Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: It sure doesn't. | |
| Posted by: keikekaze 05:32 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: While It Doesn't Prove Anything - Clancy 04:22 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| Mendes and Marshall are not the authors of Cabaret. Thank goodness. Btw, neither is Bob Fosse. | |
| reply to this message |
| Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 09:53 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: re: It sure doesn't. - keikekaze 05:32 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| Since the Mendes version is an officially licensed version of the show, and the changes that Mendes made for that production are in that script, Mendes actually is an author of "Cabaret". | |
| reply to this message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: Billhaven 02:08 pm EDT 03/31/23 | |
| In reply to: Hate to break it to you… - Singapore/Fling 09:53 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| According to Tams-Witmark who licenses the 1998 version, the only author of record is Joe Maateroff. Mendes is only officially the director (along with Rob Marshall). That is the case on the title page of my program from the version presented at Henry Miller’s Theater. So it’s not a fact that Mendes is an author. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 03:05 pm EDT 03/31/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - Billhaven 02:08 pm EDT 03/31/23 | |
|
|
|
| Well, it’s not a fact that Mendes is the credited book writer. But as we know, there are untold writers who never get credit for the work they do rewriting scripts… are they not authors? But sure, let’s go with the title page. Joe Masteroff is credited as the writer (along with John Van Druten and Christopher Isherwood as the source materials), and he was alive when that production came out, so if he didn’t author those changes, he at least approved of them, so why are we debating the original versus the Mendes as if the latter doesn’t count? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: Erik_Haagensen 12:25 pm EDT 04/01/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - Singapore/Fling 03:05 pm EDT 03/31/23 | |
|
|
|
| Joe Masteroff was my teacher at NYU in the grad program for writing musicals from 1984 to 1986, my dramaturg at the O'Neill Music Theater Conference in 1987, and we were friends afterward. When the Mendes version was produced, he told me that he, John Kander, and Fred Ebb all went to London to see it. Joe and Kander liked the changes that Mendes had made; Ebb did not. None of the men were prepared for the extent of the changes, which included new book writing done by Mendes. Ultimately, the three men decided to allow a New York production of the new version. However, Joe insisted that the Mendes script not be used. Instead, he wrote his own versions of the new scenes while keeping Mendes' structural and character changes intact. Mendes was not given a writing credit as a result. However, just as Harold Prince has an author copyright and royalty on many of the musicals he directed, even though he gets no formal writing credit, I think one would have to say that Mendes is a co-author of the 1998 Broadway version of CABARET. Joe never discussed the question of royalties with me, alas, except that he got a lot of them. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 12:04 pm EDT 03/31/23 | |
| In reply to: Hate to break it to you… - Singapore/Fling 09:53 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| No he isn’t. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: keikekaze 11:00 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: Hate to break it to you… - Singapore/Fling 09:53 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| . . . but my original comment is correct and I stand by it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Last Edit: Chromolume 11:33 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 11:31 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - keikekaze 11:00 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| Your original comments are correct only in terms of the 1966 script. Changes that were made after that definitely need to be credited to those who made them. In fact, crediting the other contributors is a good way to keep each version straight. (Or, maybe I should say "distinct," given some of this thread lol.) It would be equally wrong, for instance, to say that the book for the current Camelot revival was written by Lerner (alone). Get the point? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: keikekaze 02:26 am EDT 03/31/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - Chromolume 11:31 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| Yes I do, and the point is, that having brushed up an existing property by rewriting a few bits here and there is not the same as having written it, that is, having created it out of thin air or even having adapted it from another medium. Mendes didn't "write Cabaret," and Sorkin hasn't "written Camelot." At most, they've rewritten some of it--and for the worse, as nearly always happens in these cases. I suppose it's nearly always going to happen when you're piggybacking on somebody else's work, only somebody else's work doesn't say what you want it to say, but you're not about to write your own show to say what you want to say (as you should) because you damn well want that pre-existing score to sell "your" revival. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 11:54 am EDT 03/31/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - keikekaze 02:26 am EDT 03/31/23 | |
|
|
|
| There's a huge difference between being a contributing writer and an originating writer, but they are all writers, and they all have a form of authorship on the musical. And while you're heaping scorn on Mendes et al here, you're forgetting that the changes made to "Cabaret" led to a revival that injected new life and popularity into the musical, running twice as long as the original on Broadway, and substantially longer than the 1987 revival. That script, which has become the default for new productions, has a lot of smart changes - and a few clumsy ones - that attune the material to a contemporary audience (and at this point, we'd do well to have another round of edits to fully bring Cliff out of the closet). This kind of work isn't just for the ego of a director, it's for the benefit of the musical itself. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 06:04 pm EDT 03/31/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - Singapore/Fling 11:54 am EDT 03/31/23 | |
|
|
|
| I don't know the answer to this: Did Mendes actually write any dialogue or lyrics? My impression is that he did not, but I'm not sure. Prince felt that he should have received royalties as one of the authors, and been credited as director of the original production in revivals, and he was sorry that he didn't put this in the contracts. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hate to break it to you… | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 11:03 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Hate to break it to you… - keikekaze 11:00 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| Me: Here are some facts. You: I reject those facts. Me: That doesn’t change the facts. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: It sure doesn't. | |
| Posted by: Guillaume 06:51 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: re: It sure doesn't. - keikekaze 05:32 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| Amen to that. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Thank you! nm | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 07:03 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
| In reply to: re: It sure doesn't. - Guillaume 06:51 pm EDT 03/30/23 | |
|
|
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.100828 seconds.