[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Lifehouse or Lamehouse



Actually, I saw both the before and after Quad shows.  The after was much
better.  The
narration in the first show was too much and sometimes interrupted the flow.
You would be really into
a song and bam there's that pain in the ass narration again. I think I would
have preferred
no narration.  I think Quad stands on its own.
Joe Cozz

----- Original Message -----
From: L. Bird <pkeets@hotmail.com>
To: <thewho@igtc.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: Lifehouse or Lamehouse


> >Pete's big thing is the ideas, of course, and sketchy plots are fairly
> >characteristic of writers who deal in layered
> >concepts.  Fine for rock opera, but a little difficult for theater or
film.
>
> Here's another interesting question.  Would Lifehouse the play have been
> better done if Pete wrote it all himself?  Or is the density his fault?
>
> Something interesting happened with the script on the Quad tour.  They
> apparently took it out on the road to tinker with the theater idea, and as
> they went along the script got simpler.  At the Hyde Park and MSG shows, I
> thought it was too wordy for the audience to really capture.  Later on
they
> replaced the live narrator with a film, and I read at least one review
that
> called the film "heavy-handed," but I thought the script was
good--stripped
> down to about what they needed for the rock opera.
>
> Any Broadway fans here?  Would the MSG script have been more appropriate
for
> a musical?
>
>
> keets
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>