BRING IT ON Begins Previews Tonight- Page 2

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 12:35am

Yes, but Spider-Man and Gomez and Morticia Addams are well-established characters, with decades of developed character traits in print, tv and film. The characters of Bring It On are hardly well-known characters in pop culture. The movie stands a minor hit, and lesser than Clueless, Mean Girls and the like.

[TheatreKid3]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 12:43am

^ Good point.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 1:11am

So they could have saved a sh*tload of dough by calling it GET IT ON!?

[latitudex1]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 1:28am

Beacon (producers of the franchise) and Universal Pictures (distributors of all four of the movies) are co-producers of this show, so no. They saved money by not using the original story. They don't have to pay royalties to use the original's characters and plot.

Updated On: 7/13/12 at 01:28 AM

[hyperbole_and_a_half]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 1:42am

You had me at "Miss Cleo." This disasterpiece sounds destined for Ken Mandelbaum levels of infamy. Gotta get me a ticket!

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 2:02am

There are plenty of "Miss Cleo" moments. There are lyrics about Serena and Venus, Pokemon/Pikachu and plenty of technological references.

Another paraphrased sample line:
Campbell: So you already heard?
Randall: I got some tweets. A few texts. Saw a facebook message. I think someone told me in person too.

There's a fat White girl who is wildly uncool at the old school, but when she goes to the new school she is hot because she has more "junk in her trunk" than anyone else there.

Why does the fat girl get sent to the new school? She seems to be the only other character affected by the rezoning which

SPOILER
was orchestrated by an evil cheerleader who wanted to usurp Campbell's role as head cheerleader.
END SPOILER

There are lots of soup jokes involving Campbell's name (like Wonderland). "You're no longer cream of mushroom. Gurl you's Chicken and Stars now!"

The show begins at the end of summer, right before the school year starts. They mention having to cheer at Football games, a Fall activity. The musical seems to cover a few weeks worth of time, yet Campbell is asked to a non-Prom. Wouldn't that be in the spring?

Another Spoiler question for others who have seen it:
The evil cheerleader gets Campbell transferred and then changes the grades of the bitchy cheerleader to knock them out of the running. The third girl is given mono so she isn't well enough to be captain. Still, once she becomes well wouldn't she take over as captain? Also how much time has passed? Doesn't mono take months to get over? She was practicing a few days later. There are also lyrics about her "blowing chunks" with mono. I don't think throwing up is a common symptom of mono- fatigue, fever and sore throat are the main issues, correct?

[RippedMan]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 2:42am

I heard Amanda Green preview some of the songs at 54 Below's New Mondays and I thought they all sounded awful. The lyrics were very obvious rhymes.

Also, it just offends and annoys me that they expect people to pay Broadway prices for a show that was designed and conceived as a national tour. It's a bare stage, with some lighting. Why would I pay all that money to see that when across the street they have chandeliers falling?

[keb2]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 2:43am

I'm glad I'm not the only one who hated the video panels!

I saw it in LA, and didn't think it was great, but generally enjoyable. But what I thought was telling was after I saw Lysistrata Jones for the first time, I texted my friend who I saw Bring It On with and said, "Lysistrata Jones is everything Bring It On wishes it could be." Granted, I am a big Lyssie Jones fan, but I thought that show was just so much more cohesive and better executed. I haven't seen Bring It On in nearly a year though, so I can't speak to the current incarnation.

One note: I'd recommend sitting in the front of the mezzanine rather than the orchestra for this show, due to the cheer stunts. I haven't sat in the orchestra, but I'd imagine it's a lot easier to appreciate the stunts from the mezz. And it's not like you're missing out on tons of the acting, since there's no huge emotional arc for the characters to go through (if I recall correctly, the St. James and the Ahmanson are similar spaces in terms of where the mezz and balcony are relative to the stage—the mezz may even be closer at the St. James)

Updated On: 7/13/12 at 02:43 AM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 6:46am

I have little desire to see this, but I figured my 15 year old daughter would have jumped all over it. Nope. She hates the idea of it. I even told her the plot of the film has nothing to do with it (which was discussed here a while ago). Her response -- no go.

She and I will be in NY in August, and we're running out of shows to see!

[After Eight]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 7:46am

So many shows today are so sloppily written, so little attention is paid to glaring implausibilities and plot holes...... I guess the writers just don't care, and believe that the audience won't either. Well, they're wrong.

A previous poster enumerated but a few of them. There are many others here.

Then there's the matter of these high school/college dodos who are passed off as poets/sages for the ages. The one in question this time out seemingly gained his insight from an old man with a broom who told him to enjoy every moment of his high school years. Yet our young beacon of wisdom decides to forego his own prom, the very highlight of said years. "No corsage, no gown," he growls at his date, offering her a picnic on a hill while others are enjoying the prom. Cheapskate. Party poop. And we're supposed to swallow his drippy carpe diem platitudes? Sorry, but no.

Likewise no to the poet football jock boyfriend in Carrie, and the lunkhead basketball jock in Lysistrata Jones who proclaimed his love of Walt Whitman. As if this dolt had ever read a poem in his life.

The derisive laughter you heard was that of the audience.

[Trish2]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 8:19am

If i'm not mistaken, this show is being "directed" by the choreographer, Andy Blankenbeuhler, correct?

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 8:20am

I love the way Whizzer always makes the first night and does a great review.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 8:40am

Why, oh why, would talented composers like Tom Kitt and Lin Manuel Miranda waste time on **** like this?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 8:48am

"I guess I just don't get it. Why get the rights to write a Legally Blonde musical if you only wanted to write a musical about a girl in a sorority and her sisters?"

And They want to use the name to sell tickets. Using the name without buying the rights is a great recipe for prolonged litigation.

In any event, huge, even mammoth, changes from rebranded source material are not atypical. The real question is do the changes work or not.

Updated On: 7/13/12 at 08:48 AM

[rjm516]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:09am

^ and apparently they don't

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:18am

^Exactly. And from this thread, it seems that Clueless is a much more loyal (and superb!) adaptation of EMMA than Bring it On is of BRING IT ON.

[jagfkb]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:22am

My analysis:

Regardless of problems with the book or lyrics, it's a FUN show, and anyone who was there last night can tell you: the entire audience was eating it up (yes, I know it was a lot of friends and families, but the energy was still inescapable). All of my friends who were there loved every bit of it. And everyone has to admit: the cheer stunts are absolutely incredible to watch.

That being said, there's some great work going on, and some not so great work. I thought the plot was actually pretty well paced and structured, and while there are MANY, MANY characters, each has enough depth and development that they don't come across as completely stock. However, there are sections of both the lyrics and dialogue that just don't work, and are Wonderland bad. That said, if the creators are going to use this month to actually work on the show, I can see a lot of changes being made for the better, especially with talent like this involved.

Also, SPOILER!!! am I the only one that wanted Eva to be the one who revealed that Campbell lied about the scholarship to Danielle? If only because those scenes literally come right after each other and it'd make Eva even more of a scumbag in the end END SPOILER.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:36am

Trish- Yes Blankenbuehler directed and choreographed. The choreography was definitely lacking; there isn't even that much "cheer" choreography. They should have had scenes where they were practicing moves, learning routines, studying different styles of dance and incorporating them into the cheerleading.

Henrik- Like I said before I wasn't looking for a scene by scene rehashing of the movie. And this isn't a matter of them making changes to the source material that aren't working. It is a completely original story and must be treated as such. My qualm is that it feels like false advertising to call it Bring it On and not have anything to do with the movie, except for dealing with cheerleaders.

RippedMan- I know you are always interested in the set/design aspects of the show and Bring it On is an eyesore. It really is Good Vibrations and Baby It's You.

[PopAria]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:45am

I'm so glad they didn't do what the movie does. I hated going to see Lion King only to see the movie with puppets on stage.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:45am

jagfkb- I completely disagree with you that the characters all had depth and development. Eva had no character development at all! (Slight Spoilers) She's the evil character, yet they never explain why she turned evil- Campbell was always nice to her and got her on the team. They would have probably won the championship and eventually she would have become the captain. Why did she turn evil? Her camp turn in act two comes out of nowhere! She's barely had 10 lines in the show and then gets a big number.

Also, as After Eight mentioned, the sage boyfriend has no character development and comes off phony. He barely has a role yet he's given this big (unearned) ballad at the end. They mention he wrote a song for the crew- is he a song writer? producer? what's his connection to the team? When did we get to see them falling for each other? I guess we saw him fetishizing over the leprechaun mascot (whatever that says about his sexual preferences), but really that's how he fell for her?

What I would have preferred is to have all of Eva's scheming be in Campbell's head. The schemes were so ludicrous no one bought them. It would have made more sense for Campbell to be a self-centered drama queen who needed a reality check and figure out it's not all about her.

Updated On: 7/13/12 at 09:45 AM

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 9:46am

If they are wanting to extend…the question is how quick can they fix things?

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 10:27am

From when I saw it in Chicago (SPOILERS), I felt like Eva's "sudden" turn to being evil was well explained in her song - she felt like she had always gotten the short end of the stick next to girls like Campbell. It wasn't a sudden shift, it was just a hidden agenda and I thought it was a delightful and funny surprise to see that what seemed like Campbell's jealous, paranoid ideas actually turned out to be the truth.

I agree - Randall is my least favorite character in the show, but not enough to bother me. I enjoyed that the love storyline was not a main focus.

I really enjoyed the show when I saw it on tour and look forward to seeing it in a couple of weeks in New York. Felt a connection the characters and was pulled in the whole time. The cast is an extremely strong group of young actors. I left the theatre feeling good and wanting to return.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 10:38am

GilmoreGirl- I don't think it was well explained in the song. How had she ever gotten the short stick next to girls like Campbell? Campbell favored and sheltered her throughout the try-out process and Campbell protected her from criticism when the other girls were frustrated she couldn't execute the moves. Campbell named her the sophomore spirit leader, putting her in line to succeed her as captain when she was a senior. They had been friends forever as they were next door neighbors.

I could understand Eva disliking the two superficial sidekicks and wanting to sabotage them, but not Campbell.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 10:45am

Thanks for the reviews guys.

I do love how THREE people have seen it on Broadway, 2 did not like it and one did, yet everyone who has not seen this is now talking like it will be an epic flop. Wow, the power of THREE theatregoers, brilliant.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/13/12 at 10:46am

From when I saw it in Chicago (SPOILERS), I felt like Eva's "sudden" turn to being evil was well explained in her song - she felt like she had always gotten the short end of the stick next to girls like Campbell. It wasn't a sudden shift, it was just a hidden agenda and I thought it was a delightful and funny surprise to see that what seemed like Campbell's jealous, paranoid ideas actually turned out to be the truth.

That's what I remember as well. She had a hidden agenda from the beginning. I do think the love story was glossed over and could use more attention to development, but I didn't find it distracting.

I guess we saw him fetishizing over the leprechaun mascot (whatever that says about his sexual preferences), but really that's how he fell for her?

I didn't get that at all. Seemed like when he discovered what happened, he was attracted to her tenacity and commitment. I really wasn't confused by it. The Leprechaun scene was my least favorite in the show, but I didn't think it was horrible enough to be legendary or anything. I just wish they could have found another way to utilize that specific plot point without a mascot costume. Or at least one that doesn't look like a Leprechaun.