HOME ALL THAT CHAT ATC WEST COAST SHOPPIN' RUSH BOARD FAQS

LOGIN REGISTER SEARCH THREADED MODE

not logged in

Threaded Order | Chronological Order

re: It was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.

Posted by: bwaydiva1 04:47 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: It was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. - Singapore/Fling 04:01 pm EDT 08/07/14

Next to normal, Once, Spring Awakening=smaller, darker musicals that did very, very well. (And no A-listers attached. Hmmmmm... maybe little, darker shows do have a shot and a place on Broadway?)

I think this little show has potential. They need to market it correctly-and the choice to open when they are is smart.


reply to this message |

re: It was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.

Posted by: Singapore/Fling 05:04 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: It was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. - bwaydiva1 04:47 pm EDT 08/07/14

Interesting that you note "Once" as being a darker show - what about it strikes you as dark? For me, "Once" is a lovely romantic musical that follows a fairly well-worn story of sadsack guy meets hopeful girl and gets his mojo back. Told with fun rock songs and a lot of finely observed thoughts about love. I think it's a marvelous piece, but I wouldn't say dark.

"Spring Awakening" is darker, but had the benefit of being a flashy production built on a direct, accessible rock score. It had a nice run on the backs of teenagers who kept coming back to see it. It also had again, a front and center boy meets girl romance for plot.

I like "Fun Home", and I hope it has a good run. But it is a difficult sell, material wise. And the Public has not had a sucessful Broadway transfer of an original musical since... "Bring in Da Noise"? (Am I forgetting something?) And the producers have noted that it's going to be a tough sell.

I don't think that the length of their run has anything to do with their worth as a piece, but I do see them hedging their bets, which might be wise - we all saw "Bridges" burn through their reserve and then some. And with "Fun Home" budgeting at $5 mil, they don't have much in their coffer for bad weeks.


reply to this message |

Where did your $5m figure come from

Posted by: dramedy 05:07 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: It was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. - Singapore/Fling 05:04 pm EDT 08/07/14

Was that in the ny times article? Playbill didn't state any numbers.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Where did your $5m figure come from

Posted by: Singapore/Fling 05:10 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: Where did your $5m figure come from - dramedy 05:07 pm EDT 08/07/14

I read it in one of the articles, so it must have been the Times. The article noted that it was a fairly modest capitalization.


reply to this message | reply to first message

Thanks

Posted by: dramedy 05:11 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Where did your $5m figure come from - Singapore/Fling 05:10 pm EDT 08/07/14

It would have to be modest to expect any chance to recoup at circle.


reply to this message | reply to first message

Yes, the capitalization is mentioned in the NYT article...

Posted by: garyd 05:23 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: Thanks - dramedy 05:11 pm EDT 08/07/14

also mentions that Gold will be directing. Hope it does well, I very much like the play. I also love Circle in the Square probably due to some weird atavistic theatre in the round gene.


reply to this message | reply to first message

Is that number 3?

Posted by: dramedy 04:52 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: It was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. - bwaydiva1 04:47 pm EDT 08/07/14

Spring awakening wasn't discussed yesterday of your favorite dark musicals.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Is that number 3?

Posted by: bwaydiva1 05:00 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: Is that number 3? - dramedy 04:52 pm EDT 08/07/14

NO


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Is that number 3?

Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 05:35 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Is that number 3? - bwaydiva1 05:00 pm EDT 08/07/14

I got busy yesterday and didn't have time to keep guessing. How about these dark musicals: Grey Gardens? The Fields of Ambrosia? Evening Primrose? The Consul? (if we are including Broadway operas).


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Is that number 3?

Posted by: bwaydiva1 06:12 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Is that number 3? - BroadwayTonyJ 05:35 pm EDT 08/07/14

You got Grey Gardens. That's there.

There is a tie for my 5th-and they are less like the others.

But you still have one more!

Bonus points if you can put them in order.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Is that number 3?

Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 06:22 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Is that number 3? - bwaydiva1 06:12 pm EDT 08/07/14

Passion? Carousel? Follies?


reply to this message | reply to first message

Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no

Posted by: dramedy 06:41 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Is that number 3? - BroadwayTonyJ 06:22 pm EDT 08/07/14

Sweeney to dis way darker than those.

I'm guessing lestat. Just kidding.

Marie Christine and wild party are pretty dark bit are rarely on anyone lists. Maybe Caroline or change.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no

Posted by: bwaydiva1 06:55 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no - dramedy 06:41 pm EDT 08/07/14

No...you got one there with the Sondheims.

I didn't care for Marie Christine or Wild Party or Caroline.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no

Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 07:29 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no - bwaydiva1 06:55 pm EDT 08/07/14

OK, so 3 of your favorites are for sure: Fun Home, Grey Gardens, and Next to Normal. A fourth one is either Passion or Follies so I'll guess Follies. So that leaves the 2 that are tied for 5th: Cabaret? Parade? Kiss of the Spider Woman? Chicago?

All this darkness is giving me a headache!


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no

Posted by: bwaydiva1 11:06 pm EDT 08/07/14
In reply to: re: Since passion and follies are Sondheim, that would be no - BroadwayTonyJ 07:29 pm EDT 08/07/14

LOL It was Passion.

The no. 5 slot is 2 shows that are a little different (less dark...). One was my first musical. (You never forget your first.)


reply to this message | reply to first message


All That Chat is intended for the discussion of theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)

Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.

[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]

Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]

Time to render: 0.139230 seconds.