https://www.rollingstone....235036916/

paywall. If anyone can post the article that would be appreciated.

This is going to be so awful.

"...some scenes — from a woman being tossed into a trash can to references to a waterbed — are raising (tough) questions..."

They stated they will be adding new scences and NEW MUSIC FROM THE VAULT!!!

If they are trying to re-think/re-write controversial scenes from the original movie, i believe it will dilute the intended storyline.

Whatever was in the movie then, still happens now and should stay in the production.

Otherwise, it'll be a late-nineties disney show.

The kind of people who are too young to know what a waterbed is probably aren't the ones who will be shelling out money to see a Purple Rain musical, but okay

if the prince curse is still in effect, it will be cancelled all together

Vannormal said:

"...some scenes — from a woman being tossed into a trash can to references to a waterbed — are raising (tough) questions..."

Why are references to a waterbed considered problematic? What am I missing?

lurker316 said:

The Kid is gonna be rizzing up Appollonia on his electric scooter fr fr 😏

nayroo2002 said:

peedub said:

lurker316 said:

Why are references to a waterbed considered problematic? What am I missing?

They suggest in the article that the producers' concern is that younger members of the audience won't know/understand what a waterbed is...

God forbid they learn something.

peedub said:

nayroo2002 said:

They stated they will be adding new scences and NEW MUSIC FROM THE VAULT!!!

My VPN let me read the article, but only once and I can't go back to it...did they specify 'from the vault'? I remember it as 'not from the original soundtrack'.

From the article:

Since the Purple Rain album is only nine songs in length, the musical team has also been given permission to dig into Prince’s catalog to add other material to the show, likely from the same era. The song list hasn’t been nailed down, but fans may hear some Prince deep cuts or additional songs by the Time or Apollonia 6. “We’re getting a chance to dive into some of that music he created in order to tell stories in new and unexpected ways, leaving easter eggs for fans who really know the deep cuts and the unreleased material,” says Webb.

Bobby Z's thoughts on what Prince thought of Broadway:

According to Revolution drummer Bobby Z., a.k.a. Bobby Rivkin, the combination of musical theater and Prince, who died in 2016, made sense when he began hearing about the Purple Rain proposal years ago. Bobby Z. recalls his late boss and friend growing animated after he’d seen Rent and, later, Hamilton, both of which Prince loved. “It was one of those days in the studio and he said, ‘Wow, we should really take this to the stage, like Broadway,’” Z. recalls of whatever project he and Prince were working on at the time.

PJMcGee said:

peedub said:

nayroo2002 said:

Bobby Z's thoughts on what Prince thought of Broadway:

According to Revolution drummer Bobby Z., a.k.a. Bobby Rivkin, the combination of musical theater and Prince, who died in 2016, made sense when he began hearing about the Purple Rain proposal years ago. Bobby Z. recalls his late boss and friend growing animated after he’d seen Rent and, later, Hamilton, both of which Prince loved. “It was one of those days in the studio and he said, ‘Wow, we should really take this to the stage, like Broadway,’” Z. recalls of whatever project he and Prince were working on at the time.

I read the article in full. It only mentioned "deep cuts" by Apollonia 6 and The Time, it doesn't mention "Vault" tracks.

As far as questionable scenes . . . I'd be OK losing the dumpster scene. Not sure about losing the waterbed quote, as it's meant to be ridiculous and it works. Hopefully they don't replace it with something like "I have Bitcoin!" or something so recent that it seems desperate for relevance.

Se7en said:

PJMcGee said:

I read the article in full. It only mentioned "deep cuts" by Apollonia 6 and The Time, it doesn't mention "Vault" tracks.

As far as questionable scenes . . . I'd be OK losing the dumpster scene. Not sure about losing the waterbed quote, as it's meant to be ridiculous and it works. Hopefully they don't replace it with something like "I have Bitcoin!" or something so recent that it seems desperate for relevance.

“We’re getting a chance to dive into some of that music he created in order to tell stories in new and unexpected ways, leaving easter eggs for fans who really know the deep cuts and the unreleased material,” says Webb.

nayroo2002 said:

Those who edit, censor or change art from the past to fit some imagined new morality of today are the enemies of art and clearly on the "wrong side of history". Just sayin'...

Se7en said:

PJMcGee said:

I read the article in full. It only mentioned "deep cuts" by Apollonia 6 and The Time, it doesn't mention "Vault" tracks.

As far as questionable scenes . . . I'd be OK losing the dumpster scene. Not sure about losing the waterbed quote, as it's meant to be ridiculous and it works. Hopefully they don't replace it with something like "I have Bitcoin!" or something so recent that it seems desperate for relevance.

I don't get how people always bring up the dumpster scene, but don't say anything about the misogynistic father. It's all meant to be parts of the same world that the Kid has to reject.

Maybe because some characters laugh at dumpster woman, people think that we're not meant to view this as bad. But I see it as all the same. Including the Kid's dismissiveness of W&L.

PJMcGee said:

Se7en said:

I don't get how people always bring up the dumpster scene, but don't say anything about the misogynistic father. It's all meant to be parts of the same world that the Kid has to reject.

Maybe because some characters laugh at dumpster woman, people think that we're not meant to view this as bad. But I see it as all the same. Including the Kid's dismissiveness of W&L.

There's a big difference between the dumpster scene and the misogynistic father, and you touch upon it.

With the misogenistic father, the audience is intended to be offended by his behavoir. The purpose of the scene is to portray the father as a monster (and raise concerns that the Kid might evolve into him). The scene conveys the idea that violence against women is evil. The same is true of the scene with the Kid slaps Apollonia -- the audience is supposed to be disgusted by the Kid's actions and believe he's turning into a villian.

In contrast, with the dumpster scene, the audience is intended to laugh. The purpose of that scene is to supposedly show how cool and funny Morris and Jerome are. The scene conveys the idea that violence against women is humorous.

Do you honestly not see a difference?

I'm zealously opposed to censorship and don't mind leaving the scene in. But at the same time, I can understand how a reasonable person would object to it. If it's cut, I won't be overly bothered.

If the entire movie was farcical and satirical, and *all* of the violence was played for laughs, I would be more inclined to defend the scene and ridicule people who take it too seriously. But it is a bit jarring in a movie that otherwise vilifies violence against woman to have one scene use it as comedic fodder.

Actually I think the reason people might want to take out dumpster scene is it makes them more uncomfortable than anything the father does. Because it can be seen as funny. It puts the viewer in the position of the person inflicting violence when you laugh. You participate with your laughter.

When the father or the Kid is violent, you can comfortably dismiss it as bad, as not something I would do.

But I do think the film sets up these elements as deeply related.

lurker316 said:

PJMcGee said:

I don't get how people always bring up the dumpster scene, but don't say anything about the misogynistic father. It's all meant to be parts of the same world that the Kid has to reject.

Maybe because some characters laugh at dumpster woman, people think that we're not meant to view this as bad. But I see it as all the same. Including the Kid's dismissiveness of W&L.

There's a big difference between the dumpster scene and the misogynistic father, and you touch upon it.

With the misogenistic father, the audience is intended to be offended by his behavoir. The purpose of the scene is to portray the father as a monster (and raise concerns that the Kid might evolve into him). The scene conveys the idea that violence against women is evil. The same is true of the scene with the Kid slaps Apollonia -- the audience is supposed to be disgusted by the Kid's actions and believe he's turning into a villian.

In contrast, with the dumpster scene, the audience is intended to laugh. The purpose of that scene is to supposedly show how cool and funny Morris and Jerome are. The scene conveys the idea that violence against women is humorous.

Do you honestly not see a difference?

I'm zealously opposed to censorship and don't mind leaving the scene in. But at the same time, I can understand how a reasonable person would object to it. If it's cut, I won't be overly bothered.

If the entire movie was farcical and satirical, and *all* of the violence was played for laughs, I would be more inclined to defend the scene and ridicule people who take it too seriously. But it is a bit jarring in a movie that otherwise vilifies violence against woman to have one scene use it as comedic fodder.

I do think the father/family dynamic is critical to showing The Kid's journey. Could they tone that down a bit, sure - but not necessary. Part of the appeal is that The Kid comes through all of that darkness at the end.

Morris' antics . . . the way the story is right now, there's no reason for him to be the way he is. Imagine a backstory where Morris also went through an abusive upbringing, or maybe that "one girl" destroyed his heart or something . . .

Reminds me of Morris's sensitive moment after he says How's the family, he collects himself in the hall, alone, as if he feels really bad but can't show it for some reason (what we'd probably call toxic masculinity today).

Actually the main problem I had with the movie was how quickly Apollonia forgives the Kid in the end. The storytelling is very efficient, with montages doing a lot of work, but the stage version can flesh that out.

Morris's hallway moment was jarringly out of place, I thought. I wonder if Morris had them put a human moment in for him, so people wouldn't think he was a monster.

Honestly, the article gives me a little more hope in the project, especially insofar as Bobby Z. and Morris Hayes are involved on the music side -- I wasn't aware of that before. Musicals aren't my thing, but if this is done well and it gives people a greater appreciation of -- or even introduction to -- Prince's music, well, all the better.

djThunderfunk said:

Those who edit, censor or change art from the past to fit some imagined new morality of today are the enemies of art and clearly on the "wrong side of history". Just sayin'...

There's a difference between adaptation and censorship.

The film doesn't hinge on a woman being thrown in a dumpster, and I'm not sure that the story will suffer for it's absence.

liverpool86 said:

So rule out Darling Nikki being sang. Purple Rain the musical censored. Welcome to 2024. [Edited 6/21/24 11:27am]

Did you read the article, or are you just going off?

"[Playwright] Jacobs-Jenkins... was especially struck by Prince commanding the stage during the controversial “Darling Nikki”: “There was something about his performance in that number specifically, where I was like, ‘Oh, this man was actually a genius of the stage.’ I wanted to see it live. I wanted to see it in a theater, which is usually a good sign for me.”

dustoff said:

djThunderfunk said:

Those who edit, censor or change art from the past to fit some imagined new morality of today are the enemies of art and clearly on the "wrong side of history". Just sayin'...

There's a difference between adaptation and censorship.

The film doesn't hinge on a woman being thrown in a dumpster, and I'm not sure that the story will suffer for it's absence.

If it's being left out BECAUSE it will upset people's sensibilities, then it is censorship.

Release Lust U Always and Extraloveable

djThunderfunk said:

dustoff said:

There's a difference between adaptation and censorship.

The film doesn't hinge on a woman being thrown in a dumpster, and I'm not sure that the story will suffer for it's absence.

If it's being left out BECAUSE it will upset people's sensibilities, then it is censorship.

So I'm guessing that every adaptation of "Sleeping Beauty" that does not include the prince raping and impregnating an unconcious woman amounts to censorship for you.

Or every adaptation of "The Jazz Singer" that doesn't include blackface.

Or Kubrick's "Lolita" not depicting the drugging and rape of a 12-year old girl.

I don't think "censorship" means what you think it means.

dustoff said: