Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
RE: Fright Night

Saw this show this evening. Was not sure what to expect.

I believe this is the 1st Haunt show, at this location, that had LIVE VOCALS along with strong choreography. Started with a small audience participation skit and then the six member cast went into their song and dance routine.

Fright Night did have a couple music selections from the former Disturbia show as well as a couple songs from former Haunt shows performed at the Kings Dominion theater. It was so weird having live vocals on that stage compared to all the years where the performers lip synched.

This cast was on par with the Eternal Jamnation performers.

Connor said:
How was it? Was it just your everyday I street show or was it decent?

I thought this show was stronger than the show that played there this summer.
This is for mtpelepele and anyone else who might not be able to catch the Haunt Shows.

Here is a YouTube video of the Fright Night show. The person recording this did not capture the audience participation skit at the beginning. They seemed to have started the video in the middle of the opening number.

A few thoughts on the show.

This Haunt show featured live vocals. I think this is the 1st time actual singing was performed at this show location. (If a previous Haunt show, on the International Street Bandstand, had live vocals; it was a LONG time ago).  

The cast seemed to be stronger in the ensemble vocals than the solos. Don't get me wrong, there were at least one guy and one gal who did have strong solo voices. The other folks were good, its just that some of them had to sing music that either pushed their vocal range or might sound a little better if they sang the song in another key. Course, strong choreography can impact some performers vocals.

But, live vocals were better than another lip-synch show. As stated earlier on this thread, the overall production is stronger with Fright Night than the summer show that was performed on the IS Bandstand.

Why does KD insist on involving every song that has some type of imaginary word that is repeated like "ohweeoh" or the "bumdumbeedum." It reflects very, very poorly on the performer's voices, and I'm hearing the same exact problems I had with hit list in this show. I agree it's better than lipsyching, but the song choice is very poor, and the performer's voices are not made to suit rave music that KD forces them to sing.

I wanted this to be better, but the singing isn't much better than Hit List. I also know it's because of the rave music, that everyone has etched in their mind, so they know the way it's supposed to be sung. This is why in a show, you try to pick music that is fairly out of style, but is still known, but not known enough for people to know how every single note is sung. Or you pick rave music, and alter the notes, to fit the performer's voices, as Busch Gardens does occasionally. Throwing them a lyrics sheet of the regular song is not the thing to do, then the performers will feel they need to change the notes on their own, which typically doesn't end well.

Also, from what I've heard so far, I disagree, the ensemble singing is far worse than the solo singing. EDIT: Nevermind, they're both equally bad.
I am aware of part of the music selection was "rave"; but the rest of the music was general rock and some pop music (Paul McCartneys' "Live and Let Die" and Micheal Jackson's "Thriller").

I am a little foggy on the rest of your critique reasoning. But, your negativity for the show is quite apparent.

I am not quite sure if the sheet music the performers use is exactly how the original composer wrote the tune & lyrics | performed it. Or, if the music was altered/rearranged to fit the show time limit and/or performer vocal ranges. Sounds like the latter.

I would not think the entertainment company would allow the performers to improvise/ad-lib since that could mess up the timing of the show; especially, when using recorded music tracks and staged choreography.

But, it is another low budget Cedar Fair entertainment production. Given the money the park has to work with, I was not expecting big changes this year.

I've discussed this numerous times in the entertainment threads. Cedar Fair needs new creative talent to come with more variety of show themes; develop shows to have rich and immersive production values (sets, costumes, lighting); larger casts for the big show productions; more musicians for some of the small-medium shows; new and improved entertainment facilities.

But, this is going to take big bucks. I am still waiting to see if Cedar Fair will take a leap of faith and invest more in entertainment at KD and across the park chain.

Should be interesting to see what Carowinds does with entertainment in 2015. They stated they want to push it to another level and expand it even more. Wonder if that will trickle down to KD in some fashion?
I meant well-known pop culture songs. Thriller, and most other songs in the show are well-known still, although some of them are older than others. There are a couple exceptions, but not much.

I don't have a negativity for the show, it's just after Hit List, I thought the park would choose songs and alter notes to conform to their singers, because I know they have good voices, but I believe the song choice is holding them back, and makes them look bad.
Now that I think about it, this show is very reminiscent of the original Monster Stomp, right down to the song selection. Combine this with Blood Drums, and Skeleton Crew and you have yourself a fair competitor to BGW's newest HOS show.
Zimmy said:
Because as a general rule of thumb, ALL theme park shows are poorly produced and performed crap.

I get the feeling that you're joking, but I'm going to give myself the peace of mind and say this. I certainly disagree with the notion that all shows are poorly produced, poorly performed, and are crap. While yes, there are many bad shows out there, there remain the few outstanding productions that truly are masterpieces. They may be outnumbered in a sea of lackluster productions, and here in Virginia, the magnificent works of art that are shows may be a dying breed. Fright Night may not fall in this category for sure, but there are many shows that certainly don't fall under your "poorly produced and performed crap" insult. Take a beloved local show like Celtic Fyre or a full-out spectacular like Fantasmic for example. They may not be your cup of tea, and that's cool, but I would never describe them as "crap."

I don't mean to go all rant-y on you, bro, and I apologize if that's how it seems. :p I just feel like I'd kick myself if I let a comment like this, joking or not, go unchallenged. It's not that I disrespect your personal distaste for shows, because that's totally fine, but your post seems to make such a notion come off as fact when that's not really the case. Hope you understand!
  • Like
Reactions: Jonquil
Zimmy was not joking. I've heard the same words out of his own mouth, and he was definitely not joking then. At least there weren't as many obscenities this time.
  • Like
Reactions: Zimmy and Nicole
Okay, cool. Sorry if I came off as a jerk. I just had to get that off my chest. :p
  • Like
Reactions: Zimmy
Joe said:
Zimmy said:
Because as a general rule of thumb, ALL theme park shows are, poorly produced and performed crap.

I get the feeling that you're joking, but I'm going to give myself the peace of mind and say this.

No Joe, I meant it precisely what I said, and I would prefer that you not put words in my mouth. I am a reasonably articulate man complete with a few pieces of wall art declaring me so. I am not speaking of a precises measurement but a sample and I think what confused you was was the term "general rule of thumb," and admittedly poor statistical tool! Often when working on a juicy analysis certain people (and I use that term loosely and advisedly) like to throw around this term when what they really mean is a sample set. These people (I'm looking at you B majors) are heathens and should not used as references. If you must, the correct way to find your sample size is" n=[(z_(α⁄2) σ)/E]^2 ". I digress.

As a general rule of thumb, ALL theme park shows are, poorly produced and performed crap. I am sure out there exists an exception. CF was better than most, certainly the original version had talent, however the lighting as an example, was crap.

The first non-crap I have seen in our local parks are the Mob at KD. They are not-crap. They are in fact quite the opposite, quiet talented.

If you want to see good quality non-Broadway work I would highly recommend you pick up a show in Winchester at Shenandoah University or one at the University of Virginia. Old Dominion University has put on quality work before, but they do not have anywhere near the talent pool SU or UVA has and are not particularly consistent. I strongly urge you to watch the whole of the next Shenandoah Summer Music Theater, summer stock. It is marvelous.

Theme parks generally suffer from a "More is better" attitude towards shows. I give you LR as a perfect example. In fact, it may even be my conclusion.

As a general rule of thumb, ALL theme park shows are, poorly produced and performed crap, ergo "London Rocks". (Except for KD's Mob because they are amazing.)

M. Zimmerman, MBA
  • Like
Reactions: MAZ and Mushroom
Joe said:
Okay, cool. Sorry if I came off as a jerk. I just had to get that off my chest. :p

Ok, Belay my last, I did not see this before I wrote my diatribe.

But for the record,
Postulate Zimmy 1
As a rule of thumb, all theme park shows are, poorly produced and/ or performed crap.

Corollary to Postulate Zimmy 1, (Corollary Zimmy 1)
The only know exception to this postulate is the King's Dominion's 2014 Haunt performance "Mob"

Please note: As evidence of decent performance with poor production has been produced, Postulate Zimmy 1 has been modified with the inclusion of "and/ or" replacing "and".

M. Zimmerman, MBA
  • Like
Reactions: Mushroom
Dressing one's subjective disfavor of a class of theater in the costume of scientism, sequined with statistical caprices, can come across as dreadfully pretentious, and even rather mean-spirited, if not handled with the greatest subtlety and the best of intentions.

Best regards,
Mr Jonquil, MFA
Indeed it can sir and perhaps that is part of the satire.  The thesis while an accurate view of the author's feelings is still seemingly absurdist.  The author felt as long as his intelligence and intent were being brought into question the best way to respond was in an absurdest manor.  

The entire discussion is one based off of an entirely subjective view.  Bringing in references to statistical tools and postulates juxtaposes the subjective nature of the thesis against hard science.  Truly an absurd view for how can one accurately measure anothers opinion of art?

As for the academic references that was more a nod to style then anything else.  It seemed as long as one was making broad sweeping generalizations he should at least present some of his bona fides.

I believe the whole thing can be summed up from the end of Act 1 of Samuel Beckett's "Waiting For Gadot"

We can still part, if you think it would be better.
It's not worthwhile now.
<Stage Direction>Silence.
No, it's not worthwhile now.
<Stage Direction>Silence.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
<Stage Direction>They do not move.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad