Is there something essentially wrong with that?
Now, I have no interest in seeing or reading anything related to the PHantom of hte OPera with the possible exception of Scooby Doo adaptations, but I enjoy a good Jackie Chan flick despite the lack of character development or coherant plot in most of them. Because it's just darn fun to watch him do his thing. It's pure spectacle. And I really want to know, why exactly is that wrong?
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with spectacle, as long as it's not trying to pass itself off as more than that. I never saw "Pantom" on stage until last year. I had heard so much trashing of it, so I went into it expecting nothing but spectacle, and it was satisfying. On the other hand, I had been told so much about what a profound, life changing experience "Les Miserables" was. Let me tell you, that is nothing but spectacle. But I still enjoy it, for what it is.
I have not seen a musical that wasn't mainly just a spectacle - that's the nature of the genre. "Rent" was very much a spectacle, but a darn good one. If a few songs can evoke emotion along the way, then that's great, but the fact it, they exist for the flashiness.
Mow, personally, for the most part, I'm not a big Chan fan - I would literally poke my eyes out beofre seeing "Rush Hour" (though in fairness, that has more to do with Chris Tucker),. But I agree with the point. There's nothing wrong with enjoying some good solid eye candy, grandiose entertainment now and again. It's totally arbitrary what floats your boat.
