| re: SO TRUE: not all for the better | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 01:38 pm EST 11/14/24 | |
| In reply to: SO TRUE: not all for the better - lordofspeech 01:19 pm EST 11/14/24 | |
|
|
|
| The people in charge of estates are often heirs and heirs would often like to get in some revenue from these titles. CABARET has never fallen out of the national repertory, but it's also never been presented on Broadway in the same way twice. I imagine the folks in the charge of it now are probably thinking that if the original creators allowed such wholesale cuts and alterations, why not continue to do so, especially if it results in a major production that's going to bring in revenue to the estate and the heirs. CAMELOT has also never been done the same way twice, but is a title that hasn't seen a major production in quite a while. In that case, my guess is that the estate/heirs were presented with the question of taking a chance on a new production with a heavily revised book or never having another major production of the piece again. The new adaptation could have been amazing and given the property a whole new life. And, if it wasn't, what are the chances that it would damage the reputation of a property that isn't done all that much anymore anyway? I can see why they decided to take the chance and go forward with it. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: SO TRUE: not all for the better - JereNYC 02:53 pm EST 11/14/24 |
| Next: | re: SO TRUE: not all for the better - EvFoDr 03:47 pm EST 11/14/24 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.126337 seconds.