Threaded Order Chronological Order
| HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question | |
| Posted by: DCollingwood 06:19 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| I’m sure this has been discussed before, but I must have missed it! Why is HELLO, DOLLY! closing with Bette rather than continuing on with more marquee types? I thought perhaps today’s TV/Film stars may not be as versatile in dance and voice as many were “back in the day,” but surely there are a handful that could keep the show humming along for another couple of years - even some who would love to step into the role... |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question | |
| Posted by: Naughty_Rob 11:22 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question - DCollingwood 06:19 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| Whoopi and SJP names were both popping up. Both ladies have seen the show several times | |
| reply to this message |
| re: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 08:17 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question - DCollingwood 06:19 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| For me, I think what Mr Rudin is doing is great. The show opened - two great stars have played Dolly, plus a third, Donna Murphy, subbing for Bette once a week. The show has earned its investment back. Some profit has been made. Close it, let's have another show. Until very recently, Broadway wasn't a theme park, which it has (and still is) at risk of being. Bring in a branded show (Disney, Phantom, Chicago) and just plant it in a theatre for 15-20-30 years. 50 if you can pull it off. There is no real reason that everyone who ever lives should see a show in New York or London - even if they weren't born when the show opened. Theatre reflects the times. Plays and musicals that were mega hits in 1960 or 1970 are about 1960 and 1970 - no matter what they are supposedly about it. THE MUSIC MAN was about the world we were losing - the picture post card mid-America (very white) world of barbershop quartets, and banning Balzac from the library. Even the fast talking big city grifter, Harold Hill, is sucked in by this fantasy version of pre WW2 America. ah if only we could go back - and recall we were still in the decade after the end of WW2, and the Korean War. Escapism. If it had run 30 years - what purpose would it have served? None, in my book. The magic of PIPPIN in the 70's was that it was very obvious in content, and in Fosse's production, and anti-Vietnam musical. Peace loving son rebels against war monger father. Scene after scene song after song. And it basically has the same ending as Bernstein's CANDIDE - a variant of leave us alone and let our garden grow. So do not mourn good shows closing. They should earn their money back, make a bit of profit, then go away and let another good show try to grow. Do we really want a generation growing up, coming to NYC on holiday every year, and revisiting the SAME show every time? Don;t quite see the point of that. The magic of theatre is that if you a miss a show you missed it - it will never come back in the same way again. Its about the moment it lives in. But LION KING and CHICAGO and PHANTOM and ALADDIN are not shows anymore - they are tourist sites, like the Statue of Liberty. You come to NY, its always there, you see it over and over and over. Not for me. Congrats Scott Rudin for letting the show go before it becomes a long running joke like CHICAGO, starring anyone who they can rope into 10 weeks. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question | |
| Posted by: ryhog 04:13 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question - NewtonUK 08:17 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| It is appealing to make generalizations but the only generalization I know of in the theatre is that you can't generalize. While it is of course true that Rudin positioned Dolly as a star driven event, his Mormon is precisely the opposite. I wouldn't view it as a trend, but as an ad hoc assessment on the basis of which each show is best produced. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question/Hello Debbie Allen | |
| Posted by: Duke1979 07:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question - DCollingwood 06:19 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| Would love to see her return to Broadway. Her portrayal of Catherine Avery on Greys Anatomy is brilliant and she would bring in the audience who know her from TV. Phylicia Rashad also comes to mind—she replaced Bernadette in Into the Woods. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Scott Rudin is producer | |
| Posted by: dramedy 06:45 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Closing Question - DCollingwood 06:19 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| Of the next tenant to kill a mockingbird and hello dolly. So he may be closing one show for the other to have a big house. I think they could have gotten other stars especially since Peters has done respectable business |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Scott Rudin is producer | |
| Posted by: ryhog 10:00 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
| In reply to: Scott Rudin is producer - dramedy 06:45 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| I'm not sure there is a comparable star to Peters. Who would it be? I think it is clear Rudin does not want to degrade the production with a lesser casting of Dolly. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Scott Rudin is producer | |
| Posted by: JohnDunlop 01:30 am EDT 05/28/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Scott Rudin is producer - ryhog 10:00 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| He has already changed the age of Dolly by decades (Channing to Milder). | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Scott Rudin is producer | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:52 am EDT 05/28/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Scott Rudin is producer - JohnDunlop 01:30 am EDT 05/28/18 | |
|
|
|
| I can think of lots of people milder than Channing. As to age, considering that Channing played the role for decades, I'm not exactly sure how the math on that works out. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Queen Latidah was asked before peters | |
| Posted by: dramedy 10:16 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Scott Rudin is producer - ryhog 10:00 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| I could se not following Bette. But now wouldn’t be so daunting. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Well la-ti-dah | |
| Posted by: Ann 10:30 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - dramedy 10:16 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| dramedy, you know I love you :) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| D and f are keyboard adjacent | |
| Posted by: dramedy 12:30 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: Well la-ti-dah - Ann 10:30 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| And my fat thumbs on iphone screen miss the mark and its hard to see on small screen. I tend to miss errors on subject line, but i do change the subject line often when replying so you have to give me points there. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: D and f are keyboard adjacent | |
| Posted by: Ann 12:49 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: D and f are keyboard adjacent - dramedy 12:30 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| It really was a small error. But a humorous typo. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| And one i cant blame on auto correct nmi | |
| Posted by: dramedy 03:01 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: D and f are keyboard adjacent - Ann 12:49 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| Nm | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters | |
| Posted by: DCollingwood 01:04 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - dramedy 10:16 pm EDT 05/26/18 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed. Bernadette Peters is a national treasure, but there are a lot of women who could walk into the role who wouldn’t “degrade” the production. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters | |
| Posted by: ryhog 02:04 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - DCollingwood 01:04 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| I guess that prompts two questions from me: (1) who are they (and would Rudin agree) and (2) having established they "could," would they? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters | |
| Posted by: Delvino 07:33 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - ryhog 02:04 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| I agree. And this production has always had "event" status, not merely a revival. After Midler there was an open question: could it continue a little longer, maybe providing better access to tickets. The answer was yet, but with an asterisk; the show still seemed to coast on the special configuration of elements. But if a third Dolly was sought for B'way, that event element in the equation almost disappears. Though other roles were replaced, only the Horace was officially switched out; it's otherwise still the Midler company assembled by Rudin and Zaks. The Midler return to close seals the production's place in history and legend. To my (layman) thinking, this is a brilliantly produced B'way product, forever tied to all points noted above. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Last Edit: KingSpeed 02:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 02:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - ryhog 02:04 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| She has said she has wanted to do it. In fact, at one point they were talking about reviving it specifically for her. I think she would've been fabulous in the role. Others: Susan Lucci? I bet she would've done it and I think she would've been pretty good as well, having seen her in AGYG. Tonya Pinkins? I bet she would've done it too and would've been fabulous, no question. Those are my thoughts off the top of my head. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Posted by: ryhog 07:42 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: Kristin Chenoweth - KingSpeed 02:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| I don't want to get in a pissing contest about it but I don't think Rudin would cast Cheno in this in a million years. And the other names would not sell enough tickets. These are ATC names, not commercial Broadway names. I also agree with the point about the "event." Rudin is not going to channel the Weisslers. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Is Betty Buckley a commercial Broadway name rather than an ATC name? | |
| Posted by: BrianJ 02:38 am EDT 05/29/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - ryhog 07:42 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| I'm not even advocating either Buckley or Chenoweth as great for the role or likely to give great performances, but I'm confused about why Rudin wouldn't cast Chenoweth in this in a million years and yet did cast Buckley - because Betty Buckley is so much more commercial and so much more of a magnet for ticket buyers than Chenoweth? And yes, I'm aware that Rudin cast Buckley for the tour rather than Broadway, but my impression is that (contrary to the situation in David Merrick's day) the road is now dicier than, and harder to make profits on than, Broadway - is that true or not true? Would Rudin cast Cheno on the road but not on Broadway? Does Betty Buckley in 2018 have a major following in mid-sized American cities where the citizenry loves her but won't turn out for Kristin Chenoweth? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Is Betty Buckley a commercial Broadway name rather than an ATC name? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 06:23 am EDT 05/29/18 | |
| In reply to: Is Betty Buckley a commercial Broadway name rather than an ATC name? - BrianJ 02:38 am EDT 05/29/18 | |
|
|
|
| good questions, some without answers other than let's wait and see. I think BB is a strong road name (as would KC be, though I don't see her going on the road at this point) but Buckley would not have been able to sustain the show as Peters has on Broadway. The dynamic (open run vs. tailored limited stops) is different and the demographics of road audiences is markedly different than what it takes on Broadway nowadays. The BB vs KC question is, to me, not one of raw commercial viability (KC wins that) but of the package Rudin has created which involves an event (a legend in a legendary play) rather than simply a question of selling tickets in the Weissler style. On this question, Buckley qualifies (at the second tier) whereas I don't think (and don't think Rudin would think) Chenoweth would. All in my opinion, of course, and reality tbd. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Is Betty Buckley a commercial Broadway name rather than an ATC name? | |
| Posted by: Delvino 12:12 pm EDT 05/29/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Is Betty Buckley a commercial Broadway name rather than an ATC name? - ryhog 06:23 am EDT 05/29/18 | |
|
|
|
| Excellent explication of the difference between a Rudin producing philosophy (with this Dolly iteration anyway) vs. an open-run Weissler style. Very important point that's often lost. The event thing is just a marker here. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Last Edit: KingSpeed 08:28 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 08:28 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - ryhog 07:42 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| Kristin is not an ATC name. She's a national TV, film, and stage star and her shows sell very well. Look at how well Promises sold. Tonya and Lucci are soap stars with a following. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:44 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - KingSpeed 08:28 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| The "these" I was referring to did not include her. And "soap stars with a following" is not gonna cut it with Rudin. But as I say I don't want to get into a pissing contest. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Lucci, no. | |
| Posted by: Delvino 07:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: Kristin Chenoweth - KingSpeed 02:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| I cannot fathom Rudin opting for a Susan Lucci. Per my points above, she is not remotely in the Rudin "event" equation for this production. And Lucci, merely passable in summer stock terms in that particular "Annie Get Your Gun," (I saw it) couldn't deliver the sort of performance Peters gives in Dolly. Neither the high comedy nor vocal demands are a good match. While we're on Lucci in musical theater: she would be fine in something like "Woman of the Year," (perhaps better than fine). But the period trappings and classical old school elements of "Dolly" are not a sensibilities match. She lacks the gravitas. I believe Buckley is a strange choice for the road, but at least she tracks with the casting of this production. An event star, and then musical theater royalty. Hard to believe that Rudin would suddenly fill the role with TV personalities or the like. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 04:26 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 04:26 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: Kristin Chenoweth - KingSpeed 02:40 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| I would have loved to see Chenoweth do it, or Tonya Pinkins, though she is a much smaller name in terms of ticket sales. But I am VERY VERY surprised they are closing this show without an actress of color taking on Dolly - or any of the lead roles - especially since the show has a history with that, and it's not as if there's a shortage of actors of color who can do the role of Dolly or the others. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Posted by: Thom915 11:19 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - Chazwaza 04:26 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| Chenoweth is quite young enough that she can do the next revival. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Posted by: tandelor 11:26 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - Thom915 11:19 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| And at almost 50 year old, is close to 7 years older than Carol Channing was when she created the role. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Kristin Chenoweth | |
| Posted by: Thom915 12:19 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - tandelor 11:26 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| And more than 20 years younger than Ms Midler in this revival which is the production being discussed here. She is additionally almost 25 years younger than Ms. Channing was when she did the 1995 revival. Therefore we are talking about an incredible age range here. I stand by my post. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Temperamentally, she's more of an Irene Molloy, no matter the age. | |
| Posted by: Delvino 09:32 am EDT 05/28/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Kristin Chenoweth - Thom915 12:19 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| It's not that she couldn't land comedy and the songs. But Chenoweth just feels like a maturing ingenue. It's not a negative, it's a casting type concern. I believe Peters would've been far less persuasive at age 49 than she is now at 70, but we'll never know. I can see Chenoweth as a definitive Irene, and her music is just ideal for the Chenoweth voice. That's not a random issue. Dolly's size and grandeur just seem still not in the toolbox for this gifted performer. More realistically: If she played it now, it would be a feat but not necessarily something a large number of people would want to pay top dollar to see. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Temperamentally, she's more of an Irene Molloy, no matter the age. | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 01:22 am EDT 05/29/18 | |
| In reply to: Temperamentally, she's more of an Irene Molloy, no matter the age. - Delvino 09:32 am EDT 05/28/18 | |
|
|
|
| IMO - and I know I've said this before - I think Chenoweth is really a Minnie Fay. She could manage Irene, but to me she's much more of a natural Minnie. But of course I don't tend to think she'd be interested in the role. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Age and temperament and life experience: Zeta-Jones' Desiree. | |
| Posted by: Delvino 12:19 pm EDT 05/29/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Temperamentally, she's more of an Irene Molloy, no matter the age. - Chromolume 01:22 am EDT 05/29/18 | |
|
|
|
| This Chenoweth discussion takes me back to the Zeta-Jones casting in "Night Music." I felt she was too young -- not in chronological age, but in presentation -- and it made Desiree's dilemma weaker. Johns, originally, may have been close to the same age, but suggested a very different life experience and world-weariness. Many others disagreed. (The stakes were raised when Peters went in, and I loved her Desiree.) The Chenoweth Dolly idea is easily a version of the same conversation. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters | |
| Posted by: DCollingwood 02:28 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - ryhog 02:04 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| 1) I’d have to think a bit about actresses outside of the known theatre folks... 2) “Would they?” is a great point and might answer my original post best. Theatre is hard work, even for the “fittest” of actors. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Not a box office draw...BUT | |
| Last Edit: nsfan 05:14 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| Posted by: nsfan 05:14 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Queen Latidah was asked before peters - DCollingwood 02:28 am EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| but I would have loved for Randy Graff to have a shot at it......I think she would have been wonderful AND its time for her to be back on Broadway..... | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Patti Lupone.............. | |
| Posted by: newyork293 11:13 am EDT 05/28/18 | |
| In reply to: Not a box office draw...BUT - nsfan 05:14 pm EDT 05/27/18 | |
|
|
|
| How about Patti Lupone, seems like a Dolly type. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.157901 seconds.