|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 18, 2022 18:22:58 GMT
Please try and remember that Adam Kenwright is now a TB member. If we're all a bit more positive, maybe he'll give us an exclusive? Who cares! The show is terrible. Is this one you've actually seen, or one of those you write off as terrible but haven't actually seen yourself? Because that seems to happen frequently. |
|
1,186 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 18, 2022 18:34:21 GMT
I’ve seen it quite a few times. I originally saw it in Boston at it’s pre-Broadway tryout because I’m such a huge Alanis fan, and left the theater just…angry. It was, and continued to be a show with every single social issue you could think of, sometimes just thrown in there at the expense of what might have been a decent book. And they knew this well before going to Broadway yet made practically zero changes. So when it arrived and people said “Oh wow there’s way too much happening here”, they had only themselves to blame for not fixing a problem they were told had been there since day one.
I will touch on the trans issue that SO MUCH has been made of. This is one thing I’ve personally found to not make a lot of sense. The character originally had maybe one line about not wanting to be called Joanne and call them Jo. And I’m almost positive that’s about the extent of it, unless it had changed before or after I saw it in Boston. On Broadway, that line was gone. The “erasure” issue for the character is an issue that was never really there to begin with, as far as I know. The character was never explicitly a trans character and is still a queer character and can be taken any number of ways. For me (my opinion) this is an issue that people wanted to make an issue for the sole purpose of having something to be angry about. It’s the only thing I’ll really defend the show for.
|
|
|
|
Post by h86 on Feb 18, 2022 21:18:55 GMT
I’ve seen it quite a few times. I originally saw it in Boston at it’s pre-Broadway tryout because I’m such a huge Alanis fan, and left the theater just…angry. It was, and continued to be a show with every single social issue you could think of, sometimes just thrown in there at the expense of what might have been a decent book. And they knew this well before going to Broadway yet made practically zero changes. So when it arrived and people said “Oh wow there’s way too much happening here”, they had only themselves to blame for not fixing a problem they were told had been there since day one. I will touch on the trans issue that SO MUCH has been made of. This is one thing I’ve personally found to not make a lot of sense. The character originally had maybe one line about not wanting to be called Joanne and call them Jo. And I’m almost positive that’s about the extent of it, unless it had changed before or after I saw it in Boston. On Broadway, that line was gone. The “erasure” issue for the character is an issue that was never really there to begin with, as far as I know. The character was never explicitly a trans character and is still a queer character and can be taken any number of ways. For me (my opinion) this is an issue that people wanted to make an issue for the sole purpose of having something to be angry about. It’s the only thing I’ll really defend the show for. Have a look on YouTube for a video by Amy Lovatt who has done a couple of videos on the the erasure issue. Some pretty compelling evidence in there for me. |
|
1,186 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 18, 2022 21:27:47 GMT
Honestly, I don’t really need to watch any of those videos. The “erasure” issue in itself implies that there was malicious intent by the authors to directly exclude a trans character and that then leads to “it’s not the authors right to make changes to their work because it might upset some people”. If the character was written one way and then changed in previews then that’s not erasure, it’s rewrites. The book could have used a hell of a lot more of them, really. But I’m not into telling authors what they must include in their story.
|
|
1,186 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 18, 2022 21:32:27 GMT
Also, “erasure” is what a lot of films and stories do to trans characters when telling the history of Stonewall. Not about fictional characters who changed during out of town tryouts of a musical.
|
|
|
|
Post by h86 on Feb 18, 2022 21:32:50 GMT
Honestly, I don’t really need to watch any of those videos. The “erasure” issue in itself implies that there was malicious intent by the authors to directly exclude a trans character and that then leads to “it’s not the authors right to make changes to their work because it might upset some people”. If the character was written one way and then changed in previews then that’s not erasure, it’s rewrites. The book could have used a hell of a lot more of them, really. But I’m not into telling authors what they must include in their story. Yes rewrites happen, but when they deny the original character was non binary - which they did - then that suggests erasure to me….. |
|
1,186 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 18, 2022 21:37:40 GMT
The original character came off to me as confused the first time I saw it. But again, it’s a horribly written book so it could have been written any number of ways and nobody ever knew for sure. People will see what they want to see in it. That’s true with any sort of art. Bad art, good art, any art.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 18, 2022 23:11:11 GMT
So if I write a piece with a character who happens to be whatever the minority du jour is, find that the character isn't working within the piece, and need to cut them, I could get cancelled?
It makes sense not to write those parts at the moment, then. Doesn't seem worth the hassle if I need to make cuts at some point during the process, and can expect a baying mob of people desperate to be offended by something - anything - on Twitter and Reddit.
Absolutely ridiculous, borderline insane thinking from some very narrow minded people.
|
|
5,794 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 18, 2022 23:17:21 GMT
Who cares! The show is terrible. Is this one you've actually seen, or one of those you write off as terrible but haven't actually seen yourself? Because that seems to happen frequently. I’ve seen every show I have an opinion on thanks. Hence the opinion. I saw this in NYC . Sadly. |
|
|
|
Post by h86 on Feb 19, 2022 8:23:02 GMT
So if I write a piece with a character who happens to be whatever the minority du jour is, find that the character isn't working within the piece, and need to cut them, I could get cancelled? It makes sense not to write those parts at the moment, then. Doesn't seem worth the hassle if I need to make cuts at some point during the process, and can expect a baying mob of people desperate to be offended by something - anything - on Twitter and Reddit. Absolutely ridiculous, borderline insane thinking from some very narrow minded people. I’d argue that the narrow mindedness is the other way around. Imagine seeing yourself finally represented in a musical and then that gets completely erased by the time the show reaches Broadway with a denial that it ever existed. No-one is desperate to be offended, they want to be represented, like hundreds of musicals have for others in the past. |
|
19,650 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 19, 2022 8:23:51 GMT
Please try and remember that Adam Kenwright is now a TB member. If we're all a bit more positive, maybe he'll give us an exclusive? We have a number of producers who are members of the forum but we don’t tip-toe around their projects. |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 19, 2022 9:14:53 GMT
So if I write a piece with a character who happens to be whatever the minority du jour is, find that the character isn't working within the piece, and need to cut them, I could get cancelled? It makes sense not to write those parts at the moment, then. Doesn't seem worth the hassle if I need to make cuts at some point during the process, and can expect a baying mob of people desperate to be offended by something - anything - on Twitter and Reddit. Absolutely ridiculous, borderline insane thinking from some very narrow minded people. I’d argue that the narrow mindedness is the other way around. Imagine seeing yourself finally represented in a musical and then that gets completely erased by the time the show reaches Broadway with a denial that it ever existed. No-one is desperate to be offended, they want to be represented, like hundreds of musicals have for others in the past. But the point I am making is that by this logic, then every single show which doesn't feature (in this case) a trans character is "part of the problem" and should be equally attacked. Every single one. Any modern musical which hasn't written such a part into the show should be equally targeted by the cancel crowd (rebranded as "erasure movement" recently I've noticed) for their lack of inclusiveness. By having a trans (or non-binary) character and removing them - however justified their reason was artistically - they have actually done more harm than forgoing them in the first place. Can you see where I'm coming from with this? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Feb 19, 2022 10:29:40 GMT
Just my two penneth work..is this outrage only reserved for gender politics and identity? Because there must be a plethora of cut characters and storylines out there that people could take offence to because it’s ‘their tribe’ getting cut therefore less representation.(if any one has a better phrase for ‘their tribe’ please feel free to edit. It’s not Dances With Wolves and I don’t have my Rogets with me).
|
|
|
|
Post by h86 on Feb 19, 2022 15:43:53 GMT
Changing characters, storylines etc through the development of a new show is always going to happen and yes where do you draw the line when changes happen….. my issue with this show is that they denied the characters origins when they changed them which hurt a lot of people who relate to that character. Flat out denied - Jo was never on a gender journey when she blatantly was.
The show accepted its mistake, apologised and changes are being made….
This isn’t cancel culture it’s holding producers, creatives etc to account and to create theatre that is accessible and representative to all.
And no not every show can do that….but when you start on a journey and change direction along the way don’t pretend you started from a different place.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 19, 2022 16:08:49 GMT
I just don't accept that any producer, writer or director would make changes which knowingly upset their potential audience. If this show found a niche with a particular market - as many do - they are most likely to double down on it.
Every change made in every production I've opened has been for the creative betterment of the piece as a whole. No director I've ever known has made a change without the overall vision of the piece of art they are creating in mind, even in the poorest jukebox musical. That is precisely what they are paid for.
Not everyone can please everyone 100% of the time, and not every change made to a show is a slight at someone or something. Everyone involved in every show wants to make the best show possible for everyone who sees it, with varying amounts of commercial need for profit/recouping investors money.
Recently there was an attempt to shame Six for choosing a theatre that doesn't have adequate disabled access. Nobody gave a toss when it wasn't a show they were personally invested in. But at that theatre was suddenly to receive a show which had a larger number of disabled fans than many, I know people involved with the theatre AND production who were actively abused on social media in the name of "equality".
There is nothing wrong with self-interest. When points are made which are for the "greater good", but actually are about inconvenience/bad feeling by a minority, they should be addressed appropriately like any other concern.
Cancel culture - excuse me, "intent to erase", is the absolute worst of social media - and brings out the worst of otherwise very fair and reasonable people.
Anyone can be a victim, at any time, if you say or do the wrong thing to what the most vocal group of the moment want you to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Feb 19, 2022 16:14:42 GMT
How perfectly worded. Bravo. x
|
|
|
|
Post by Kubrick on Feb 19, 2022 16:18:20 GMT
Saw this in November 2019.
Too many social issues, too many characters(none interesting), and too long. While the issues being addressed in the material are certainly not to be taken lightly, the whole enterprise is designed to keep reminding you how concerned you should be in lieu of using compelling characters to tell the story. Also, the big moment (You Oughtta Know) is over the top and totally unearned.
This was the last production I saw in New York before the shutdown, so it left a bad taste in this theatre goer’s mouth.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Feb 19, 2022 18:32:23 GMT
I like what I've heard from the cast recording but there's a LOT going on. Feel like I need to see the show in context for it to make sense.
|
|
5,794 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 19, 2022 20:29:14 GMT
I like what I've heard from the cast recording but there's a LOT going on. Feel like I need to see the show in context for it to make sense. I wouldn’t hold out much hope for that to happen. None of it makes any sense. |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 19, 2022 20:42:04 GMT
I listened to the recording tonight out of curiousity. I read the synopsis as I went. What the hell WAS that?
Surely it makes more sense on stage though, mrbarnaby? It was all over the place.
|
|
1,186 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 19, 2022 20:47:32 GMT
It’s not that it doesn’t make sense. It’s the issue of forcing a story to revolve around songs not written for the story being told - the same issue so many of these jukebox shows have. But again, when you have every single social issue, drug addiction, sex addiction, rape and so on and so on the entire thing is just way too much. It does make sense but it’s still not good.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Feb 19, 2022 22:30:26 GMT
I listened to the recording tonight out of curiousity. I read the synopsis as I went. What the hell WAS that? Surely it makes more sense on stage though, mrbarnaby? It was all over the place. I tried doing that a second time but gave up ;-) Just an observation - it seems like they've crammed a lot into it. Will be going to watch like I said and intrigued to hear about the casting. |
|
267 posts
|
Post by gmoneyoutlaw on Feb 19, 2022 22:31:48 GMT
It’s not that it doesn’t make sense. It’s the issue of forcing a story to revolve around songs not written for the story being told - the same issue so many of these jukebox shows have. But again, when you have every single social issue, drug addiction, sex addiction, rape and so on and so on the entire thing is just way too much. It does make sense but it’s still not good. You might be right. The show in Boston was about the mother, for me. The changes for Broadway had the focus shift to Jo. Social justice and identity was always a part of the story, but it’s about the human family in 2020s and that was lost |
|
3,426 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Feb 19, 2022 22:59:28 GMT
Reading the comments, this show sounds perfect for the self-absorbed, introspective, over-represented, woke-is-me theatregoer. It'll fly, I'm sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 20, 2022 0:43:11 GMT
Doubt it ceebee - people are getting sick of it already. It's like a protest vote in an election, when it comes down to it, nobody actually pays to go. It's more the "idea" of the concept of controversy. Twitter is free. |
|
