yes,
By all means David, I wasn't trying to discount your opinion or say
that LOVE isn't a good show. And I certainly agree that a good show is
more than just the tech. This, in fact, was part of my point. The tech
for LOVE was amazing as any Cirque show... and I'm a big Beatles
fan... so much so that I wasn't all that interested in LOVE due to the
fact that I wasn't that thrilled with the remixes I'd heard off the
soundtrack. The quality of the remastered music is amazing, of course,
but when hearing the soundtrack I found it frustrating to hear part of
a song I like so much, then have it fade away into a modern remix.
Turns out those remixes are only a small part of the show, and as I
said, it sounded amazing.
My impression was that LOVE was a purposeful turn away from the
acrobatics on which so many of the Cirque shows have been based... In
the other shows I've seen (Zumanity might be different, due to its
nature) the dance and choregraphy and visual imagery were there
sup****ting a sketched out story interspersed with acrobatics acts from
which the Cirque name derives. The story is usually told without
words, for sure, and certainly light on details, but a bit of a story
nonetheless, often carried along by the incredible clown work. The
acrobatics acts can be dropped in and shuffled around, to a certain
extent (within reason, of course) so that if one performer gets
injured, or leaves the show, another can be inserted without having to
completely change the show or exactly copy what the first one was
doing. LOVE seems to change that formula, as it was primarily a series
of images and scenes without much connection. There were recurring
characters, of course, with a couple central ones that seemed like
they might be trying to carry a plot, but I honestly couldn't tell you
what that might have been. While there are many acrobats, and even a
couple that have specific Acts, within the show, I venture to say that
if any of them were to have to leave for any reason, another performer
could in inserted into their place without changing the show at all.
In any case, I just find this change interesting, and as I said in the
first post, even if LOVE isn't my favorite, it's still well ahead of
most everyone else.
And for me, that choice is a no brainer - even not being a huge Elton
John fan, I'd see him in that intimate room with just a piano and mic
in a second, whereas I sincerely doubt that I'll ever venture to Red
Piano.
Stephen
> > Stephen,
>
> > I'll defer to your critique of LOVE verses the other Circue shows
(I've
> > only seen 3 others - one a traveling company and 2 in Vegas ala Love.
>
> > My fondness for LOVE is probably linked to the fact that this is the
> > music of my youth and every song was like revisiting an old friend who
> > looked (well, actually sounded) superb after all these years.
>
> > Since we're likely all in the business, perhaps this is a reminder
that
> > we see a LOT more staging than the average patron - and that we can't
> > forget that no matter how impressive the staging or production design,
> > it's the creative work at the HEART of any performance that has to
come
> > first.
>
> > Put another way, I'd be hard pressed to choose if you offered me
tickets
> > to Elton John's Red Piano Show at Ceasers - or two p***** of him
playing
> > after hours in a bar where all the tech sup****t he has is perhaps a
JBL
> > Eon system and a single SM-58.
>
> > Some performances ARE the staging. Others are staging in SUP****T of
> > exceptional talent.
>
> > I considered LOVE to be the latter.
>
> > But I appreciate your view as well.
>
|
