MADISON SCOUTS 2016

[tesmusic]

I have been seeing people on other show threads making comments about how Madison's show is disjointed, the horns are not that loud, the drums are filthy and dirty, the ending doesn't work, etc. I said this before. Especially if you are alumni, I would think that we should please refrain from negative comments about any corps for that matter on public social media. Even if these observations are true, do you not think that the staff is aware of it and has a plan in place to get it corrected? If not, have you not thought about personally contacting Scout's Administration to discuss the matters with your suggestions? Who knows you could be the next Zingali, Fred Sanford or Jim Ott in the making?

Unfortunately, that's not going to happen.

There are simply people out there that are going to say negative things because of the corps name. There are so many close-minded individuals on here, when it comes to bias toward their corps, sorry to say.

That being said. I take those comments as comical at best, as many of the people making so many negative comments about the Scouts, and all other corps for that matter haven't seen them in a great number of cases. So they're basing their comments on a video that someone recorded on a phone-which will definitely give varied opinions on the sound of the music especially.

As for the comments about the closer being disjointed, I have to say that I felt that way, but as I've seen the show progress-I would disagree at this point. Unless people were at DoP, which very few that are posting on here were, it's been quite a while since most would have seen the show, video or live, with the trip back from the west. So at this point, it's just talk, IMO.

Having seen the show very recently, I wouldn't put much, if any value in many comments.

[HockeyDad]

Or you could work on not being so hypersensitive about every comment you perceive as being negative. On the one hand you say this forum is a joke. Then you rail against a comment potentially destroying the spirit of the members. Well, ya can't have it both ways. One person's observations are another's scathing negative criticism. I think most posters here love the activity and don't have a particular rooting interest in any one corps. There are always exceptions, I know that. Yeah, I'm looking at you George D. 🙂

[cowtown]

I thought we were all here to destroy the marchers’ spirits; I can’t be the only one feasting on the broken hopes of Bandos?

This is the Judas thread, right?

[Alicepoodle]

I was at the show Sunday in Middleton sitting in the back stands. From all the cheering I was hearing from the guard, especially towards the end of the show, they were excited and having a blast. Good stuff!

[Channel3]

Madison's Broadway quality dancers and musicians are stunning this year. Judas has socko set pieces, and that classic Madison wall of sound. Madison never fails to deliver a huge dose of showmanship. The dance soloists are fierce and convincing in their character work, and the color guard choreography is masterful-- subtle, suggestive and powerful. The entire production stays in the realm of the abstract, thankfully, and the entire visual team did a miraculous job interpreting tired, well worn, ten foot pole material.

- - -

The following is an analysis of the flawed show concept, the reason for the deflated scores:

1) ADAPTATION: Why does Madison use only the original music in this new version (save some Lady Gaga)? Some of the music just doesn't "excerpt" well in a dark version about Judas. For example, the eponymous anthem at the end feels good and is toe tapping, but it simply doesn't fit. There are likely copyright adaptation issues, and that raises the specter of typical adaptation problems. This isn't a true adaptation. It's a cut and paste.

"The source material is the starting point. But the very point of adaptation is to end up someplace new." Caleb Lewis, Playwright

2) STYLE: What happened to the daring humor and light camp feel to this musical? There isn't any now because of the 180 degree change in focus. This shift presents a style conflict versus the original. The raucous audience response in 1999 came from the balance of humor and heart rending sacrifice. But this show is pretty much just dark. The engine that makes this piece so likeable is broken.

3) HERO IDENTIFICATION: Protagonist/Antagonist/Hero/Antihero. Pick one. There's an anti-hero problem with creating a musical version called Judas. We want to like him, but he did throw Jesus under the bus. Don't expect anyone to applaud during the show, it's not going to happen. That's a concept flaw. This isn't Batman that you can spin as an anti-hero, it's Judas who betrayed Jesus Christ. Good luck with the likability factor. What's next, Martin Shakrelli, the musical?

4) BLACK JUDAS: Of course the production prolongs the myth of black Judas, a racist fabrication, as I've documented before. Go ahead and read something about historical depictions of Judas. Where's your new insight since the JCSS premiere 40 years ago? Does the original producer's intent in casting still stand up today, or do you have a new take on it, these 40 years later? None? Okay.

5) POV: What's the point of this adaptation? To humanize Judas? To shed light on his internal struggle? We simply can't tell-- it's not clear.

6) IF IT AIN'T BROKE After Madison's 1999 triumphant version which effervesced with just the right amount of camp and comedic lift and heart-rending sacrifice, and with a boffo crowd reaction (I saw a woman in the stands throw her newborn baby), who would dare touch this piece ever again?

There seems to be a trend toward shock material in DCI recently. Show coordinators are going for dark, edgy material that's meant to raise eyebrows, and meant to appear bold and artsy. But any designer can easily shock audiences by choosing dark subject matter-- that's the easy part. This year the Cavaliers do it by holding up images of Barbara Streisand next to pictures of high-heel crushed hamsters. But just featuring dark subject matter isn't good enough, it's not a clear thematic argument, by itself. You must build universal human truth into your show. You must have a clear point of view, and a rock solid insight, both missing now.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Channel3

[corpsband]

[Channel3]

If Madison's show coordinators were to create a new musical adaptation of Little Shop of Horrors, focusing only on Audrey, the evil plant, and using only the original music, how would it work? What would the point be? Would it require new music in order to fill out the character and make it deep? Would the original music be enough to create a new thematic argument? Would the show still be funny and have the same tone? Would Audrey now be a hero character? Would they keep the same ending? What new insight would the production have?

[jonwoody]

I thought we changed the locks in the place. How did Channel 3 get past the guards and the hungry dogs???

[ShortAndFast]

I thought we changed the locks in the place. How did Channel 3 get past the guards and the hungry dogs???

He's on loan from the Crown thread for the day. You can send him on to Cadets tomorrow.

[xandandl]

He's on loan from the Crown thread for the day. You can send him on to Cadets tomorrow.

please don't.

We already have GD, Tobias, Tekk, and me. Let's not hog.

Edited July 13, 2016 by xandandl