| re: How does George M compare to the film Yankee Doodle Dandy? |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 12:28 pm EST 02/12/18 |
| In reply to: re: How does George M compare to the film Yankee Doodle Dandy? - TheOtherOne 11:57 am EST 02/12/18 |
|
Film biographies almost always play fast and loose with facts - as do all films based on fact (and most plays for that matter). I was always like to point out the major inaccuracy in the film (and play) of FINDING NEVERLAND. While the film and play tell us that BArrie is depressed after the reception of his latest play, LITTLE MARY (1903), The History of the London Stage (1576-1903) calles LITTLE MARY a great success - an enormous success. Following on his two previous big hits, QUALITY STREET and THE ADMIRABLE CRICHTON. And Frohman produced 53 shows on Broadway alone in the 1903-1904 season, including Barrie's LITTLE MARY. If it had flopped in London, Frohman would not likely have reproduced the show in NYC. Yet FINDING NEVERLAND revolves around Barrie's despair at his failure. The core of what was to become PETER PAN IN KENSINGTON GARDENS appeared in Barries 1902 novel THE LITTLE WHITE BIRD. So Peter Pan existed before Barrie thought to write the play.
As a PS - we know that Frohman's protege Maude Adams created the role of the Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up on Broadway. In London, the very first Peter Pan onstage was Nina Boucicault, daughter of the great British playwright, Dion Boucicault (the London Assurance).
But we accept the fabrications because they make a more entertaining narrative |
|
reply
|
|
| Previous: |
re: How does George M compare to the film Yankee Doodle Dandy? - TheOtherOne 12:52 pm EST 02/12/18 |
| Next: |
re: A GEORGE M 'fabrication' - NewtonUK 01:56 pm EST 02/12/18 |
| Thread: |
|
