|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 18:18:24 GMT
‘42nd St’ had big budget spectacle, it just wasn’t ‘fantasy’ spectacle. Something like ‘Curious Incident’ with interesting modern set design can be just as thrilling as the likes of Bat, because of how much it is part of the piece. 42nd St definitely had big budget spectacle, and those steps were thrilling when they came out. They also had amazing costumes, still love all those different coloured tap shoes in the opening, but every big production of 42nd St is the same, and has the same shoes and steps. The Hunting of The Snark. Now that had spectacle!!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 18:19:21 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows. But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet! I really regret not having seen Lord Of The Rings. I’ve never read the books/seen the films and wasn’t massively moved by the cast recording so decided not to.... As well as my Back To The Future hopes, I also wonder if Prince of Egypt might provide some breathtaking spectacle.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 19:07:24 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows. But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet! I really regret not having seen Lord Of The Rings. I’ve never read the books/seen the films and wasn’t massively moved by the cast recording so decided not to.... As well as my Back To The Future hopes, I also wonder if Prince of Egypt might provide some breathtaking spectacle. The staging was the only good thing about LOTR, imo. It was overly long, made zero sense and the musoc was plodding. I'm seeing Prince of Egypt in a few weeks and really hope they fill the Dominion stage with something special.
|
|
2,563 posts
|
Post by viserys on Jan 30, 2020 19:56:38 GMT
LOTR was a snoozer, it was impossible to cram all that plot into a stage show and the music was forgettable.
We had got front row tickets through GILT back then and what this arachnophobe remembers most from the show was that massive spider turning up towards the end. I almost jumped out of my skin.
I echo the hopes for Prince of Egypt to be a feast for the eyes.
|
|
749 posts
|
Post by horton on Jan 30, 2020 20:28:13 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows. But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet! I really regret not having seen Lord Of The Rings. I’ve never read the books/seen the films and wasn’t massively moved by the cast recording so decided not to.... As well as my Back To The Future hopes, I also wonder if Prince of Egypt might provide some breathtaking spectacle. I think Lord of the Rings was the last time I thought "wow, I've never seen so much money on a stage"- and yes the fireflies were gorgeous. 42nd was sumptuous, but of course it was very nearly a straight revival from the 1980s- but that staircase was genuinely a coup de theatre. The use of projections can never have the same visceral impact as actual scenic items.
|
|
306 posts
|
Post by MrBraithwaite on Jan 31, 2020 9:28:39 GMT
I liked LOTR for what it was, saw it three times during its run. It was very different from the films and took some liberties with the books, but some of the songs were great and easily the best part of the show. The scenery was definitely some of the most impressive stuff I've seen on stage. And this is one of my favourite 'flops' I have actually seen. Pity they didn't film it at the time, nowadays might be a different story. At the time they thought this might have more life in it, there was talk of a NZ and a German production, but it never happened of course.
|
|
1,510 posts
|
Post by anita on Jan 31, 2020 9:51:53 GMT
I liked LOTR for what it was, saw it three times during its run. It was very different from the films and took some liberties with the books, but some of the songs were great and easily the best part of the show. The scenery was definitely some of the most impressive stuff I've seen on stage. And this is one of my favourite 'flops' I have actually seen. Pity they didn't film it at the time, nowadays might be a different story. At the time they thought this might have more life in it, there was talk of a NZ and a German production, but it never happened of course. I saw it 3 times too. Loved it.
|
|
1,907 posts
|
Post by sf on Jan 31, 2020 12:32:12 GMT
LOTR was a snoozer, it was impossible to cram all that plot into a stage show and the music was forgettable. And it was apparently better in London than it was in Toronto, where it felt like six months of my life that I'll never get back.
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Feb 2, 2020 0:18:35 GMT
The best way I can describe the LOTR musical (despite not actually seeing it, although I would have given the opportunity!) is that it was the West End's equivalent to Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. Both had huge budgets behind them, were adaptations of popular works of fiction that had big screen Hollywood adaptations, both were 'the most expensive musicals in both the West End (LOTR) and Broadway (Turn Off the Dark) respectively, they experienced technical difficulties (although for LOTR, it wasn't as bad or as publicised as Turn Off the Dark), were ravaged by the critics upon opening and both were the biggest commercial flops for their time. Not to mention, Conan O'Brien made fun of both of them!
Turn Off the Dark however has gained a much more 'notorious' reputation than LOTR and I suppose the reason why there aren't really any major big budget flops nowadays is because producers don't want to lose millions, like what happened with Turn Off the Dark. In a way, I guess it is an 'important' part of both Broadway and musical theatre history, as it is a cautionary tale about making such an expensive musical and the problems faced producing one.
A YouTuber called Wait in the Wings made an interesting and insightful video about Turn Off the Dark's tumultuous history;
|
|
1,871 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Feb 4, 2020 22:12:43 GMT
Just found this on youtube!
Featuring an early appearance by Jonathan Pie (i.e. Tom Walker)!
|
|
1,871 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Feb 4, 2020 22:13:38 GMT
Viva Forever would surely be classed as a flop from the last 10 years, despite the media splash and creatives involved?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2020 23:22:25 GMT
Viva Forever would surely be classed as a flop from the last 10 years, despite the media splash and creatives involved? Easily classed as a flop. Unfortunately i never got to see it.
Those who saw it, why was it so bad??
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2020 23:28:29 GMT
Carrie. Probably the most infamous flop of all time.
Unfortunately, Terry Hands, who helped guide it to that title, died today. What he did to Carrie was nothing short of spectacular and downright bizarre.
When told the musical should be like Grease, he heard it as Greece, took it like a Greek tragedy, and why the original production had those horrific toga like costumes. You can't make it up.
If you haven't read it, Not Since Carrie, the book regarding the history of flop show is an absolute must read.
|
|
5,276 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 4, 2020 23:49:30 GMT
I miss the glory days of the Shaftesbury flops..
Daddy Cool - THE PARROT The Far Pavilions- beautiful set Napoleon- stunning design Lautrec- some beautiful stage images
Lord of the rings was sooooo boring. All that effort and money for no pay off.
|
|
5,276 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 4, 2020 23:50:47 GMT
I'm afraid I hated Lend Me a Tenor the musical: it ruined a very funny play. I truly pitied the talented cast. Totally agree. The set was kinda clever but it’s colour (lilac) was hideous to look at. The whole show was a laugh free zone.
|
|
145 posts
|
Post by impossibleprincess73 on Feb 5, 2020 0:12:34 GMT
Viva Forever would surely be classed as a flop from the last 10 years, despite the media splash and creatives involved? Easily classed as a flop. Unfortunately i never got to see it.
Those who saw it, why was it so bad??
Aww I know it was a flop but I actually really enjoyed it. I wouldn't say I was a huge Spice Girls fan or anything, but I did like some of their music and I thought the show was sweet and quite funny. The performances of Sally Ann Triplett and Sally Dexter carried the show for me, as most of the cast were relative newbies. The story wasn't great to be fair, but it entertained me enough for me to go back and see it a second time before it closed.
|
|
|
Post by learfan on Feb 5, 2020 11:31:12 GMT
Carrie. Probably the most infamous flop of all time. Unfortunately, Terry Hands, who helped guide it to that title, died today. What he did to Carrie was nothing short of spectacular and downright bizarre. When told the musical should be like Grease, he heard it as Greece, took it like a Greek tragedy, and why the original production had those horrific toga like costumes. You can't make it up. If you haven't read it, Not Since Carrie, the book regarding the history of flop show is an absolute must read. The book is a required read, its fantastic. Truly amazing how many of the giants have had flops!
|
|
1,871 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Feb 5, 2020 13:39:32 GMT
Easily classed as a flop. Unfortunately i never got to see it.
Those who saw it, why was it so bad??
Aww I know it was a flop but I actually really enjoyed it. I wouldn't say I was a huge Spice Girls fan or anything, but I did like some of their music and I thought the show was sweet and quite funny. The performances of Sally Ann Triplett and Sally Dexter carried the show for me, as most of the cast were relative newbies. The story wasn't great to be fair, but it entertained me enough for me to go back and see it a second time before it closed. I never saw it because I don't like jukebox musicals generally (especially when a favourite artists music is shoehorned into a new story).
I had a friend that quite liked it. What was clear was that Jennifer Saunders did not know how to write a musical book. (and that's coming from a massive fan of hers)
|
|
749 posts
|
Post by horton on Feb 5, 2020 15:09:19 GMT
And although mentioned elsewhere, Terry Hands must be the crown-prince of this thread for his contribution to the craziness of Carrie. Actually 'Not Since Carrie' does a very good critique of exactly why the director's concept destroyed the show.
|
|
|
Post by chadexx on Feb 5, 2020 15:44:41 GMT
Terry Hands' POPPY was an interesting collector's piece but not a roaring success~~~
|
|
749 posts
|
Post by horton on Feb 5, 2020 17:50:23 GMT
It was an incredible show!
|
|
749 posts
|
Post by horton on Feb 5, 2020 17:50:42 GMT
And I still have the LP!
|
|
|
Post by learfan on Feb 5, 2020 18:03:42 GMT
Terry Hands' POPPY was an interesting collector's piece but not a roaring success~~~ Maybe but didn't it win the SWET Award for best Musical?
|
|
196 posts
|
Post by Peter on Feb 5, 2020 22:05:53 GMT
I miss the glory days of the Shaftesbury flops.. Daddy Cool - THE PARROT The Far Pavilions- beautiful set Napoleon- stunning design Lautrec- some beautiful stage images Lord of the rings was sooooo boring. All that effort and money for no pay off. Didn’t see Daddy Cool, but I remember the others all had gorgeous scenic designs and all seemed to have had a good deal of money thrown at them (Napoleon in particular, with a relatively large orchestra, elaborate set and staging and some impressive choral pieces). Peggy Sue Got Married was there too but I remember that being quite dull rather than bad, and the score was unmemorable (mostly 50s pastiche with a random Steinman song thrown in)...
|
|
|
Post by jcs619 on Feb 5, 2020 22:06:57 GMT
Viva Forever would surely be classed as a flop from the last 10 years, despite the media splash and creatives involved? Easily classed as a flop. Unfortunately i never got to see it.
Those who saw it, why was it so bad??
The performances of Sally Ann Triplett and Sally Dexter and the vast majority of the young cast were excellent. Most of the songs were very well staged and sung. The book was bloody awful and Jennifer Saunders should never be asked to write another musical ever...
|
|
|
Post by fluxcapacitor on Feb 8, 2020 8:37:25 GMT
Easily classed as a flop. Unfortunately i never got to see it.
Those who saw it, why was it so bad??
The performances of Sally Ann Triplett and Sally Dexter and the vast majority of the young cast were excellent. Most of the songs were very well staged and sung. The book was bloody awful and Jennifer Saunders should never be asked to write another musical ever... I personally enjoyed Viva Forever, but always felt the musical numbers were maybe adapted TOO well. Lyrics were changed, orchestrations and tempos were vastly different to the originals, songs and phrases were blended together. Much more so than Mamma Mia. I distinctly remember “2 Become 1” being an exception as it was sung very closely to the original arrangement (albeit as a duet) and the audience loving it and singing along. I’m not saying crowds should be singing along at a musical, but I think that’s what this crowd wanted and had it been more of a shameless jukebox show it would have gone down better.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2020 0:28:36 GMT
I'm not sure we have ever mentioned this, but the show 'Someone Like You' - Music by Petula Clark, staring Petula Clark, Dave Willets and Clive Carter
Ran for 1 month in 1990. I remember the marketing for it, but never saw it. Did anyone here see it?
Clive Carter has been in a quite a few bad shows. Him and Graham Bickley owned the 90's flops!
|
|
|
Post by craig on Feb 13, 2020 18:13:40 GMT
Viva Forever was absolutely woeful, and I say that as a big fan of Spice Girls and Jennifer Saunders.
I've always had the impression that Saunders is extremely talented but not particularly focused. I think a musical book was just a bit beyond her.
|
|
396 posts
|
Post by djp on Feb 15, 2020 21:41:38 GMT
Easily classed as a flop. Unfortunately i never got to see it.
Those who saw it, why was it so bad??
The performances of Sally Ann Triplett and Sally Dexter and the vast majority of the young cast were excellent. Most of the songs were very well staged and sung. The book was bloody awful and Jennifer Saunders should never be asked to write another musical ever... The story was nonsense and went nowhere before fading into oblivion . They invented that, presumably to avoid making it the story of the spice girls , or just a celebration of their music. The Spice Girl's story possibly raised too many issues - like what does Vicky sing and why do some go? And because they were stuck with a poor story they couldn't make it a celebration. The audience looked perplexed at a story that had almost as many plot holes, and nonsenses as Game of thrones season 8, disappointed by songs that were incomplete or made different, and only really came to life for the montage of the original songs at the end.
Could have been much better with either the real story, or a much better story, or actresses , like those reported to be in the workshop who sound elsewhere more like they could play baby or Mel B . But the main failure was trying to make a Not the Spice girls story out of a musical based on the spice girls music and sold to fans as the Spice Girls Musical. The concept fails all logic at that point. It made all the mistakes Mamma Mia avoids.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2020 23:45:42 GMT
The performances of Sally Ann Triplett and Sally Dexter and the vast majority of the young cast were excellent. Most of the songs were very well staged and sung. The book was bloody awful and Jennifer Saunders should never be asked to write another musical ever... The story was nonsense and went nowhere before fading into oblivion . They invented that, presumably to avoid making it the story of the spice girls , or just a celebration of their music. The Spice Girl's story possibly raised too many issues - like what does Vicky sing and why do some go? And because they were stuck with a poor story they couldn't make it a celebration. The audience looked perplexed at a story that had almost as many plot holes, and nonsenses as Game of thrones season 8, disappointed by songs that were incomplete or made different, and only really came to life for the montage of the original songs at the end.
Could have been much better with either the real story, or a much better story, or actresses , like those reported to be in the workshop who sound elsewhere more like they could play baby or Mel B . But the main failure was trying to make a Not the Spice girls story out of a musical based on the spice girls music and sold to fans as the Spice Girls Musical. The concept fails all logic at that point. It made all the mistakes Mamma Mia avoids. Well on paper Viva Forever should have worked: Judy Craymer producing (Mamma Mia), Jennifer Saunders (prolific script writer), Spice Girls music (100 million records sold) and a strong and able cast. All of the right elements were there... but sometimes it just doesn’t work. I really don’t think people went expecting the story of the Spice Girls because the girls had done press explaining it wasn’t, the advertising clearly said it was a new musical based on the music of the band and sometimes I think that’s just an easy criticism to throw at the show. Don’t get me wrong, a biop musical would have been great but the band still aren’t ready to tell us the real story, let alone put it on stage: we only recently found out Mel C was almost kicked out (for telling Victoria to FO at the Brits) and that the rumoured Geri and Mel B thing was real. They’ve told so many stories over the years I’m not sure they know what’s true anymore (like the fact Geri co-wrote Goodbye before she left). Anyway, my biggest issue with the musical was the book though. It was absolutely dire and a story about a girl ditching her best friends in her quest for fame is basically the exact opposite of Girl Power. Jennifer tried to give every character their own storyline and for a large chunk it focused on the judges instead of the title character, who basically became a footnote. The TV talent show idea was lazy and I never understood why Viva lived on a houseboat in London. Then there’s the fact the songs lost all spiciness. You had trained theatre performers applying all their training that sucked all of the personality out of them. Half the band were northern and you’ve got performers using the Queen’s English singing songs the audience knew inside out. It just made them sound off. There were moments that really worked though, like 2 Become 1 being a comedy song between two middle aged people contemplating a bunk up, and the Spanglish version of Viva Forever performed acoustically. I saw the musical a few times over the course of the run and saw Jennifer there too on occasion, and to her credit she kept tinkering with the show trying to improve it (songs were cut, moved around, replaced etc more or less right to the end).
|
|