[ SECRET POST #4784 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4784 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 40 secrets from Secret Submission Post #685.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I think it's worth having a conversation about WHY comedic roles get cast that way and whether the "point" of the role is "ha ha man in a dress" or if it does actually translate well.

People keep bringing up Shakespeare as if he had the option to cast women and simply chose not to.

[(Anonymous)]

The point is making a comedic character, that the character itself isn't taken as seriously as they potentially could be. Like with Trunchbull, a sociopathic child abuser meant to be ugly and imposing, being cast as a man isn't the joke, but more of a filter so she isn't as horrifying as she could be, pretty much nobody is laughing at a man in a dress in musical theatre. It's kind of and oxymoron.


Edwin Drood is a great example of this as well, Stephanie J. Block plays Edwin Drood a male character. It's a great murder mystery whodunnit where the audience votes (since the book was never finished) on who the murder is, which the show then ends with any person of the cast doing a musical number about why the did it. The comedy is great, and not because Block wears a suit.