51 GMT
Call me shallow but frankly I'm only interested in the bits when Aaron Tveit is thrusting his hips. The more suggestively the better. I am totally with you on this one!!! |
|
2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Feb 1, 2016 15:49:34 GMT
Between feedback coming through from my US friends on Twitter and Facebook, I have literally no idea if this was good or not. They all seem relatively united on it being technically impressive, but I'm pretty sure that's not the same thing at all. I can't wait for this team to work on a televised musical of a show I actually like. This was a lot of fun, though. |
|
4,369 posts
|
Post by Michael on Feb 1, 2016 15:54:59 GMT
The next should be Hairspray, right?
|
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Feb 1, 2016 15:58:39 GMT
The next should be Hairspray, right? NBC are doing that but they're currently sorting out rights with Warner Bros as New Line own the screen rights. |
|
97 posts
|
Post by aksis on Feb 1, 2016 16:14:40 GMT
Call me shallow but frankly I'm only interested in the bits when Aaron Tveit is thrusting his hips. The more suggestively the better. Truth!! And I was curious if his hair would be out of place at some point. |
|
2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Feb 1, 2016 16:16:12 GMT
Are you kidding? If he'd tipped over in that golf cart, the hair would've been what saved him.
|
|
378 posts
|
Post by Ade on Feb 1, 2016 16:41:16 GMT
Call me shallow but frankly I'm only interested in the bits when Aaron Tveit is thrusting his hips. The more suggestively the better. The best part of that three minutes was the backwards roll/springing back into standing up thing he did. Arms. *has a moment* |
|
|
|
Post by DebbieDoesDouglas(Hodge) on Feb 1, 2016 16:49:55 GMT
Well, no, they didn't *just* stage the film, there were some changes. And really, you're on a theatre website, do you not see the ridiculousness of saying you might as well watch the film rather than a new version with a wholly different cast? Surely if there's one thing theatre fans understand more than TV or film watchers it's the simple joy of seeing a different actor's take on a role you're already familiar with. New forum same old people saying your views are ridiculous if not exactly like their own. Pooh sticks to you. |
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 1, 2016 17:26:19 GMT
If they'd put the film on a few people would have watched it. By making a big fancy live 'event', millions of people watch it, they can charge sh*tloads for advertising, loads of actors and crew get jobs, and everyone's happy. So yeah that's why they don't just show the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 1, 2016 17:27:37 GMT
That pesky asterisk is back, squashing my emotional outbursts. Titting thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by DebbieDoesDouglas(Hodge) on Feb 1, 2016 17:41:18 GMT
I did say 'creativity' not 'capitalism'
|
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 1, 2016 17:51:25 GMT
I did say 'creativity' not 'capitalism' And I said it gives a load of actors and crew jobs. Plus potentially inspires people to be interested in musicals/performance. That's creative. I don't really understand the problem. It's not like they broadcast ISIS Beheadings: Live! for three hours. x |
|
|
|
Post by DebbieDoesDouglas(Hodge) on Feb 1, 2016 18:05:09 GMT
I did say 'creativity' not 'capitalism' And I said it gives a load of actors and crew jobs. Plus potentially inspires people to be interested in musicals/performance. That's creative. I don't really understand the problem. It's not like they broadcast ISIS Beheadings: Live! for three hours. x No problem, Pantyletdown, just said I thought it looked exactly like the film and they should have just put that on instead. I suppose they could of done a new take on Grease or a complete original production but I guess most people wud have blinded themselves with the shock of it all Merry Christmas |
|
