The Sunday Giveaway: 2 Tickets to see Ghost The Musical on Broadway

If you hadn't yet realized, the starting bell has rung on the start of the Spring season of new Broaday musicals.  

They are off and running!  For how long, that's the big question.

One of the most anticipated musicals to arrive on our shores this Spring is one of the strongest titles we've seen in awhile.  Ghost, that surprise-smash of a film that was produced for only 22 million dollars (the musical is rumored to cost $13mm by comparison) and went on to make bazillions for everyone involved, including The Righteous Brothers, whose song, "Unchained Melody", is featured in one of the most iconic moments of the movie.

And, that sweet song is also featured in the musical . . . as one of you will see because I've got two free tickets to give away.

Who will win?

As more and more movies become musicals (and I'm not one of those that think it's such a bad thing, by the way, as long as the source movie makes for a strong musical foundation (e.g. Billy Elliot, Once, etc.)), more and more producers have to make the tough decision of including a big song from the movie or starting from scratch with something original.  What's the expecation level of the audience?  Do they expect to hear these tunes?  Do you disappoint if you don't include 'em?  Do you disappoint the reviewers if you do?

What do you think?  Should movies-to-musicals like Ghost start over, or are they obliged to include these tunes in the show?

Comment below and I'll randomly choose one of you to go see Ghost on Broadway!

 

(Got a comment? I love 'em, so comment below! Email subscribers, click here, then scroll down, to say what's on your mind!)

------

FUN STUFF:

- Take a Broadway Road Trip from DC on 4/28.  Click here. 

Comments

[Ellen Orchid]

I love when the signature songs are used; that makes me feels I'm getting the "real thing" and then they add new songs that enhance and expand the musical to new heights. There is comfort in familiarity and excitement with the new.

[Yosi Merves]

I think it's alright to have a song or two from the original film in the musical version as long as the rest of the score is original. I compliment Sister Act on creating an all-new score even though the source material is a film that had several well-known songs. But the two take place in different time-periods.

I am more interested in seeing classic moments on stage more than classic songs. Anyone who saw Dirty Dancing in Toronto or the US Tour can see how slavishly recreating the movie doesn't always produce magic.

[Raizza R.]

The producers are obliged to include one to two major signature songs. As long as the composer gives a new light to the tune and carefully incorporate the signature tunes to the script and stage set. Though, composers are there to create and re-imagine the story on stage. It really comes down on how every detail will be incorporated. The story line, actors, music, and set production will have to edit what works and what doesn't. Given the hard work and countless rehearsals day and night, I'm positive those crystal moments will appear instantly on stage. I'm always looking forward for a new twist and creativity in movies-to-musical storylines.

[Diane]

When a song is so connected to a movie or television show it should be part of it's Broadway reincarnation. It is important to have all new music and lyrics, but that one song will be something the audience is familiar with already & they will be looking for it to be a part of the show in some capacity. And with the right placement, that one familiar song will most certainly work along side the new music. If the critics cannot get past one song, they more than likely will find fault with other elements of the show. And it's important to use the recognizable song in the TV & radio spots--it will most certainly grab the attention of possible ticket buyers.

[Andrew B.]

Give the audience what they want. Forget the reviewers. Broadway is about taking the audience on a journey ... an escape. When I see a movie musical, I just want to see the movie, LIVE. Don't mess with it too much, if it was already a huge success. Scenes should feel the same, critical moments should be carefully examined, and the emotional build needs to be consistent with the film. And music should be more or less, the same. It would've been tough to get offered the Catch Me If You Can gig, and have to write a fresh score, when JW's was near-perfect.

Definitely yearning for more original musicals, but nonetheless, anxious to see Once and Ghost...

[Greg]

I think part of the draw of a movie turned musical is the idea that the audience will see that "fan favorite" performed live. The expectation is inherent. "Unchained Melody" is a pivotal scene/song in the movie, one reason why people will come to see it - my mother I know for a fact being one. It seems that the audience may be cheated if you don't put it in. There is so much great music in Sister Act, but I'm sure more than one person walked out of the theater saying "where was "My Guy? Where was I Will Follow Him?" If the creative team is not interested in writing it in/investing in the rights for the song, wouldn't it make more sense to write completely original material? That way there are no expectations. On the other hand, you can't base the complete score on the one signature song either. It has to be balanced with an otherwise solid material.

[Andrew Beck]

It's hard to imagine certain movies-into-Broadway-musicals without their iconic numbers. A "Flashdance: The Musical" without "Maniac"--I'd be disappointed for sure. But just as I was about to suggest a moratorium on Broadway adaptations of motion pictures in which music played a significant role, I am stopped in my steps by the brilliance of "Once," which not only included the wonderful "Falling Slowly" but managed to bring a freshness and creativity to the entire concept, that has been missed in some other adaptations.

[Shannon D.]

I would actually say yes to this...
Just because if one or two of the songs are "iconic" to the movie, the audience will be expecting it and if they don't "get it" they will more than likely complain and give their friends, coworkers, etc. an "ear-full" of how they were disappointed by the lack of movie-songs in the musical. And we don't want any bad press.
However, if the movie songs are just not good songs, then maybe just include the instrumental in the Overture or during a quiet scene or at curtain call.

[Ins]

I think this could go either way. If a big number from the movie is not included in the show it's a big disappointment. If it is included it has to be perfected to avoid a miserable moment. When including a major number that was made a major hit and iconic I'm always afraid they're going to drastically change it. That's a mistake don't stray too far from the original. It's iconic for a reason. But, I love this movie and this song has a defining moment for my fisncr snd i. must see this show!!

[Virginia Wilcox]

I have to heartily agree with Ryan B. "Titanic the Musical" would have been ridiculous with "My Heart Will Go On." I do think that NOT having the iconic songs that are associated with a movie included in the stage show can definitely lead to some disappointed and disgruntled patrons. However...If the show's ONLY legs are the reiteration of some familiar tunes, then that's no good either. It's really gotta be the whole package...all in service of a great story with fully-fleshed-out characters (naturally). Because the much-loved music will get people in the door initially, but the HEART of the story connecting with the audience on a HUMAN level....THAT's what keeps us coming back for MORE!!!!

[Eric]

As long as the preexisting songs and the new songs are cohesive, I don't have a problem incorporating songs from the film version. I think that audiences would be disappointed if "Unchained Melody" wasn't in the stage version of GHOST, so they probably made a wise decision.

[Melanie]

Well, Ghost wasn't a film musical, so I think it can largely start from scratch as long as the basic storyline stays the same. I was disappointed when Thoroughly Modern Millie had so many new songs because I loved the songs from the film so much. I did like the new songs but missed tunes like "Jazz Baby." Sometimes, it does seem as though some of the reinvention is unnecessary, but I know that I'm not as knowledgeable as the producers and composers readying a show for Broadway.

[Candace]

I think a familiar song is a good way for unsophisticated audiences to connect with the show, sit back, enjoy the song, and finally get involved with the plot and characters, if they haven't done so already.

[Alex L]

Yes I believe that movie musicals definitely need to include the key songs in them. But I believe there is always room to include new and even better songs to add to a production. So old and new can combine to make a even better profitable product!

[Andre]

I think that the popular material should definitely be used since there is a good reason for its popularity in the first place - it is generally very catching and helps people connect with the show. I would imagine many people actually look forward to the moment in the show where such a tune is played.

[Christine Garfinkel]

I absolutely think Broadway shows that evolve from movies SHOULD include the original songs, as well as new pieces written specifically for the stage version! It keeps the sense of the "familiar", which may very well be the reason the theatre-goer is there to see it in the first place, as well as provide new delights for the patron. I think that adds up to a win-win experience!

[Jacky]

Hmm... I think the signature song(s) should be included in the Broadway version. Lion King is a successful musical that has incorporated new and old songs, so I think it's doable!

[ECP]

Less effort to "recreate" iconic screen moments on stage, more emphasis on originality and creativity. Relive the movie by buying the DVD. Savor the soundtrack by buying the CD or downloading the tunes.

[Donald Sanborn III]

I have often thought that "Back to the Future" would make a fun musical. If it were turned into a stage show, I would want to hear the Huey Lewis songs "The Power of Love" and "Back in Time," as well as the songs "Earth Angel" (which was skillfully used to advance the plot in the film, and "Johnny B. Goode."

On the other hand, Rodger's & Hammerstein refused to use authentic Von Trapp songs in their "Sound of Music" score, which may have been wise. You want to ensure that there will not be a clash between the show's songs and the existing material.

[consuelo carpenter]

I do feel that the original songs should be included. That is the what woudl draw people to the show originally.

[Samantha]

At least a few songs from the movie should be included in the stage version in order to make the show more appealing to a wider audience. While I enjoyed Sister Act, I was disappointed that the songs from the movie were not included in the musical because that is what I loved about the movie.

[Sharon Hill]

For audience appeal, it is smart to include one or two big songs from the movie. Then, creative originality rules!

[JerryS]

Well, I think that at least a few songs shouldbe common from movie to musical.

[Jessica]

I think that there is a certain expectation from the audience when you bring an iconic film to the stage, and part of that expectation is that the audience still wants to see the memorable moments intact. With a film like Ghost, the most iconic scene is that pottery scene underscored by Unchained Melody. If the show banking on drawing audiences in because of their familiarity with the film, those audiences are going to want to see the things from the film that they remember. Music is such a huge part of film, 20 years later I can still hear songs and name the 80s movie that they were used in. I think that people want that familiarity in their film to stage adaptations.

[roy]

make new songs but keep the old one is silver and the other is gold

[Amanda]

I think with some shows it is important to keep the iconic songs in (loved FOOTLOOSE and I'm glad to hear "Unchained Melody" is in GHOST as it is by far the most famous part of that movie...and probably how the song is best known), but I also loved THE WEDDING SINGER which had entirely original music (despite the fact that the movie soundtrack was full of '80s tunes). I wouldn't have complained if TWS had '80s songs in it though. George's lip-syncing of "Do You Really Want to Hurt Me" was a huge joke in the movie that was entirely removed from the musical. I also think HIGH FIDELITY probably could have used some recognizable songs since the characters are all music snobs.

[Zach]

I think it's a good idea to keep at least a couple of the famous or well known songs in the score but fill it with some new tunes as well. The old songs can work as a kind of bridge between the old and the new. Familiar songs will get people on board with the show easily, especially if they're being performed well, and can definitely open audiences up to connecting with new material. As long as the songs from the film are integrated in a way that enhances the story and doesn't stop the show dead in it's tracks, it's a good idea. I think beyond that, people love just hearing their favorite songs being performed, whether by the original artist or new interpretations and using famous songs in a show can definitely create some great word of mouth amongst audiences.

[Brian_sheola]

This is a very interesting question as many shows do use the score within the original movie, and very little don't. I feel like if you are going to make a musical based on a movie, you should use the music within the movie. Maybe not all of it, but the more popular songs within since that is what is going to attract people to come see the show, even if it is for one song.

[Robert L.]

That's a tough one. If the new score tells it's own story, no need for the old song. however, if there is a hole where that old song should be, yeah, you're gonna need it.

SISTER ACT did it well with a new score. As did THE COLOR PURPLE (no Oscar-nominated "Sister").

[Kevin Davis]

I think it is fairly easy. People need to connect with the old as long as it builds a bridge to something new. For instance, people will still laugh at a pie in the face if the context is fresh. Therefore, I would choose a mix of surefire music from the original, supplemented with new music you feel enhances the original. The customer is always right but they won't know what's right beyond their comfort zone until they hear it. If it is heard in connection with songs and scores they already know and love, there is a very good chance they will learn to love the new material.

[John Shorter]

I like my musicals "fresh." I love when the overture starts on a new musical and I can feel my body tingle with the excitement of a new beginning. If the music is original and vibrant, I can't wait for the opening number to start and whisk me away to a world I've never been to before. When the musical is based on a movie, the feeling is different. I feel like "OK... let's see what they do with this movie on stage." Sometimes, I'm still blown away, but it is more of an "old friend experience" rather than finding a new love!

[Rick Reynolds]

Theatre purists will want a new score (as will the Tony nominators); all others will want what the film gave them. The solution: keep 1 or 2 hit songs within a new score. You've got to appeal to as many as possible. Toward that end, show lots of photos of Richard Fleeshman without his shirt on.

[Courtney]

I think that if you're going to use the existing fanbase for a popular movie, then you should keep the integrity of the movie. Give the people what they want. It is one of the worst experiences to be so excited and happy that your favorite movie has an onstage incarnation...wait to buy tickets for opening...get all geared up and then the show not live up to the expecation you had for it. I've wanted to ask for my money back more than once.

We all know how upset people get when their favorite book is put to screen and the backlash that follows when little changes are made...and especially how hard some movies work to stay as true to the book as possible (and yes, I am terrified about the Hunger Games movie). Why are musicals any different?

If you're going to appeal to the audience that loves the movie, you should give them what they want. Deliver. If you want to stray pretty far from cannon, then remake it all together.

I'm still waiting for a rendition of "Oh Maria" in Sisteract. I know that I'll be waiting for quite awhile.

[MJP]

It's interesting to me that a lot of the responses to this question seem to assume that there is a correct answer, or that the "type" of movie or play will answer the question for you. Doesn't the answer to this question necessarily come down to the question of what is the most effective and meaningful way to tell the story?

Sure, we could all attempt to create meaningless blockbuster hits based on song-lists that everybody knows, but ultimately that choice falls flat (did "Baby It's You" recoup?). Audiences ultimately want to be emotionally moved by an interesting (dare I say "important"?) story told in a meaningful way.

If "I'm a Believer" is vital to the telling of the Shrek story, and the development of its themes, then it should be there. If it's not, get rid of it. I would also suggest that if "I'm a Believer" is truly necessary to enjoying Shrek, the show has bigger problems that need to be addressed. And that philosophy rings true with everything ever written. If "I Don't Know How to Love Him" isn't vital to JCS or "To Be or Not to Be" isn't vital to Hamlet, it shouldn't be there.

The audience's expectation is to see a show they'll want to gush about. Which choice a writer/producer/director makes on this question isn't the point. The point is whether the choice aids or hinders the audience's ability to connect with the show, climb inside its characters and live within a new world for a couple hours.

[Steve]

I vote to keep the song --- if it can be fit into the plot without the use of a shoehorn. "Sister Act" ---which has a very good original score, might have benefitted from incuding even one of the famous medleys from the film -- especially if it were performed during promotional appearances.

[Carol2]

My vote: Keep the signature song, but rethink all else and decide what's best.

[NineDaves]

It depends how the song is originally used in the movie. I wouldn't have expected GHOST THE MUSICAL to use "Unchained Melody" because it's not really performed - just underscored. But I was disappointed originally to hear that SISTER ACT THE MUSICAL wasn't using the songs the nuns performed in the original movie. Of course, I got over that when I saw how Alan Menken's score had basically mad me forget those songs were missing. Which means, I suppose, that any good composer could overcome those initial objections.

[Elissa]

Whenever any adaptation is made (stage to screen, screen to stage, etc), I feel like there have been times where compromises in the story have been made just to get an "iconic moment" in. As much as an audience expects to hear or see that one moment, it should be put in effortlessly. I don't want to be immersed in a show and then taken aback because "Unchained Melody" comes in out of nowhere. As long as the effort is made to have a coherent story line, an "iconic moment" is perfectly acceptable.

[V1RGINIO]

Yes I believe they do. A song can almost be more iconic to a movie than the title. Imagine a musical version of The Graduate without 'Mrs Robinson' or a remake of Risky Business without Bob Seger's 'Old Time Rock and Roll'. Here is another example, what if you ordered a cheeseburger at restaurant and it was served without the bun? Technically its not essential to the burger and its rarely ever listed as an ingredient on the menu, but as a customer, you expect it. The problem with remakes is at the audience comes expecting certain staples. If not as a main element, at least mention it as a spoof or undertone. It serves as a reminder to them about how much they loved the original.

[gj]

i say that if you can afford the rights to the original songs, then use them! those songs are like the movie title, an additional draw for nostalgia buffs!

[Evelyn]

If a song is (or songs are)immediately identifiable with a movie, I think it should be incorporated. If it's just a soundtrack, no matter how good the songs are, it's unnecessary and, I think undesirable. A Broadway musical should be unique, even if it is based on source material.

[Adam]

I think it certainly depends on the movie, and your target audience.. I.E., if your are recreating a Disney movie, and you are targeting everyone with a child who loves that movie.. You darn well better make it as close to the movie as possible... And I think the same applies to iconic movies, I recently had a conversation with someone about Dirty Dancing.. And who they wanted it to get to NY.. But in the same breath, they talked about "bc that is my favorite soundtrack of all time". Personally, I would be ok with "time of your life" and some original music, but I am not the target audience here..
That being said, I think that lesser known movies or movies without a great soundtrack, such as The Full Monty and Catch me if you can, work very well... Even if they didn't have long runs. That is a marketing problem, not a musical problem!

[Brandon]

No easy answer to this one. I think it all depends on the situation and the creative vision. If a charming show like ONCE hadn't used the songs from the movie, audiences would surely revolt. On the other hand, I can't imagine enjoying the stage versions of SISTER ACT or SHREK like I did without their original scores. On the other hand, when I discovered VICTOR/VICTORIA had omitted a couple of my favorite songs from the movie, it detracted from the experience for me. On the other hand...

[Eddie]

Quite often the music for a film sets a mood or tone that takes an audience on a journey, but every once in a while a specific song becomes associated with a specific moment of a film. Take the song, Singin' in the Rain, as the title song, it is irreplaceable, nothing else would work, but take the moment that it is used in A Clockwork Orange. It's memorable, but another song could be used at that time that would trigger the same or similar emotional reaction. I think the question is, can an audience accept another song creating the atmosphere or will they spend their time wishing they heard "the" song?

[Jake]

Shrek could have used the inspired soundtrack of the film (Hallelujah, I'm a Believer, All Star, I Don't Give a Damn About My Reputation) rather than the miserable and derivative score it had. At the same time, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels and Spamalot had two of the better scores of recent memory (The Song That Goes Like This? Brilliant!). I don't think there's a definitive answer, but that (like everything) producers need to be fully invested in the reality of the storytelling (and not only in the bottom line) in order to weigh their options.

[David]

I submit that once the decision is made to transform a film into a new stage musical, it is the obligation of the authors to enhance the material by providing it with an entirely new score. Inserting any, though fondly remembered, songs from the film can only remind the audience of the film, and thus immediately diminish what promises to be a completely fresh approach in a different medium. For those who miss any songs from a film that have not been included in a new stage adaptation, I would direct to the film's c.d. or d.v.d. where there can be enjoyed over and over again.

[ken marion]

Keeping the signature song of the hit movie could be critical in the marketing package you develop. If you've got recognition, draw with that. Clearly, the potential audience member wants to feel there is something new so the visual that goes with the song needs to show how Broadway does it differently from Hollywood. All this, while balancing the love factor of the bazillions who saw and loved the movie and want to see the "show" again.

[WC]

I believe the role of theatre, commercial or otherwise, is not to meet an audience's expectation, but rather to subvert it or exceed it. If you can do that, then it's almost unimportant, or at least a non-discussion if you use a song from the original. Look at The Producers; no one's mentioned that Springtime for Hitler was from the movie. That's because by the time you get to that song, the show has earned the right to use it. But if you start the building a musical based on a song everyone is expecting to hear, you may be putting the cart in front of the horse.

[John P]

Personally I think if a successful movie is being made into a Broadway Musical there should be some familiarity ... especially if the movie is a musical as well....Of course adding new songs/music to the production should be included. As for the success of the Broadway show we know it can go either way.... there have been flops and successes in which both original songs and songs from the film were used... Some movies that need to be heading to Broadway as musicals..
Romy and Michele's High School Reunion
Beetlejuice
The Devil Wears Prada and of course this years
The Artist

[Elizabeth Parra]

I definitely believe that it depends on what movie is being made into a musical, for example if it were Moulin Rouge I believe 99% of audiences would expect to here Elton John's and Madonna's famous songs. On that note can we please really make this happen?!