Talk:South Pacific (musical)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Musical Theatre Portal South Pacific (musical) is part of WikiProject Musical Theatre, organized to improve and complete musical theatre articles and coverage on Wikipedia. You can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class
WikiProject Musical Theatre tasks: Help out with one of the WikiProject Musical Theatre tasks below. You may add your name to the Participants list to the right. edit this Open Tasks template Collaborate and work on the Collaboration of the Month Articles needing a content fork Mainly, these are articles on films and either their source or subsequent musicals. There are a couple where the musical needs to be "forked" from the source material. Feel free to add or remove as necessary. Important: If you split an article, please make sure that you move all the relevant links from the first article to the new one. To find which links to move, click on "What links here" at the old article and look through the list to see which links should be pointed to the film related link (for example, articles on actors in the film). Then, click on those links and update them to point to the film article. Thanks! Don't Play Us Cheap Roberta How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying I Married an Angel Lady in the Dark The Band Wagon - musical adaptation will to be forked after it opens in April.

	Theatre Portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Emile 2 Happy Talk "political incorrectness" 3 legacy 4 Separate film article 5 Fair use rationale for Image:South Pacific.jpg 6 Fair use rationale for Image:South pac reba 2005.jpg 7 Fair use rationale for Image:South pacific bway 1949.jpg 8 Article improvement 9 Tony Awards

[edit] Emile

• The part of Emile deBecque was not specially written for Ezio Pinza. DeBecque had been a major character in some of Michener's short stories, which served as the basis of the play.66.1.40.242 19:05, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I think that the point is that the role in the musical play was conceived for Ezio Pinza - if not at the immediate outset then before long and, I believe, well before the writing was finished - not that the character was invented by Rodgers and Hammerstein for Ezio Pinza. Christopher W, 29 May 2006

>>I think that the point is that the role in the musical play was conceived for Ezio Pinza<< This is simply wrong, although I am not going to change the page. According to Rodgers' autobiography, director Joshua Logan brought to Rodgers the idea of dramatizing the Mitchener story "Fo' Dolla" concerning Cable and Liat and was going to option only that story if they were interested. R&H decided to proceed with the project but had Logan option the entire book of stories in case they later felt the need for additional material. As the writing progressed, they became dissatisfied, because, as Rodgers states "it dawned on us that on stage it looked like another variation of 'Madama Butterfly'. Although we liked the story we became convinced it that was not substantial enough or original enough to make a full evening's entertainment." The creative team then settled on the story "Our Heroine" involving Nellie and de Becque. Later they realized they could entertwine the stories even though in the book the two couples never meet or interact. Only well into the writing was Rodgers "by a remarkable coincidence" contacted by the West Coast producer of musicals Edwin Lester, who had Ezio Pinza under contract but no material suitable for him and a play-or-pay deadline. Did Rodgers and Hammerstein by any chance have anything appropriate for him? Well, guess what, they did.... So R&H were writing the part of de Becque long before Pinza was even remotely involved in the project. - Steve L.

BTW, Rodgers also says they did have Martin in mind for Nellie when they decided to use "Our Heroine", before they began writing the part. They knew her work well as she had starred in the national tour of Annie Get Your Gun for them the year before (R&H did not write AGYG but they produced it.) Martin at that point was a Broadway and former Hollywood star but not quite in the same league as Merman. It was South Pacific that gave her that status. Pinza, however, was definitely brought in at a later point when the writing was well underway, as described above. Martin then famously refused to sign a contract until she was given personal assurance from Rodgers that the vocal writing would not favor Pinza to her disadvantage. Steve L.

Was it that the vocal writing would not favour Pinza to her disadvantage or that they would not be required to sing together because of their differing musical styles (and no doubt his more sonorous voice) — but not entirely the same thing? Ondewelle (talk) 20:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

• The on-locations shots were done on Kauia, not in Malaysia.66.1.40.242 19:05, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• Someone linked the character "Bloody Mary" to the historical queen, Bloody Mary. Took out the link. 208.20.251.27 20:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I think the whole section on 'political incorrectness' is frankly pointless. Firstly, the musical's narrative is not 'politically incorrect'. The points made are inaccurate and no justification anyway. Secondly, there was no such thing as 'political correctness' when it was written; I don't see why South Pacific should have to endure "criticism" for it in that case. And that's another thing: what criticism? Who's criticised it? I'm removing that section. --195.92.67.68 15:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Talk "political incorrectness"

I've just found this, an article about the TV show written before it was shown. It seems fairly authoritative. If no one refutes it within a week or so, I'll remove the reference to "political incorrectness" in the article. Hayford Peirce 00:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

http://www.theatermania.com/content/news.cfm/story/1275

The key paragraph reads: "There are a couple of musical casualties. "Happy Talk" was never filmed because it didn't fit in smoothly with the new adaptation--not, we have been assured by a R&H spokesperson, because it was "politically incorrect" (à la, "I'm a Polynesian, Too"), as had been previously rumored. The lovely Nellie Forbush-Lieutenant Cable duet "My Girl Back Home" was filmed but had to be dropped because of time constraints. That song suffered the same fate on the road to Broadway in 1949, but was restored to the 1958 Josh Logan movie version; the Close-Connick rendition may be included on the upcoming Sony soundtrack CD and, with any luck, the future DVD release."

[edit] legacy

I deleted the reference to Gilligan's Island. The show had nothing to do with navy sailors stranded, etc. The Minnow was a tour boat. The whole legacy section is reaching a bit. McHale's Navy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.56.127.199 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Separate film article

Yes, the film and stage plays should be separate entries, because they are different categories. This should be the rule for all stage plays that have been adopted into films and/or TV shows, not only for the obvious reasons, but because they often have different plots, casts, producers, directors, songs, etc. -- Added by someone in 2006?

Yes, would someone kindly separate the film? It's a major film and needs its own article. -- Ssilvers 18:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:South Pacific.jpg

Image:South Pacific.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:South pac reba 2005.jpg

Image:South pac reba 2005.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:South pacific bway 1949.jpg

Image:South pacific bway 1949.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article improvement

Now that this article has a good plot summary, the next thing it needs is a "Background" or "history" section, about how the musical came to be written and brought to the stage. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Super! You're really bringing the quality of this article up. How about a Critical reception section (lower down), discussing some of the early reviews and later assessments of the show, as well as, perhaps, some information about how the show fared at the box office and its place in musical theatre history? -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm so excited this article got promoted to B-Class! I'll start working on a critical reception section as soon as I can!MarianKroy (talk) 14:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I added a Critical Reception and Legacy section!MarianKroy (talk) 01:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks muchly! I'll take a look. What's your next Wikiproject? If you're at loose ends, Camelot could sure use some help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:14, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I could do some work on Camelot, but I'm not as familiar with the show. I'll certainly try, though. I'll see what kind of reference material I can dig up for it.MarianKroy (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tony Awards

The article shows that the original (1949) production won 9 Tonys. When I put in the specific Tony Awards, I came up with 10. (I used the IBDB). Looking at the official Tony site, it shows that Jo Mielziner won the Tony in 1949 for "Scenic Design" "(Sleepy Hollow / Summer and Smoke / Anne of the Thousand Days / Death of a Salesman / South Pacific)" Tony Award listing for Jo Mielziner. The rest of the Tonys for South Pacfic were awarded in 1950 (again, per the Tony site). I'd say that South Pacific won 10 Tonys (even though the Scenic Design to Mielziner was for several shows). I'm changing the 9 → 10. JeanColumbia (talk) 15:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I remember being confused about this in the past. Thanks for clearing it up. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Is 11 nominations a record for a revival? -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)