So, is this bad like "Transformers" bad, or bad as in "The Room" bad? Because if its the later, i might see it just for laughs.
It wont be, but it will just hurt all of the people involved in the show. The actors, the musicians, and especially the theater crew. And that's why you and I wont really be able to see eye-to-eye on this, because I do have a stake in it. I see my dad for about 45 minutes a day because he's working on this show from 8am until midnight. The theater has been completely gutted and transformed since the show got new life last winter, with my dad there every day. I want this show to last as long as it can because I know that when it goes, the theater is going to have to go through that work-intensive process again, and neither my dad nor any of his guys are going to be able to have a more normal working schedule again, and they deserve that.Fronzel said:I imagine bad reviews always do a particular show more harm than good, but that's hardly going to cause the downfall of theater (the critics' subject matter).
Why should anyone care how difficult it was to get this show running except those who have a stake in it? All that effort doesn't have to mean the show is worth watching.
I wouldn't say that either. I would say that when it comes down to caring about what a critic has to say, and caring for a show that I do have a stake in to stay open, it becomes a real easy choice. And if you were in my position, where bad press threatens the quality of life of people around you, I've got a strong feeling you would think in a rather similar manner.Fronzel said:You don't seem that understanding of critics who are interested in artistic merit and don't know and/or don't care about its complicated stagecraft. You dismiss them by saying the show's "not for them".
Bad press is threatening their quality of life? Give me a break. This is how all arts industries function, in an extremely competitive and harsh environment. If you want to do well, you have to produce quality artwork. Why should this musical get a free ride just because you happen to know people working on it?laststandman said:I wouldn't say that either. I would say that when it comes down to caring about what a critic has to say, and caring for a show that I do have a stake in to stay open, it becomes a real easy choice. And if you were in my position, where bad press threatens the quality of life of people around you, I've got a strong feeling you would think in a rather similar manner.Fronzel said:You don't seem that understanding of critics who are interested in artistic merit and don't know and/or don't care about its complicated stagecraft. You dismiss them by saying the show's "not for them".
And furthermore I would like to readdress the idea of something being "for" critics. Nothing is made for critics. It is made for consumers. Critics thrive off of the existence of things to critique. Without something to critique, critics would not exist, whereas without critics, products would still be produced. In fact, critics are "made" for products, not the other way around.
I did.BonsaiK said:Lies - audiences didn't like Transformers.
I agree. It wasn't particularly great, but the special effects were sleek and seeing giant robots impale each other is very entertaining.UltimatheChosen said:I did.BonsaiK said:Lies - audiences didn't like Transformers.
Granted, it wasn't the best movie ever, but it was still fairly entertaining and enjoyable.