• neatchee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Definitely not an issue for me; I’m a musical theater kid. And I never said the original wasn’t better. Just that 10x claim is a bit of an exaggeration :)

    I think Broderick and Lane are both hilarious comedians as well (especially Lane, where Broderick is more of a total-package entertainer). It’s a different show for a different audience, for sure, but let’s not sell those two short, especially after the highly successful Broadway run. I mean, it was so successful on Broadway that they made it into a movie with a lot of overlapping cast (obviously not Wil Ferrell though. His performance was decent but I was not very happy with that casting choice)

    • Ertebolle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fair enough. Will Ferrell’s casting was terrible, but I wasn’t totally sold on the two of them for those roles either, maybe just because the original actors inhabited them so well - I saw the musical on stage with Brad Oscar as Bialystock and thought he did a better job bringing in that bombastic schemer Ralph Kramden element than Lane did (if maybe not quite possessing the same stage presence overall), and Broderick is just a touch too earnest and cool for Bloom.