| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | JohnDunlop 07:10 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - ryhog 06:49 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| I agree that it is unlikely that Radcliffe would do it, although he is short enough to off set his age (and perhaps pass for a boy). On past form, I can not argue strongly with your phrase, "big junky maninstream TV special." But, there's always the off chance that NBC will cast Peter and Hook just right. It's a little early to dismiss that whole thing, don't you think. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 08:23 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - JohnDunlop 07:10 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| Yes there is a chance that the network will lose its mind and cast this show in a way that would interest me (and perhaps you). But I think it's more like an off-off chance. I'd think that the sort of version that would even start to get Radcliffee's attention would need a parental advisory at the top, and I have a funny feeling that's not what they have in mind. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | LegitOnce 08:29 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - ryhog 08:23 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| And probably at the bottom as well. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | mikem 08:43 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - LegitOnce 08:29 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| I'm not sure why appearing in Peter Pan would be less appealing than appearing in How to Succeed in Business. How to Succeed is about as mainstream as it gets. And I think, now that the concept has been shown to draw in ratings, I wouldn't be surprised if NBC was able to snag someone who wouldn't have considered it the first time around. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 09:06 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - mikem 08:43 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| LOL. Is it your sense that Radcliffe's choices are based on ratings? How to Succeed was a way of demonstrating that he had the chops to do it. And it was on Broadway, not in a TV studio. And he was a teenager when it materialized. This thing, however successful it might be, is several rungs down the ladder. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 09:30 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - ryhog 09:06 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| I completely disagree with your reasoning. And if you're implying that Radcliffe is now ONLY interested in doing edgy, dark, adult material, and will never again consider doing anything lighter that would appeal to his younger fans, then I guess you think you know what's in his mind as well as he does. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 10:46 pm EST 01/19/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - Michael_Portantiere 09:30 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| I'll say it once more: it is not about the material; it is about the medium. I can only go on the same things you can, which is what he has said publicly. And based on what we know of him, I do not think he is going to do a junky TV special. I also don't expect to see him on Celebrity Apprentice. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 04:36 pm EST 01/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - ryhog 10:46 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| PETER PAN may not turn out well if it's as poorly directed and woefully miscast as THE SOUND OF MUSIC, but there's nothing inherently "junky" about a huge-budget, well-rehearsed production of a classic musical by a major TV network. I fail to see the comparison to CELEBRITY APPRENTICE. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 05:26 pm EST 01/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - Michael_Portantiere 04:36 pm EST 01/20/14 |
|
| |
| Michael, the disconnect between what you are talking about, and what NBC has done and almost undoubtedly will do again is gaping. Your wishful thinking is the reason you and I are not communicating on this subject. This endeavor is not about art, it is about ratings. And the result is going to be the lowest common denominator on all levels. I admire your optimism, but I think it is ill-placed, and I don't think Daniel Radcliffe or anyone else of his stature and intention is going to touch something like this. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | mikem 05:03 am EST 01/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - ryhog 10:46 pm EST 01/19/14 |
|
| |
| Your ideas about the relative prestige of film and TV are outdated. Think of all the film stars (Matthew McConaughey being the latest) to appear on TV recently. And Daniel Radcliffe is one of them. He stars in a TV series, A Young Doctor's Notebook, which has run two seasons and whose most recent episode was last month. And I don't think this Peter Pan is automatically "junky." If there was a revival of Peter Pan on Broadway, I don't think it would get dismissed automatically as "junky." This year's Sound of Music could have been better, but a lot of people found it entertaining, and it was successful in the way Hollywood measures success (by ratings, and it also got a Directors Guild nomination, voted on by other directors.) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 11:01 am EST 01/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - mikem 05:03 am EST 01/20/14 |
|
| |
| The issue is not TV vs film, nor is it Peter Pan. (I was not suggesting the property itself was junky.) But this show is not borne of making something great; it is about ratings for a family special, and it is going to be perceived as ratings junk unless and until NBC foolishly tries to make it into something more artful that wil have the sort of ratings the Tonys get in the same time slot. Lots of things are successful in Hollywood that I don't expect to see Daniel Radcliffe signing up for. Do you expect him on Dancing with the Stars too? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? | |
| Posted by: | SuzanneR 05:04 pm EST 01/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Maybe Daniel Radcliffe? - ryhog 11:01 am EST 01/20/14 |
|
| |
| "But this show is not borne of making something great; it is about ratings" Perfect description ... | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 0.636705 seconds.