London Rocks!
- Thread starter Zachary
- Start date
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
not really...its a true dress rehearsal...so it is in fact a sneak peak..it says the FINAL dress rehearsal...lol
not really...its a true dress rehearsal...so it is in fact a sneak peak..it says the FINAL dress rehearsal...lol
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
I watched four minutes of the show on Zach's request, and I came to a realization. I didn't give a MOD EDIT. While I don't like it, I've lost all empathy I had towards the park. I'll still continue to go because the rides are still there and I enjoy the animals, but I'll no longer see any of the shows.
I watched four minutes of the show on Zach's request, and I came to a realization. I didn't give a MOD EDIT. While I don't like it, I've lost all empathy I had towards the park. I'll still continue to go because the rides are still there and I enjoy the animals, but I'll no longer see any of the shows.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Ehh, I'm not quite doing what you're doing, sorry Nic. What that really means is that I'll be spending more time at KD more than anything. As opposed to seeing something that once flourished being riddled by things like KK, KD is being transformed from a park with lots of coasters being owned from somebody who didn't care about how it looked to being a park with lots of coasters who cares about how it looks. While I don't doubt that Scott cares about how the park looks, there's nothing at KD as bad as Banbury. They also have fresh baked pretzels now, so that's one less factor in choosing which park I visit.
Ehh, I'm not quite doing what you're doing, sorry Nic. What that really means is that I'll be spending more time at KD more than anything. As opposed to seeing something that once flourished being riddled by things like KK, KD is being transformed from a park with lots of coasters being owned from somebody who didn't care about how it looked to being a park with lots of coasters who cares about how it looks. While I don't doubt that Scott cares about how the park looks, there's nothing at KD as bad as Banbury. They also have fresh baked pretzels now, so that's one less factor in choosing which park I visit.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Okay, so I've held my tongue a bit on this one. And I want to make it clear right now that I have not seen this show in person. I have only seen the pictures and videos posted by CK, Zach, and others. And thanks big-time to those who did that.
Perhaps seeing this show in person is different, but from here it seems like the only word to describe it properly is "weird." It does look like a well put-together production; however the entire thing looks like a gaudy, confusing mess of different ideas. The ideas are very silly and the very last word to come to mind while watching this show would be "classy."
That's the issue I have with this. There was actually a time when shows like Celtic Fyre and This is Oktoberfest were the rule, not the exception for the park's show quality. This show lacks class, and class is what has made BGW's entertainment- and the park itself- so special for so long. My gripe about this show is no longer about how British Invasion era music doesn't fit into royal Shakespearean England; other shows have done this in the past. My gripe is the cheesiness and lack of class in the show, the lack of pride in making a truly memorable production.
I almost see this as Wunderbarn on a larger scale; a show full of stereotypes and cheap gags, while lacking in character and- once again- class. I will say the set for LR is very well-done, and in all honesty it looks pretty cool.
Also, Griffon: I do not appreciate being told to "grow up" because this show did not meet my expectations. If you like it, that's great. I for one hold the park on higher standards than what they have given.
It's hard to put it into words, but what I want to emphasize is the show's lack of class, which at a time would be out of character for the park, but now seems to be the norm.
Okay, so I've held my tongue a bit on this one. And I want to make it clear right now that I have not seen this show in person. I have only seen the pictures and videos posted by CK, Zach, and others. And thanks big-time to those who did that.
Perhaps seeing this show in person is different, but from here it seems like the only word to describe it properly is "weird." It does look like a well put-together production; however the entire thing looks like a gaudy, confusing mess of different ideas. The ideas are very silly and the very last word to come to mind while watching this show would be "classy."
That's the issue I have with this. There was actually a time when shows like Celtic Fyre and This is Oktoberfest were the rule, not the exception for the park's show quality. This show lacks class, and class is what has made BGW's entertainment- and the park itself- so special for so long. My gripe about this show is no longer about how British Invasion era music doesn't fit into royal Shakespearean England; other shows have done this in the past. My gripe is the cheesiness and lack of class in the show, the lack of pride in making a truly memorable production.
I almost see this as Wunderbarn on a larger scale; a show full of stereotypes and cheap gags, while lacking in character and- once again- class. I will say the set for LR is very well-done, and in all honesty it looks pretty cool.
Also, Griffon: I do not appreciate being told to "grow up" because this show did not meet my expectations. If you like it, that's great. I for one hold the park on higher standards than what they have given.
It's hard to put it into words, but what I want to emphasize is the show's lack of class, which at a time would be out of character for the park, but now seems to be the norm.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
You have obviously never seen the American Jukebox or the various terrible country music shows that Busch used to have....
Joe said:
You have obviously never seen the American Jukebox or the various terrible country music shows that Busch used to have....
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Yes, but at the time un-classy shows were the exception, not the rule. Shows like that were vastly outnumbered by quality productions (Emerald Beat, This Is Oktoberfest, Starlight Orchestra, etc. etc. etc.).
Yes, but at the time un-classy shows were the exception, not the rule. Shows like that were vastly outnumbered by quality productions (Emerald Beat, This Is Oktoberfest, Starlight Orchestra, etc. etc. etc.).
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
London Rocks however, has a love story in it. And if you do not tell me why I should care about these two people falling in love. I literally could not care any less than I already do about them. There are many teenagers who fall in love on a daily basis, what makes this couple I'm supposed to be watching, any different from those who are standing in front of me for Verbolten, and can't stop making out with each other? Am I supposed to feel differently for them, because they're on a stage? There is no difference given between them and some random couple with a lack of PDA boundaries in line. I am not told why I should care about them, so I don't.
Not to mention the fact that in the beginning, where the girl is listening to her music and has, what I'm going to assume is a daydream sequence, of this band. But, the lead singer and the girl fall in love at a music store?? So is he the lead singer of this band, or some random guy off the streets? There's nothing really given for me to know the difference, other than clothes, and I'm sorry I need more than that to go off of.
Do you know how to solve this problem of confusion? A narrator. That's it. All they have to do, is explain to me what I'm looking at, why I should care, and I will. Not the "Queen" full of the worst kind of British stereotypes. An actual narrator. Because as far as I can tell, this whole thing is one really bad dream sequence. Especially, when adding in the puppet children going underwater, and then going up to space.
At the end of the day, the first half of it had potential. Like, it wasn't the best, but it wasn't the worst. I was confused, and as I said before, I was wondering why I should even care about these people. But, I could of handled it. But, then the puppet children came, and the weird dream sequences happened, and that's where it was lost, and I gave up. The show did have potential, and I honestly wanted this show to be better than my very low expectations. But, it somehow managed to go even lower than my already too low expectations.
And on the subject of the Queen, whether or not the people working on the show are British or not, it's still highly disrespectful when it comes from America. I'm sorry, I will not get over that fact. It's the basis of "We can make fun of our own dignitaires, but if another country makes fun of us it's insulting." Yes, across the ocean they may make fun of their queen, but it's their queen to make fun of. She is not ours, we sort of gave up that right back in 1776. (Even though back then, it prolly would have gotten you killed if you made fun of the current royal.) So no, it's not okay.
Here's the thing, Dig it Up barely has a plot, but you can follow it. All you need to know is that these museum workers are dealing with two of their exhibits coming to life in a silly way. That's all. There's no trying to get them to no longer come to life. There's no wondering what the repercussions are if they leave the museum. It's clearly meant not to be taken seriously.Griffon said:
London Rocks however, has a love story in it. And if you do not tell me why I should care about these two people falling in love. I literally could not care any less than I already do about them. There are many teenagers who fall in love on a daily basis, what makes this couple I'm supposed to be watching, any different from those who are standing in front of me for Verbolten, and can't stop making out with each other? Am I supposed to feel differently for them, because they're on a stage? There is no difference given between them and some random couple with a lack of PDA boundaries in line. I am not told why I should care about them, so I don't.
Not to mention the fact that in the beginning, where the girl is listening to her music and has, what I'm going to assume is a daydream sequence, of this band. But, the lead singer and the girl fall in love at a music store?? So is he the lead singer of this band, or some random guy off the streets? There's nothing really given for me to know the difference, other than clothes, and I'm sorry I need more than that to go off of.
Do you know how to solve this problem of confusion? A narrator. That's it. All they have to do, is explain to me what I'm looking at, why I should care, and I will. Not the "Queen" full of the worst kind of British stereotypes. An actual narrator. Because as far as I can tell, this whole thing is one really bad dream sequence. Especially, when adding in the puppet children going underwater, and then going up to space.
At the end of the day, the first half of it had potential. Like, it wasn't the best, but it wasn't the worst. I was confused, and as I said before, I was wondering why I should even care about these people. But, I could of handled it. But, then the puppet children came, and the weird dream sequences happened, and that's where it was lost, and I gave up. The show did have potential, and I honestly wanted this show to be better than my very low expectations. But, it somehow managed to go even lower than my already too low expectations.
And on the subject of the Queen, whether or not the people working on the show are British or not, it's still highly disrespectful when it comes from America. I'm sorry, I will not get over that fact. It's the basis of "We can make fun of our own dignitaires, but if another country makes fun of us it's insulting." Yes, across the ocean they may make fun of their queen, but it's their queen to make fun of. She is not ours, we sort of gave up that right back in 1776. (Even though back then, it prolly would have gotten you killed if you made fun of the current royal.) So no, it's not okay.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
What is the rush to see it?
What is the rush to see it?
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Oh wow. I guess it's not worth running up there then. My luck the 8pm show will sell out. Thank you for responding.
---------
Re: Nic
It's new? I'm getting bored with the park, so for me *anything* that is new gives me an excuse just to go to the park now. They can throw up a new trash can in the Pompeii queue line and I have a reason to tell my husband to get dressed and get in the car. Doesn't take much.
Oh wow. I guess it's not worth running up there then. My luck the 8pm show will sell out. Thank you for responding.
---------
Re: Nic
It's new? I'm getting bored with the park, so for me *anything* that is new gives me an excuse just to go to the park now. They can throw up a new trash can in the Pompeii queue line and I have a reason to tell my husband to get dressed and get in the car. Doesn't take much.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Here is some broll footage.
Here is some broll footage.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Wow. They picked some horrible footage for B-Roll...
Wow. They picked some horrible footage for B-Roll...
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
HAHA Good one!
That would be more exciting than many of the real changes happening in the park! LOL
RocketChk said:
HAHA Good one!
That would be more exciting than many of the real changes happening in the park! LOL
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Those are the sweatiest puppeteers I've ever seen.
Those are the sweatiest puppeteers I've ever seen.
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)
Wait, could someone please clarify something for me? Was the preview today, or is it tomorrow? If it is tomorrow, were you guys saying that one has to get tickets for it today ( a day early?) Thanks!
Wait, could someone please clarify something for me? Was the preview today, or is it tomorrow? If it is tomorrow, were you guys saying that one has to get tickets for it today ( a day early?) Thanks!