The press reports that NBC execs were surprised that viewership was half of the Sound of Music's. But -- like her or not -- Carrie Underwood is a big star, and while Allison Williams did well, I thought, she is virtually unknown except to viewers of Girls on HBO. So Taylor Swift, Britney, Miley ... as Peter? Can't picture it. Any other casting ideas? Keep in mind that Mary Martin was 47 when she played Peter in 1960. An older singer/actress?
shareOn another thread I posted
Justin Bieber😱
It's not about Carrie Underwood being a "star", the play IS the star. It is a time honored stage play that families love. Peter Pan is a good play but not as exciting as The Sound of Music, or known too well for its stage productions as there are tons of film and movie productions
I bet if they do "The Music Man" or "Cinderella" or even "Oliver!" it will bring in great ratings akin to "The Sound of Music" live as these are great family fares with known tunes that have carried on through the decades till today.
But make no mistake: "the play's the thing" these days and The Sound of Music was the first "live" network stage production since...I dunno... Cinderella?
So of course people were going to look, but after the audience was 50/50 on the performances in The Sound Of Music, whatever came behind it wasn't going to get as many viewers - and being the play chosen was 'Peter Pan' that has tons of other versions on the horizon, it was pretty hard to grab more of audience than before.
da flippity-flop.share
Would you have gone with Allison Williams or someone else?
shareI would have gone with an experienced Broadway professional for the lead. Don't get me wrong, Ms. Williams is a talented lady and has a bright future. She does, IMO, need more experience on the boards to adequately shine in the lead role in a stage production. I wish her nothing but the best!
____________________
Lighten up, Francis!
Since she just nailed the most talked about role, I guess your faint praise is a little out of date.
I think Allison is fine. Who else could they find?
Mary Martin was a real stage performer. She was an actress. She brought spunk to the role, and then her Texas accent was charming.
I think you have a point. I watched it mostly out of curiousity to see how Walken did. Otherwise I was "meh" to Peter Pan. I mean, liked Cyril Ritchard as a kid but Peter Pan the story is rather boring to me. Possibly childish/silly. Whereas Sound of Music is so famous with its beloved "The hilllllls are aliiiiiiiiive" among others, and I am sure everyone was dying of curiosity to see it re-done.
And it was the first live broadcast in a while...the novelty helped I think. Aaand it was awkward, so maybe people were less enthused this year.
Maybe NBC should keep their Xmas treat for a time closer to Xmas? Also live theatre/panto can't be more than a gimmick for most US broadcast TV viewers, and gimmicks wear thin. If NBC cares, it should say "to hell with the viewership figures- we do this because it's fun, harks back to the origins of US TV and Radio, and pleases our creative people".
It is nice to think that quality, imagination, and trying something different go hand-in-hand with mass audience response, but that just isn't true most times. Sometimes you have to do a thing just because you can.
However, it cannot be denied that the astonishing popularity of Xmas panto in the UK is down to the habit of casting current audience darlings in key roles.
It is my fervent hope that the production of live musical theater for television continues, but if the practice of compromising the quality of the lead actors for the sake of name recognition persists, I am afraid that it will continue to be of lower quality than it could be.
____________________
Lighten up, Francis!
and while Allison Williams did well, I thought, she is virtually unknown except to viewers of Girls on HBO.
Peter Pan has almost always been played by a woman, right? How utterly ridiculous to make an issue of it.
shareOh, my goodness! Such uneducated people thinking this way. It's a good thing Peter didn't kiss Wendy. 😀
shareI have a theory about this. Most folks know Peter Pan is usually played by a woman. The problem is that people don't trust NBC to continue the tradition in good faith.
This production stars a cast member of outspoken Leah Dunham's show & it altered the songs about Indians to reflect the modern zeitgeist. Maybe that alienated some more conservative folks.
Personally, I don't care about any of that.
What turned me off was NBC promoting it as a "hate-watch" event. They thought their audience was a bunch of too-cool-for-school middle-brow types watching ironically hoping to see something subversive & weird. They operate under the (false) assumption that this was what drove the success for the Sound of Music.
http://www.npr.org/2014/12/04/368308833/hate-the-idea-of-peter-pan-live-nbc-is-counting-on-it
More likely, S.O.M. viewers were fans of the original Rodgers & Hammerstein production. Carrie Underwood's "star power" was less important than the fact that people trusted her to play it sincere.
I don't think people really care that Peter Pan is played by a woman. They just suspect NBC will act like a bunch of smartasses about it.
What turned me off was NBC promoting it as a "hate-watch" event. They thought their audience was a bunch of too-cool-for-school middle-brow types watching ironically hoping to see something subversive & weird. They operate under the (false) assumption that this was what drove the success for the Sound of Music.
It's OK, NBC didnt actually do that, NPR used a sensational headline and way over-extended a comment by one performer. It was not NBC's official or unofficial position, intent, or action.
Williams commented on the nature of audiences to post venom on message boards for preserve fun. That's certainly a true comment. She also said she was expecting it here and wouldn't bother her.
She's uniquely positioned to talk since she's one of the most attacked actresses on the entire Internet. That's because she's plays a entitled character and Internet losers often don't know the difference between a character and an actress. She also has posted self parodying Internet videos that, again, Internet losers can't grasp. She's flat chested which apparently offends this crowd, and to make it worse, she's thus far avoided providing them with nude scenes to prime their hate masturbation. They continue to attack her, and she doesn't react. Put this all together, and you have the perfect storm for an Internet hate fest. So yes, she knows the subject.
Bottom line is Peter Pan is supposed to be a boy and she doesn't even look close to a boy. Many people didn't want to waste their time.
shareIgnoramus
that's a bit harsh, but I will say this... I don't think a single soul actually decided not to watch because Pan was played by a woman. Nobody, anywhere.
shareRather than write about how such rude criticism just shows the poster is utterly ignorant of the history and tradition of this well known play, I figured best to sum it up in the one most appropriate word.
shareI take your point. There seems to be some people out there (maybe not in this case) who thrive on posting controversial opinions just to stir up a digital fight. Blows my mind that some types find entertainment in that.
shareIf you're saying that "ZTrainExpress" was trolling, then perhaps and probably you are right.
I gave them the more charitable assumption that their comments stemmed from ignorance rather than deliberate attempt to inflame through deception.
But given that "ZTrainExpress" has multiple posts repeatedly bashing the inflammatory theme, your interpretation is probably more correct.
From the New York Times: "... Ms. Underwood came to the production with a huge audience base, and that no doubt accounted for some of the surprising bounce in ratings that the show produced. By contrast, Ms. Williams was essentially being introduced to a mass audience for the first time: her performance on HBO’s “Girls” gets a lot of attention in the media, but the show has a minuscule audience by broadcast network standards."
shareThe star power of Carrie Underwood was only one factor of many. Last year's presentation was novel and fresh in this era. Many tuned in for that reason alone. But the biggest factor by far is that the Sound Of Music is just a much bigger draw.
share