LOG IN / REGISTER



Threaded Order Chronological Order

re: Why was the 1987 revival of DREAMGIRLS such a bust?
Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 08:44 pm EDT 06/28/20
In reply to: re: Why was the 1987 revival of DREAMGIRLS such a bust? - kess0078 11:41 am EDT 06/28/20

Amber Riley was supposed to be terrific as Effie and she got great notices, but she had trouble doing 8 performances a week and she missed a lot of performances. I have no idea why and don't recall if any reason was given publicly for Riley's attendance issues.

When it was announced that the production was transferring to New York with Riley, I was curious if the producers and/or Riley had solved whatever the issues were and Riley had committed to do all performances. It seemed like bad business to mount a production built on a star leading lady who'd already demonstrated problems with attendance. Perhaps that's why it seems to not be happening now.
reply to this message


re: Why was the 1987 revival of DREAMGIRLS such a bust?
Posted by: bway1430 02:49 am EDT 06/30/20
In reply to: re: Why was the 1987 revival of DREAMGIRLS such a bust? - JereNYC 08:44 pm EDT 06/28/20

She apparently did have legitimate health issues but truth be told, Effie is an epic sing so a 6 show a week arrangement with an alternate scheduled for remaing 2 performances is understandable.

DREAMGIRLS London eventually pulled a BILLY ELLIOT where they cast 3 Effies but you didn't know which one you would get until you arrived at the theatre. Not a bad move unless one is a star attraction (and they didn't start doing that until Amber left).

It would be a shame not to see Ms Riley do the role on Broadway. She was sensational. The production was also quite stellar though I did find some of the costume design uneven and the staging of the final number a bit silly and over-done.

I hope it eventually gets mounted.
reply to this message


Privacy Policy


Time to render: 0.008166 seconds.