or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Smash on NBC HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Smash on NBC HDTV - Page 2

post #31 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by URFloorMatt View Post

The success of Glee and American Idol concerts suggests otherwise.

Glee and Idol concerts are entirely different animals from Broadway shows.
post #32 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMilner View Post

But while watching a basketball game during a timeout, I switched over to the live SMASH premiere broadcast. It happened to be at the Beautiful audition scene, but the sound seemed like it had been mixed differently, not nearly as much presence, much more echo effects and reverb. I was shocked. I can't decide if the suits at NBC decided to try and make it sound more like GLEE by remixing, or if my local NBC affiliate had poor sound broadcast.

The Comcast OnDemand version is stereo sound while the NBC broadcast version is 5.1 surround sound.
post #33 of 397
We really enjoyed it. Sort of a 'Glee' for grown-ups with less broad humor and wacky characterizations. Seems to be very well written, and McPheever is more than holding her own against a dazzling cast. They put a lot of time, talent, and effort into this, and it shows. Think I'm going to be all-in with this one.
post #34 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal1981 View Post

That seems to be high risk strategy if it's accurate. The TV show could reveal so much of the concept and production numbers that potential ticket buyers might shy away because they didn't like what they saw or had a "been there, done that" feeling.

I disagree. If fact, I think mounting the show on broadway is a no-brainer. For every potential ticket buyer who is turned off by knowing so much about the show, there will be many for whom that will be a draw. Broadway plays struggle to find some 'hook' that will generate publicity for their show, hence things like 'Spiderman' and ALL the revivals. And speaking of revivals, why would anyone want to see a show they've seen perhaps many times before? And yet, they do. It's the same kind of draw.

So, I will be very surprised if we DON'T see this show on broadway at some point. They've already got 10 million people interested. That's pure gold.
post #35 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

We really enjoyed it. Sort of a 'Glee' for grown-ups with less broad humor and wacky characterizations. Seems to be very well written, and McPheever is more than holding her own against a dazzling cast. They put a lot of time, talent, and effort into this, and it shows. Think I'm going to be all-in with this one.

I think it is far above Glee quality, writing and production. In fact, IIRC the TV Guide by Matt Roush said basically the same thing - not to mistake it for a Glee for Adults. Even if you don't like Theater, many folks would be interested in the story of the characters and their machinations. Of course, I'm only basing it on the pilot, but Roush has seen several and seems very positive.
post #36 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by jandron View Post

I disagree. If fact, I think mounting the show on broadway is a no-brainer. For every potential ticket buyer who is turned off by knowing so much about the show, there will be many for whom that will be a draw. Broadway plays struggle to find some 'hook' that will generate publicity for their show, hence things like 'Spiderman' and ALL the revivals. And speaking of revivals, why would anyone want to see a show they've seen perhaps many times before? And yet, they do. It's the same kind of draw.

So, I will be very surprised if we DON'T see this show on broadway at some point. They've already got 10 million people interested. That's pure gold.

Isn't it based, in part at least, on the 80's attempt at a musical on Marilyn that badly flopped?
post #37 of 397
Thread Starter 
Tonight's' second episode continues to show the same quality found in the pilot, often that is not the case. The musical numbers were well done, and the plot moved, unlike Glee that this show gets compared all too often to.

Hilti was much better this time around, so much so that I'm torn between the two as to who I want to play Marilyn.
post #38 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post

Hilti was much better this time around, so much so that I'm torn between the two as to who I want to play Marilyn.

Agreed. When they did the piece that laternated between the two I preferred McPhee's voice. But I really liked Hilti's song in the bar at the end.
post #39 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Wadsworth View Post

Agreed. When they did the piece that laternated between the two I preferred McPhee's voice. But I really liked Hilti's song in the bar at the end.

Agree with your agreement. I think that overall, McPhee may have a more versatile voice than Hilty. Megan is more of a classic belter but she did show some serious chops on her last song. I loved the initial staging of Let Me Be Your Star last night. The song is great and deserved another airing. The fact that Ivy "got the role" may not guarantee her that if the show opens on Broadway. Some strange things can happen when a new show is work shopped. One of the primary examples is Wicked. Stephanie J. Block, a superb actress, created the role of Elphaba in workshop but Idina Menzel got the role when the show went into production. After the show opened in San Francisco, Bobby Morse who played the Wizard was fired and Joel Grey was brought in. There is some buzz about Uma Thurmond coming in and vying for the lead. It's also obvious that Derrick is totally intrigued by Karen and, down deep, wanted to cast her in the lead. If they don't get too soapy, this could be fun to watch unfold.
post #40 of 397
After seeing the pilot, I so much want this series to succeed. I love music, theatre and dance. The two leads are pretty and believable. But it needs more, if it's going to attract the attention of the 18-49's and popular buzz.

I'm glad to have a fresh tv series that's not based upon crime, detectives or hospitals. Refreshing. But for Smash to succeed, it's going to need a villain. The villain could be another actor, a greedy, over-sexed director, or even a world of hard knocks. So far we haven't seen that. If we saw more of Karen's fear of failure, or Ivy's passing up marriage, or Karen's struggle with dancing, or the struggle to pay a grocery bill, it will give a bit more reality to the characters and make us want them to succeed.

But so far, those struggles have not been seen.

Otherwise, this might as well be Opera to most 18-49's. Their attention span is too short and better entertainment can be found online, on demand or on another of the 200 channels.
post #41 of 397
Thread Starter 
Sorry, a no from me on the "villain" Seems like every show has some sort of villain just to stir things up and add conflict, but when you are struggling to make it in your craft there is more than enough conflict. How many of us really have villains in our daily life? we may struggle with work, or finding work, marriage or kids, but I'd dare say most of us do not have a person plotting against us on a daily basis --- at least I don't.
post #42 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMilner View Post

But for Smash to succeed, it's going to need a villain. The villain could be another actor, a greedy, over-sexed director, or even a world of hard knocks. So far we haven't seen that.

I think we have one in Derek Wills. He sleeps with one and tries rather sleazily so with the other. All the time not really giving a hoot as far as I can tell... giving it zero influence.

Quote:


Otherwise, this might as well be Opera to most 18-49's. Their attention span is too short and better entertainment can be found online, on demand or on another of the 200 channels.

Who cares. The Good Wife is having a pretty decent run and it's not played to the lowest common denominator.
post #43 of 397
Thread Starter 
Another strong show. They keep layering things on. Looks like Tmilner got a villain of sorts....
post #44 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post

Another strong show. They keep layering things on. Looks like Tmilner got a villain of sorts....

It was very good and both women got to do killer songs (McPhee can definitely do Country). Tom's assistant, Ellis, is turning out to be a total sleeze ball. His sexual orientation also turned out to be somewhat surprising. He's either bi-sexual or is straight and posed as Gay to score the job with Tom. One can only hope that Theater Karma catches up with him. The staging on Mr. and Mrs. Smith was very spare (typical of workshop) but very nicen and the song was really good. The Brit throwdown between Dev and Derick was very funny. The show continues to bring in established Broadway performers. Will Chase (Michael Swift) was Roger in the final company of Rent. It was taped for DVD/Blu-ray release and is excellent. Michelle Federer (playing his wife) was the original Nessarose in Wicked. Louis J. Stadlen (an investor) is a two time Tony nominee who was Max Bialystock in the national tour of The Producers. They even got Emanuel Azenberg, one of the biggest Broaday producers, to play himself. The only red flag was the "showmance" between Julia and Michael. These do actually happen in theater and film companies and are pretty intense while they last. I just hope that it doesn't become too much of a soap opera. Given the talent behind this show, it probably won't but you never know.
post #45 of 397
Great show last night. I used to watch Castle and record Smash. Now I watch Smash & record Castle.
post #46 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoilerJim View Post

Great show last night. I used to watch Castle and record Smash. Now I watch Smash & record Castle.

Same here. The DVR and On Demand are your friends
post #47 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

I think we have one in Derek Wills. He sleeps with one and tries rather sleazily so with the other. All the time not really giving a hoot as far as I can tell... giving it zero influence.
....

Yeah, Derek is the Bob Fosse clone that sleeps with all the dancers. But who's his Gwen Verdon (the ever suffering wife that he keeps going back to between flings)?

On other topics:

This episode was a little to "scattered" for my taste. Still good, but just too much going on with everything getting short shrift.

I'm already sick and tired of Jerry (the male producer). I think they might have already wrecked this character with the repetition of one scene. I don't know what they can do to fix it now.
post #48 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

Yeah, Derek is the Bob Fosse clone that sleeps with all the dancers. But who's his Gwen Verdon (the ever suffering wife that he keeps going back to between flings)?

On other topics:

This episode was a little to "scattered" for my taste. Still good, but just too much going on with everything getting short shrift.

I'm already sick and tired of Jerry (the male producer). I think they might have already wrecked this character with the repetition of one scene. I don't know what they can do to fix it now.

Good point on Derek but, at this juncture, he appears to be totally single and basically a hound dog. Maybe there will be some kind of reveal about this but at the very least, there will, hopefully, be something about his history with Tom and the clear hostility between them. They could do with a bit less Jerry (although it is fun watching Eileen toss the drink with lighting speed). He should appear only when he's being constructive or sabotaging in a major way. Of course in their world that could be every week almost simultaneously
post #49 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

This episode was a little to "scattered" for my taste. Still good, but just too much going on with everything getting short shrift.

I agree. Almost like they had bullet points they wanted to check off. Not enough time was spent on anything to let it soak in (to any degree). Let's see boyfriend confronts girlfriend's boss... check... baby shower... check...
post #50 of 397
The show is starting to lose my interest. I'll bet I am not alone.
post #51 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave1216 View Post

The show is starting to lose my interest. I'll bet I am not alone.

Oh, you're not.
post #52 of 397
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce73 View Post

Oh, you're not.

While the ratings are a bit down, I'm feeling the opposite, the more I see, the more I like. I to am watching it over Castle and H50, both of which I enjoy for various reasons though they are very different. I watched Smash almost live, then H50 but Castle is still sitting on the DVR.
post #53 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave1216 View Post

The show is starting to lose my interest. I'll bet I am not alone.

I thought the same thing as I watched the last ep yesterday.
I like the singing and dancing(which they always highlight in the teasers) but I'm getting board by all the talking and general backstage goings on.
Maybe I'm not the target market, I like shows like SYTYCD and DWTS but really never got into Glee because of all the talking. We'll see, I'm not bailing just yet but on my way. Glee only took two shows to decided it wasn't my kind of show, this one is holding more interest for now.
I really like McPhee and would be gone by now if not for her and her great vocals. The blonde is interesting too but IMO not nearly as talented as McPhee. The British guy is OK too but I really don't like the producer gal and her liquor throwing scenes, oh and not so hot for the sneaky secretary guy either.
post #54 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post

I thought the same thing as I watched the last ep yesterday.
I like the singing and dancing(which they always highlight in the teasers) but I'm getting board by all the talking and general backstage goings on.
Maybe I'm not the target market, I like shows like SYTYCD and DWTS but really never got into Glee because of all the talking. We'll see, I'm not bailing just yet but on my way. Glee only took two shows to decided it wasn't my kind of show, this one is holding more interest for now.
I really like McPhee and would be gone by now if not for her and her great vocals. The blonde is interesting too but IMO not nearly as talented as McPhee. The British guy is OK too but I really don't like the producer gal and her liquor throwing scenes, oh and not so hot for the sneaky secretary guy either.

My thoughts pretty much agree. I really like McPhee, but she is not great at lipsyncing. No emotion. Kinda like Rossum in the Phantom movie if you ever saw that. If you like Katherine, try the Hitman disc by David Foster. I think all the subplots are boring and the music numbers are not good enough to make it worth my time.
post #55 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post


I thought the same thing as I watched the last ep yesterday.
I like the singing and dancing(which they always highlight in the teasers) but I'm getting board by all the talking and general backstage goings on.
Maybe I'm not the target market, I like shows like SYTYCD and DWTS but really never got into Glee because of all the talking. We'll see, I'm not bailing just yet but on my way. Glee only took two shows to decided it wasn't my kind of show, this one is holding more interest for now.

Exactly. This is basically "Glee for Grownups." I enjoy the performances, but the narrative part is not particularly gripping. Maybe it is to those who know the biz ...
post #56 of 397
Thread Starter 
I hate shows like DWTS, SYTYCD and AI so I guess that's why I like this show. I'm enjoying the mix of narrative and music at this point. I'm not anywhere near the business and I don't feel it has an insider take on things, I just find it something different to watch that isn't a fake competition geared to teen girls.
post #57 of 397
Count my wife and me among the group of people that enjoyed the premiere but have been liking it less and less in the following weeks to the point where we've dumped it from the DVR. I personally dont find anything compelling or entertaining about showtunes, but that alone didn't make me lose interest. It was the really uninteresting storylines and the fact that McPhee isn't improving, she's regressing with each episode. What a major bore she turned out to be. Easy on the eyes, tough on the brain. I hope viewership picks up so that those of you that like it wont have it cancelled. NBC sure could use a hit.
post #58 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyehill View Post

Count my wife and me among the group of people that enjoyed the premiere but have been liking it less and less in the following weeks to the point where we've dumped it from the DVR. I personally dont find anything compelling or entertaining about showtunes, but that alone didn't make me lose interest. It was the really uninteresting storylines and the fact that McPhee isn't improving, she's regressing with each episode. What a major bore she turned out to be. Easy on the eyes, tough on the brain. I hope viewership picks up so that those of you that like it wont have it cancelled. NBC sure could use a hit.

I thought it was good last night and every night.
post #59 of 397
There is an easy solution if the show takes off. I believe the plan is to stage the ACTUAL production of "Marilyn: The Musical" on Broadway. If that happens, Hilty can star in that show for sure.

That seems to be high risk strategy if it's accurate. The TV show could reveal so much of the concept and production numbers that potential ticket buyers might shy away because they didn't like what they saw or had a "been there, done that" feeling.


Actually taking the Marilyn show to Broadway was my suspicion from the beginning. People were familiar with The Lion King and that seemed to work; likewise, people know operas and continue to go to them.

If this continues to be like The Red Shoes and follows all the things that arise in creating a musical then it should continue to be interesting. Since Spielberg is connected with it, there's a good chance that might be the case. If it continues to be The War of the Girls, then we simply get more cliche.

My suggestion: hire both of them and use both of them. It's not unprecidented. A very controversial Parsifal film in the eighties did this with the title character, and Luis Bunuel did this in That Obscure Object of Desire. One could argue that Marilyn Monroe was such a complex and iconic character that one person is not enough to do her justice. The actresses could alternate who did what scenes, possibly in a very dynamic way- you might never know who was going to be doing whatever scenes or numbers from night to night.
post #60 of 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaded Dogfood View Post

[i]
My suggestion: hire both of them and use both of them. It's not unprecidented. A very controversial Parsifal film in the eighties did this with the title character, and Luis Bunuel did this in That Obscure Object of Desire. One could argue that Marilyn Monroe was such a complex and iconic character that one person is not enough to do her justice. The actresses could alternate who did what scenes, possibly in a very dynamic way- you might never know who was going to be doing whatever scenes or numbers from night to night.

See the movie: Norma Jean & Marilyn (1996)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117201/
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Smash on NBC HDTV