I loved that original set, but I do understand that many did not. Of course, it does demand performances of a certain size.
Even in 1968, one of the studies that Goldman commissioned for The Season suggested that the presence or lack of presence of tourist audiences made a difference to how well several plays did. If that was true for plays in 1968, I think it would have been more true for a musical in 1980. Sweeney did well enough while its original stars were in it that with bigger names as replacements perhaps it might have jad more life in it than turned out to be the case. Admittedly, it didn't pay off during the time that the original leads were in it, mostly because of the combination of what may have been the highest production cost ever at that time along with what was believed to be the highest weekly nut ever.
As it turned out they probably should have closed it more quickly than they did. They lost a lot after the original leads left. As far as I can tell, looking at the grosses, I think they probably lost money every week except closing week, although perhaps royalty reductions and smaller star salaries meant that they more or less broke even some of those weeks. Had the original leads played a second year or even another six months on Broadway, it probably would have paid off. |