Sort of off topic--Saw this show at a high school a couple of years ago and it was was hilarious. Bought the movie to show my son and we couldn't get past the first half hour and I'm a huge Carol B fan. Should we have given the movie more of a chance?
I'd love to see this happen. I've only ever seem community and high school productions of this, but even then it's never failed to make me laugh hysterically.
I am a firm believer in serendipity- all the random pieces coming together in one wonderful moment, when suddenly you see what their purpose was all along.
Actually, it IS a very specific form of comedy, but just because you don't like it, doesn't keep it from amusing the hell out if many of us.
I adore the show (the movie? Not so much) with a stellar cast, I could be up for it again!
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
As tempted as I was in the other thread to say something like "I would never post something like that they should shut Phantom down", I didn't do it and that was for one reason: I knew that I have this awful feeling about one show and one show only. And you picked it, JC, you picked it.
It might break up my marriage if they staged it again, but if there's demand, let 'em play it.
I love the show, and would definitely enjoy a revival. Jordan's suggestion of Jan Maxwell is a good one.
And I've never quite gotten why the film has such a bad reputation -- do people think Bogdanovich isn't that good of a comedy director? I'll be controversial and say What's Up, Doc? is less funnier than Noises Off.
I loved the movie as well (an absolute dream cast), though I saw the film before I ever saw the play on stage. I was lucky enough to catch the London revival and it was wonderful. I think the biggest drawback with the film is that there was no way they could truly capture the brilliance of the second act.
I guess farce is to WeeThomas what Tracy Morgan and David Spade's style of comedy is to me.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
The first act of the movie and the play are both slow. They are setting up for the hilarity that happens later on. While the film is not as funny as the stage show, seeing the film was what made me interested in seeing the play. This is one of those plays I would see whenever I come across it being produced. The other would be "The Woman in Black."
I love the movie and I actually think the devise of Americans playing British works well, providing additional comedic opportunities (also helps to clarify when we're watching the play and when we're watching the "play"). It really is perfectly cast, too.
I remember enjoying the 2001 revival but not to the extent that I felt I should have. Anyone have thoughts on what might have been missing from that productions?