Posted by CukorLover 2012-11-12 23:10:51
In a word, YIKES !
Posted by Mystic Pasta 2012-11-12 23:44:28
This is hard to watch. Hey, Mr. Choreographer, don't try to do Steven Hoggett style movement. It's like cilantro. A little goes a long way. What you have on stage from seeing that clip, is too much and looks like a high school production. Less is more!
Posted by Baiseur82 2012-11-12 23:52:13
Bare is one of my favorite shows. I was so excited when I heard about this revival however as more and more info comes out about this revival I am less and less excited for it. I am seeing it when I come to NYC in December and I am hoping that I am completely wrong about my trepidation for this incarnation! I really want to love this show!
Posted by SNAFU 2012-11-13 00:21:41
What a butt ugly looking show!
Posted by RippedMan 2012-11-13 00:37:09
Oof. That's an awful design. And I'm sorry, but I can't get over homeboy's puka shell necklace. Is this show set in 1994?
Posted by AEA AGMA SM 2012-11-13 01:18:22
I agree on the awful design. I know stage 4 isn't super deep at New World, but looking at that video I would estimate they have about 10 feet of depth because of that design, which means that it's going to be very challenging to keep the staging from ending up looking very flat. And that collage aspect of it is just not attractive at all.
Like others have said, the more we see and hear about this production the less I want to actually go see it.
Posted by CurtainPullDowner 2012-11-13 02:05:18
It couldn' t look worse.
And what the he## were they talking about?
And yes I am judging from a half hour "clip".
And Damon's sex change, didn't work.
Posted by LYLS3637 2012-11-13 08:57:25
I'm just making educated guesses, but it looks like the first number replaces "Epiphany" and the Nadia/Ivy duet either replaces "A Quiet Night at Home" or "Portrait of a Girl"... 3 songs that actually worked and are staples of the original show.
I'm just having a hard time understanding why even do the show if so much of the core music is being replaced?
Posted by little_sally 2012-11-13 09:27:39
I loved the original version of this show a lot and this preview just made me really sad. I was going to see it anyway out of curiosity but I think I'm just going to pass.
Not to mention, the footage of the opening number looked just like the opening from Carrie.
Posted by ajh 2012-11-13 09:42:31
Like a number of the other posters on here, I was looking forward to this but after this preview I'm really not sure now. I am guessing (hoping?!) that this isn't the lighting plot and costumes that they'll be using in performance. The sound quality is pretty poor so am also hoping that the vocals are better live. The set looks horrible too, oh dear.......
Posted by ClydeBarrow 2012-11-13 10:08:55
I'd like to give that video a WOOF and an UGH because that looks terrible. The new songs that they've added sound pretty generic. The set is probably the most hideous thing I've ever seen. I don't get why everything is covered in Instagram photos. We get it, you've updated the show!
I'm a huge fan of Travis Wall but I'm not feeling any of that choreography. Not really sure if he works well in a theatre setting. I don't think Stafford Arima should be allowed to direct anything (at least revivals) ever again. Taylor Trensch seems like a pretty terrible choice and not a very good singer.
Part of me has been waiting years to see an actual production of this and the other part of me never wants to see it because it'll probably make me hate the show entirely.
Posted by newintown 2012-11-13 10:33:01
I gather that liking Bare in the past doesn't mean you'll like it now; it appears that it's become a very different piece. I wonder who they thought they were making the changes for, precisely? The fans seemed to like it as it was; based on this clip, I can't imagine they'll recruit any new admirers, and will alienate many of the old ones. (Personally, I always thought it was adolescent amateurish nonsense, but that's just me.)
Posted by MichaelDendy 2012-11-13 12:03:54
I have been dying to see this show for years. Living in the south this show is almost never produced but with the Off-Broadway revival it is getting some buzz. With that preview I saw, this will not be Bare. They have taken this show and ripped it's heart out. They decided (from what I can tell) to just focus on the story of Peter and Jason but their is so much more to Bare than their stories. Also, the fact the Nadia is not a fat character that takes every aspect of her struggle away.
While I believe some stuff needed to be trimmed down and cut, the things they have decided to cut are extreme and ridiculous. The cutting of Claire was when I lost all faith in this production. Stafford Ariama should never be allowed to direct anything of this stature ever again. All he did was rip the heart out and left us with a stale production.
Posted by BwayTday 2012-11-13 12:16:26
Re: Nadia, yes, exactly. Someone can not be introverted and feel socially outcast unless they are overweight. Never. Ever. (I'm not advocating the decision but come on now)
I thought by cutting some of the stuff they did they were trying to make it less angsty and preachy, but based on what I've seen/ what they are saying, I guess not. We'll see.
Posted by LYLS3637 2012-11-13 12:51:44
It's going to be even more "angsty and preachy" because now the bullying card is being played.
Bare was relevant and universal without having to change the entire structure to give a "ripped from the headlines" feel.
Posted by AC126748 2012-11-13 12:59:01
I've enjoyed the incarnations of Bare that I've seen in the past--high art it ain't, but I found it pleasing enough. This, however, just seems awful. The set and choreography are like a stomach-turning CARRIE redux, and the new songs sound awful. Also, am I the only one who just doesn't get Taylor Trensch? He's just so...vocally unimpressive.
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-13 13:58:31
In partial defense of the set, I have actually seen it and it is pretty cool in person. This was a press event. I am sure some things may change by the opening.
Posted by RippedMan 2012-11-13 14:22:51
Pics of the set.
Um, is it set in a warehouse junkyard in Brooklyn? Aren't we suppose to be at a privte school?
Posted by mmh1019 2012-11-13 14:25:21
I saw Jason Hite (playing Jason) as Melchoir in San Jose Rep's production of Spring Awakening, ironically brought down by choreography from another SYTYCD alum, Sonya Tayeh. His voice seems to fit the songs better than they did in SA, but I wasn't feeling the chemistry between him & Taylor...
Posted by ErikJ972 2012-11-13 14:56:12
Wasn't there a giant, inflatable penis in the original production? I hope they kept that.
Posted by jaynellll 2012-11-13 14:58:58
Oh dear god. I've watched the original Bare on youtube, and after seeing this, it makes me sad. I feel like they're trying to make it fit in too much with popular culture, (I definitely thought of Skins). They're over doing it.
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-13 15:01:12
Ripped, I saw it back in 2004 and the set was fine. They moved ieces in and out. I suspect they may do the same here. From what I remember it was a pretty bare, pardon the pun, stage. I think this stage will be cool if the lighting is good.
Posted by Kad 2012-11-13 15:57:40
I never thought a set design so simple in its construction could look so busy.
Posted by RippedMan 2012-11-13 15:59:06
Too me, it looks too much like American Idiot done on a cheaper scale. I thought the set was fine with the original production. This set design just doesn't give me the right sense of time and place. I mean, is the show about memories? Is that what we're suppose to walk away thinking? Cause that's what I get with that design.
Posted by Kad 2012-11-13 16:17:26
...is this incarnation even still set in a Catholic boarding school? Because... nothing they have shown seems to indicate that. At all.
Posted by shrekster224 2012-11-13 16:21:38
No desire to see it, and Trensch singing this score is close to unbearable. Or unBAREable, rather.
Posted by boggess 2012-11-13 17:32:48
I quite liked the set in the original. The stained glass artwork above them seemed so ominous. Looking at the new set, it's not so much anymore. The number in the video reminded me too a lot of Carrie.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-13 20:38:49
"(I definitely thought of Skins). "
The video commercial definitely seems like a poorer copy of the Skins (UK version) opening sequences.
Posted by MichaelDendy 2012-11-13 23:13:15
I had not even made the connection with Skins but it literally does look just like the intro for the show. The more and more I see the more and more I hate.
Yes it is still set in the catholic school and yes nothing indicates such a thing. They said it in the interview.
I would just like to get a running list of the songs that we know are cut or will be cut... What I have found so far are: "Epiphany", "See Me", "Warning", "Plain Jane Fat Ass", "911! Emergency", "God Don't Make No Trash" - Probably "A Quiet Night At Home", "Wedding Bells", "Rolling" (Needs to be cut).
Also, depending on if the stick with "Romeo and Juliet" or not that could change "Auditions", "Queen Mab" and "Two Households" (I'm blanking on if anything else references that aspect)
Things that have been changed - "Are You There", "Role of a Lifetime", "Best Kept Secret"
This is NOT "Bare" anymore. This is some f-ed up creation of Stafford Arima. I hate that "Bare" and the ones that love and find solitude in this are going to be let down.
Posted by Marlothom 2012-11-13 23:57:56
I didn't get it then (and I saw it in 2004) and I don't get it now.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-13 23:58:00
"I had not even made the connection with Skins but it literally does look just like the intro for the show. The more and more I see the more and more I hate. "
It's really pretty shameless--were they just too lazy for their own concept? Did they hope teens would confuse the two shows and think this is Skins on stage? Did they hope their target audience would be clueless about the obvious reference?
Posted by Dave516 2012-11-14 00:24:40
I'm relieved that I am not the only one thinking that this production is a nightmare. Trensch should not be allowed anywhere near this score and the somewhat problematic but ultimately fulfilling and beautiful show that I once connected with is just gone. I don't understand how they are allowed to use the same title. This is most definitely NOT the Bare that I love. Notice how Damon is nowhere to be seen in this clip. I'm not exactly sure how some other woman was allowed to come in and re-write the show, but it appears as if Damon wants no part of this bastardization of his work.
Posted by Scarywarhol 2012-11-14 00:52:24
Flat and obvious staging, an after-school special tone, boring production values, and hilariously unconvincing teenagers.
Yep, it's a Stafford production all right!
Posted by CurtainPullDowner 2012-11-14 01:12:46
For me, no one could sing Peter like Michael Arden, but listening to Trensch sing it makes me wish Andy Mientus had not gotten SMASH and done BARE as planned. That would have been a small compensation, to what looks like a disaster, from these clips.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-14 01:15:58
I agree with both of those comments. I think I have more trouble with the show than most people on here (the previous version, I mean). I do find some of it pretty embarassing and poorly done--and yet, I have huge affection for the piece despite that. I always find it kinda funny when people proclaim that some new version is stealing the heart of a show--but in this case, I get where the thought is coming from. It just seems like every change, the more and more we are shown, was misguided--not working on or fixing the parts that don't work, and gutting the parts that most of the fans of the show most liked.
I think Newintown's comments were spot on--and I know he's not a fan of the show, which puts them in a sharper perspective. I really can't see this new version gaining critical respect and new audiences that might not have liked the previous version--and i seems to be alienating the existing fans. Stafford's Carrie did this too, I know, but I got more where the revisions were coming from in that case as, misguided or not, they seemed to genuinely be trying to work on what didn't work in the original.
Posted by orangeskittles 2012-11-14 01:17:53
The promo videos look like Rent: Remixed and the set design reminds me of this:
Still upset that we never got a studio recording of Michael Arden and John Hill singing the title song
Posted by crushgroove 2012-11-14 01:54:38
Cutting Claire from the show...that's it for me. "See Me" is by far one of the most heart wrenching songs of the piece and the fact that it gone along with a lot of the best numbers in the show. I am never seeing this production and I'm actually angry that they are even allowed to call this BARE. While I know the show needed cuts. They went at this poor show with a chainsaw.
Posted by Kad 2012-11-14 02:06:41
I'm really baffled as to why Stafford Arima continues to get work. He's proven himself to be a pedestrian-at-best director.He hasn't even shown flashes of brilliance that make me think he has real potential greatness.
Posted by newintown 2012-11-14 09:23:30
There are many people in commercial theatre (directors, writers, performers) who have never been particularly successful, but who continue to be hired. My guess is that those with the cash decide whom to hire mostly based on merely having heard the name before.
Posted by Bettyboy72 2012-11-14 10:55:51
The promos have the kids looking like back up dancers for Color Me Badd. Wretched costumes and design.
Posted by songanddanceman2 2012-11-14 13:37:45
wow such outrage to a preview video, over reaction much?
Posted by newintown 2012-11-14 13:40:45
What would we all do without songanddanceman2 telling us what we should think or say, particularly about the more witless shows?
Posted by Kad 2012-11-14 13:43:06
The fact that the preview materials are provoking such a reaction ain't really a good sign for this production.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-14 13:52:51
Exactly. These aren't bootlegs, badly filmed. This is material being released with the idea of this is how their show should be sold and represented (and not even with a disclaimer that the end product will be greatly different). I think for those of us who know the show well, or, frankly, don't know the show at all, it's more than fair to judge the show *at this point* from these videos.
Was Arima hired before Carrie or after? I almost wonder if some producer heard he was doing a more "realistic" version of Carrie and decided then and there he'd be ideal for this.
Posted by CurtainPullDowner 2012-11-14 14:31:21
Correct Eric, The producers put this (very long) promo out there so people WILL talk about the show and to judge if they want to see it. Getting negitive feedback is part of the territory.
As for Stafford, he is a sweet man who talks the talk, getting BARE and CARRIE up, I believe were mainly championed by him, but unfortunely his productions don't measure up to his dreams.
Posted by Idiot 2012-11-14 15:38:39
"I'm really baffled as to why Stafford Arima continues to get work. He's proven himself to be a pedestrian-at-best director.He hasn't even shown flashes of brilliance that make me think he has real potential greatness."
My guess is that he makes creators feel warm and fuzzy with all sorts of pretentious psychobabble about the importance of their work.
Posted by newintown 2012-11-14 15:52:28
And he probably comes pretty cheap.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-14 16:21:15
I'm sure this has been discussed--I haven't read all the Bare threads, but why did Lynne Shankel write the music for the new songs and not Damon Intrabartolo? Is he the one who had some sort of criminal offence? Is he too busy orchestrating film scores or whatever he seems to usually be doing? Much of the priase for Bare originally was for the music, and these new songs (aside from having vague, and cliche ridden lyrics that make some of the cliched lyrics of the original material sound great in comparison), also seem to have very cliched music--almost the kind of thing where you hear the first couple of lines of a song and know exactly where the melody will go.
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-14 16:28:15
From what I understand, he has decided to let the show go.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-14 17:01:38
I guess that was gracious on his part, but they did lose a huge chunk of the appeal. Is there any word if the previous version will remain available for performance?
Posted by TBFL 2012-11-14 18:24:36
With regards to the set - it looks like it is made up of stills from youtube videos - possibly from the 'It Gets Better' campaign, which would make sense given the themes of the show.
Posted by ClydeBarrow 2012-11-14 18:34:51
It's not from YouTube or It Gets Better videos (thankfully). They had people send in Instagram photos to be included in the set design. Seeing as how there are millions of them I guess the contest wasn't the only source they used.
Posted by MichaelDendy 2012-11-15 12:09:11
@EricMontreal22 If you order the show from Theatrical Rights you can have the original show. They let you keep the material when they send it out. I own it as well as a couple of other friends. I will never ever do this new production they are putting together. It's not Bare and never will be.
I really hate this was the show I was coming to NYC to see and now it's the one I am dreading seeing. If I had not already bought tickets I would not be going.
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-15 12:41:00
Michael, you evidentally have an interest in the show. This was a press event without full lighting and staging. Go see the entire show andw then judge it. I feel that is what people should do who are already slamming it. I am not happy about some of the changes but I am going to see the show.
Also, a bit more as to why Damon is not involved, I know a while ago he felt he worked on/with the show for long enough and needed to let it go.
Posted by newintown 2012-11-15 12:45:36
"Also, a bit more as to why Damon is not involved, I know a while ago he felt he worked on/with the show for long enough and needed to let it go."
Makes one glad that other writers haven't taken the same line - imagine South Pacific by Bob Merrill; Richard Rodgers says in Variety, "Oscar and I felt that we had spent more than enough time on this thing; let Bob take a whack at it."
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-15 13:06:13
New, I understand what you are saying but the original version is still out there. I think he had just been with it so long that he felt he did al he could with it.
Posted by newintown 2012-11-15 13:16:06
I've just never heard of a living writer abandoning a show they worked on for years to someone who'll keep some of his material and change anything else they like.
Many properties have changed hands entirely (Muscle originally by Sondheim, then by Finn, for example), but this sort of hybrid seems new.
Is it comparable to the revised Charlie Brown? Gesner was still alive (but was he in poor health?) and didn't object to the inferior new material and the awful re-writing of his original material.
Posted by boggess 2012-11-16 17:40:41
At this point, this should hardly even be considered a revival. It's not the same show. What was formerly Bare: A Pop Opera is now Bare The Musical.
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-16 22:46:44
New, with all due respect, well now you nave heard of one!
A bit of inside info...I found out that due to Sandy, they lost time with load in, tech and this press event. Dates were set that they had to adhere to. So, not to defend them, but they had expected to have more time to prepare for the event.
Posted by uncageg 2012-11-16 22:47:04
New, with all due respect, well now you have heard of one!
Posted by LordGrantham 2012-11-18 08:26:57
besides those strange new songs.. this Trensch guy doesn't seem ready for the score..
Posted by MichaelDendy 2012-11-18 21:47:32
A new interview/article was released today confirming the cutting of "Wedding Bells", "Wonderland" and "Rolling" - Now I am completely okay with "Rolling" getting cut. They have decided to cut the rave scene completely, which it was a little dated so if it is modernized correctly it could be okay. I enjoyed "Wonderland" but for selfish reasons. I am really curious as to what is left in this story.
Also, if you didn't know the show is now titled "Bare: The Musical" instead of "Bare: A Pop Opera" - I guess this is due to the amounts of dialogue they are adding in.
Posted by EricMontreal22 2012-11-18 23:00:06
Rolling was dated even when the musical first ran off-Broadway, so I'm fine with its cutting. The thing is, so much of the press pics really still look dated--
Posted by DEClarke 2012-11-19 09:10:31
Yes, Rolling was very dated...
I don't get all the changes. I have no hope for this new version. I love the 2004 NYC version. Some of the changes made for the "Concept Album" (i.e. "Dream a dream/Then dash another") make me cringe!
Posted by taboo123 2012-11-19 11:28:51
YAY! Now I know what to do for my bedroom design. Polaroids and instagram pics of my friends. I figured it would be cheap, easy to do and I could probably do it in about 27 minutes.
Posted by Kaplan18 2012-11-19 12:21:03
A little worried...
I love Bare, but the preview makes me nervous.