Jesus Christ Superstar

[ttreg]

Has anyone seen it? Ive seen the 1973 movie version on DVD and basically all of the 2000 movie version on youtube. I am also seeing it on Nov. 8 on stage with Ted Neely! That is basically a week away!!

 

[superdave]

Has anyone seen it? Ive seen the 1973 movie version on DVD and basically all of the 2000 movie version on youtube. I am also seeing it on Nov. 8 on stage with Ted Neely! That is basically a week away!!

Jesus Christ Superstar, is what introduced me to Theatre. I like to say, Jesus led me to Theatre. The play about Jesus, and the real Jesus. I have the 1973 Film. It's REALLY dated...and kind of boring. But the music in that film is the best ever done. Ted Neeley rocks my socks off. Carl Anderson, has to be the best Judas ever...no comparison. And Bob Bigham, Barry Dennen...come on....All of these are demanding preformances.

The 2000 movie is sufficient. The visuals are better, but Glen Carter, not as good...too pretty, looks a little too gay for my tastes. Jerome Pardon, he's a gutsy actor--not the best singer--but he is a good Judas.

I cant wait to see it on stage either, I am going on Nov. 13!!!! WOO HOO!!!! I keep on telling everyone, I am gong to go see Jesus...on Nov. 13. I hope they have a meet and greet, because I really would just love to see Ted.

 

[gengwall]

I have seen it and been involved in several stage productions. I'll be curious to hear how they staged it and played it and your reactions. My take has always been that the show could be staged to be very representative of Jesus minstry but rarely is. Most stagings portray a very different Jesus than the one the bible shows us.

 

[Paddington]

Jesus Christ Superstar, is what introduced me to Theatre. I like to say, Jesus led me to Theatre. The play about Jesus, and the real Jesus.

It's not really 'the real Jesus' as it portrays him as a confused man rather than the Son of God...

Anyway as a musical I don't like it tha much. There are some good songs in it but it's not up to some of ALWs others like Phantom which has amazing music all the way through. I also wasn't impressed with the film at all.

 

[gengwall]

The one song I find fascinating in JCS is "I Don't Know How to Love Him". Of course, virtual every production plays this song with sexual overtones, and often explicit sexuality leading into the song. And I'm quite certain that is how lyricist Tim Rice envisioned it. But isn't this really the cry of every Christian. Look at the lyrics without a sexual magnifying glass and it is what all of us experience. What Christian knows how to love Jesus in comparison with His love for us. We all have differing views about love and we all have differing experiences with love but none of us is really prepared to be loved the way Jesus loves us. And none of us, I suspect, know truly how to return that love.

Whenever I watch the show, I always block out any sexual inuendo that might exist and view the song from Mary's perspective as a new follower of Christ.

 

[soulsearching1]

The one song I find fascinating in JCS is "I Don't Know How to Love Him". Of course, virtual every production plays this song with sexual overtones, and often explicit sexuality leading into the song. And I'm quite certain that is how lyricist Tim Rice envisioned it. But isn't this really the cry of every Christian. Look at the lyrics without a sexual magnifying glass and it is what all of us experience. What Christian knows how to love Jesus in comparison with His love for us. We all have differing views about love and we all have differing experiences with love but none of us is really prepared to be loved the way Jesus loves us. And none of us, I suspect, know truly how to return that love.

Whenever I watch the show, I always block out any sexual inuendo that might exist and view the song from Mary's perspective as a new follower of Christ.

I think that the song really has to do with both. We know the "before" version of Mary Magdalene- an unbelieving "loose woman". But now, as she's singing, we have the "after" version, where she struggles with relating to this man in a COMPLETELY different way than she's used to. What is striking to her, is that her love for him is NOT in a sexual way, which is strange for her. So she doesn't know what to do about the way she feels for him. Does that make sense? I've seen this show several times, and never in the productions I've seen, have they really played up MM's sexuality. I think we tend to put those overtones there because she IS a prostitute, so it's "expected" of her- but then we learn how she really feels.

 

[soulsearching1]

It's not really 'the real Jesus' as it portrays him as a confused man rather than the Son of God...

Anyway as a musical I don't like it tha much. There are some good songs in it but it's not up to some of ALWs others like Phantom which has amazing music all the way through. I also wasn't impressed with the film at all.

By standards of people who are in the business (theatre, that is), JCS is far superior to Phantom and besides Evita, it's the only good thing Lloyd Weber wrote. Phantom is overblown, in every way possible. (And let's not even get into the atrocity that was Cats)

But anyway, yes, JCS adds a "human" element to the character of Jesus, but I don't think that he's completely confused. Maybe from a human standpoint yes, but he makes it clear that he knows what's going to happen to him.

The play definitely lends itself to a more "Christian-friendly" interpretation- lately I've considered as a fantasy, directing a production, and how I would go about doing so (I have a degree in Musical Theatre, so this isn't an entirely out-in-left-field idea). And it's doable. I just think that it doesn't get done in such a manner because many Christians are afraid to really touch it.

 

[gengwall]

I think that the song really has to do with both. We know the "before" version of Mary Magdalene- an unbelieving "loose woman". But now, as she's singing, we have the "after" version, where she struggles with relating to this man in a COMPLETELY different way than she's used to. What is striking to her, is that her love for him is NOT in a sexual way, which is strange for her. So she doesn't know what to do about the way she feels for him. Does that make sense? I've seen this show several times, and never in the productions I've seen, have they really played up MM's sexuality. I think we tend to put those overtones there because she IS a prostitute, so it's "expected" of her- but then we learn how she really feels.

Good points and take on the song. The sexual part that I have seen usually is in the reprise of "Everythings All Right" just before "IDKHTLH".

Of course, the prostitute or "loose" angle is Tim Rice's use of artistic liscense to combine several women in the bible into his Mary M. But that is nitpicking. Certainly, the woman as written was "loose" even though there is no evidence the real Mary M was.

The song I have the most problem with, as one might expect, is the Garden. The angry, bitter, childish Jesus portrayed in the lyrics just doesn't jibe with the biblical Jesus. This is the song (along with Jesus' "why don't you go back to fishing" line right after) that I would find the hardest to represent with biblical integrity.

If you do pursue a production, I would be very interested in how you play it.

 

[soulsearching1]

Of course, the prostitute or "loose" angle is Tim Rice's use of artistic liscense to combine several women in the bible into his Mary M. But that is nitpicking. Certainly, the woman as written was "loose" even though there is no evidence the real Mary M was.

Right, I know the Bible is never specific. But in context of the show, and therefore context of the song, she's not exactly of pure character

The song I have the most problem with, as one might expect, is the Garden. The angry, bitter, childish Jesus portrayed in the lyrics just doesn't jibe with the biblical Jesus. This is the song (along with Jesus' "why don't you go back to fishing" line right after) that I would find the hardest to represent with biblical integrity.

Oh, believe me, I know there are definitely lines that do not mesh with the Biblical Jesus. But there are also some that very much do, the most interesting one is "to conquer death, you only have to die"- He dies for us, but we also "die" when we are born again, which conquers death as well. I sort of feel like these inconsistencies can be used to further a larger theme/message- not sure what that is yet, but I feel it's out there

If you do pursue a production, I would be very interested in how you play it.

It's definitely a pipe dream- it would cost money to rent space, even if I could get people to perform and run things completely for free. Plus, I don't know how keen any of my Christian friends would be on taking up such an endeavor I just like to think about it.

 

[gengwall]

Plus, I don't know how keen any of my Christian friends would be on taking up such an endeavor I just like to think about it.

You might be surprised. I have found many Christians in the theater community are very interested exploring how this show could be staged to overcome some of those inconsistencies.

One person I read staged it so that it all came from Judas' perspective. The sense was we weren't seeing the real Jesus but Jesus put through the Judas filter. Judas was always in the background and visible in every song reacting to the song. I never saw the show; only read about it. But it seems interesting.

The thing is the show, whether intentionally or not, gets so many things dead on right. That is why it probably has impacted many people positively.

I should note that the production my daughter was in left no doubt that the story wasn't over with Jesus death. Although there was no resurection scene per se, it ended with the angel characters one by one "walking" by Mary. As each passed, Mary's countenance grew brighter. After the thrid - the curtain opened to a tomb with the stone rolled away. It was very very cool.

 

[soulsearching1]

One person I read staged it so that it all came from Judas' perspective. The sense was we weren't seeing the real Jesus but Jesus put through the Judas filter.

Yeah, that's actually a pretty common interpretation- that it's all from Judas's point of view. I think in some ways, it is, but I won't get into my particular interpretations

The thing is the show, whether intentionally or not, gets so many things dead on right. That is why it probably has impacted many people positively.

I've loved the show since like 4th grade- seriously. It's the only show that I NEVER get sick of. And it is incredibly moving, whether you believe or not. Which is why I think it's important that it keeps being performed, and especially opened up to a wide audience.

After the thrid - the curtain opened to a tomb with the stone rolled away. It was very very cool.

That's awesome- I've never seen it done like that (that I remember), but it's certainly a thought that has crossed my mind.

 

[Paddington]

By standards of people who are in the business (theatre, that is), JCS is far superior to Phantom and besides Evita, it's the only good thing Lloyd Weber wrote. Phantom is overblown, in every way possible. (And let's not even get into the atrocity that was Cats)

Phantom is amazing! It's definitely the best music he's written, and it's consistently good all the way through. Evita's ok but a couple of the songs are just boring. But yes I agree that Cats is...... yes.

 

[soulsearching1]

Phantom is amazing! It's definitely the best music he's written, and it's consistently good all the way through. Evita's ok but a couple of the songs are just boring. But yes I agree that Cats is...... yes.

Conceptually and structurally, Evita is a good show- to the general public, it gets mixed reviews because yeah, Argentinian politics aren't exactly attention-grabbing material, but as a work of theatre, it's well-thought of by professionals.

And I still stand by my convictions that Phantom isn't the greatest. The music is self-indulgent and excessively sweeping, though it has its moments. And then there's the fact that it's just WAY overdone, and pretty much taboo audition material in the theatre business.

 

[superdave]

It's not really 'the real Jesus' as it portrays him as a confused man rather than the Son of God...

Anyway as a musical I don't like it tha much. There are some good songs in it but it's not up to some of ALWs others like Phantom which has amazing music all the way through. I also wasn't impressed with the film at all.

I know how the musical portrays Jesus. Keep in mind the production tells the conflicts between Judas and Jesus. I am very well versed in JCS.

 

[ttreg]

Going to see it tonight!

 

[ttreg]

I just got home from it and it was amazing! By far beats the movie versions!

 

[soulsearching1]

Yeah, the show is WAY better live Glad you enjoyed it!

 

[ttreg]

It saids its the farewell tour. Does that mean that its Ted's last tour or that its the last tour of JCS?

 

[E-beth]

The best staging I ever saw of JCS was when I saw it at a college in Middletown, Ohio a few years ago. The set has about 20 to 30 TV sets all around the procenium. Then the play was set up to be just what the play is about---the celebrity of Jesus Christ. For example during the first song, when Judas is singinga about Jesus, the TVs flashed on various paintings and other forms of art depicting Jesus. Later Simon Zealot was set up like a talk show host, with the TVs on the set capturing the footage from a TV camera which was also on set.

The most clever part was the costumes. They were all dressed in specific ways. For example, Judas wore an 8 ball T-shirt. Peter wore a Saints jersey. Mary wore a red slinky dress at first, then a white plain one later. Everyone but Christ was dressed in modern clothes. He was dressed in the traditional way. After Judas dies he wore all red for the final song.

I LOVED it. It was the perfect staging of any play and I haven't seen JCS done nearly as well since.