Threaded Order Chronological Order
| I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 03:40 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
| In reply to: Ugh. OK, after 30 years, count me out. - ShowGoer 03:33 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
|
|
|
| City Center has got to be hemorrhaging money; of course they're going to go with something already popular. And likely go for the biggest names they can find. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 10:31 am EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - MockingbirdGirl 03:40 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
|
|
|
| INTO THE WOODS is the kind of show ENCORES might do as their special benefit, with big stars. INTO THE WOODS has been on Broadway 3 times, most recently in 2002. Its produced constantly in the US and the UK. There are so many musicals worthy of a second look, and I would imagine some pretty big BRoadway names would be willing to do them the first year or so back for Encores. I fear they will roll a set of shows that are just as likely to get commercial revivals - so what service is really being provided. That said - the other two shows are ENCORES type shows - THE TAP DANCE KID and THE LIFE. So lets not get too excited. | |
| reply to this message |
| Twice, not three | |
| Posted by: Esther 10:35 am EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - NewtonUK 10:31 am EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| 87, 02 plus the Central Park production & the off-Broadway Fiasco prpduction. Agreed it feels more like a gala/benefit title like SITPWG in 2016 |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Twice, not three | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 12:38 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: Twice, not three - Esther 10:35 am EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| If you go to the ibdb page for Into the Woods, you see the 1997 reunion concert listed. Yet if you go to the page for a cast member of the benefit, you won't see it listed unless you click on "Special Events." It's inconsistent and it confuses people (including writers for the New York Times and other periodicals). It's easily fixable. They already do it for performers. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Twice, not three | |
| Posted by: ryhog 03:54 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: re: Twice, not three - AlanScott 12:38 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| I agree about this and would just point out that there are other similar situations. Broadly, I lot of them fall under what I would call the "real estate" view of Broadway (as opposed to the production view), e.g., the "In Residence On Broadway" concerts of a few years ago. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 09:50 am EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - MockingbirdGirl 03:40 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
|
|
|
| I'm sure you're correct, but I tend to look at this from the other direction. If money is the actual issue, why not take a step or two back from the (pretty much) full productions of shows that have become the norm over the last decade and go back to their roots and have singers in formal wear singing the scores and nothing more than a small set piece or two to suggest a setting? Make them actual concerts again and even bring back the scripts in hand. I would think that would drive down the production costs and let them spend money where they should be spending it...on restoring scores. And lower costs would allow them to not have to try to schedule a blockbuster every season to support the more obscure titles. People loved Encores! in the beginning just as much or more than they do now...I don't see any reason why downsizing the productions would drive audiences away. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: Amiens 12:23 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - JereNYC 09:50 am EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| I couldn't agree more. These (mostly) fully designed endeavors have ruined Encores by giving the illusion that they're finished productions when the short rehearsal periods predictably reveal otherwise, often scattered performances, resulting in a deathly uneven balance. Of course, there have been exceptions, but not many. I would also imagine that these overblown productions have scared off bigger names, directors and actors and designers, who are justly intimidated by the highly unreasonable expectations. Not to mention the extreme waste of money for a handful of performances. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: mikem 12:09 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - JereNYC 09:50 am EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| I agree with this, although it would be hard to go backwards. The rumor was that the big names have started to fall away because the expectations are so much higher now and the time investment is much greater. The audience expects full memorization and lots of choreography/staging/costuming for a show that runs for a handful of performances. I would rather have a simpler show with the best possible cast than a show with bells and whistles and a good-but-not-great cast. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Sorry, we posted virtually the same opinion at the same time! | |
| Posted by: Amiens 12:25 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - mikem 12:09 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| NM | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sorry, we posted virtually the same opinion at the same time! | |
| Last Edit: mikem 10:29 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| Posted by: mikem 10:28 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: Sorry, we posted virtually the same opinion at the same time! - Amiens 12:25 pm EST 11/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| Amiens, no need to apologize! Great minds think alike! I've seen a lot of great Encores shows, but I have to say that most of those were several years ago, before the productions got all fancy. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: Ann 09:25 am EST 11/19/20 | |
| In reply to: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - MockingbirdGirl 03:40 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
|
|
|
| I agree, but ... it seems there could be something that would bring in good money but is not as frequently produced a musical as this one. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: mikem 11:07 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
| In reply to: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - MockingbirdGirl 03:40 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
|
|
|
| The Life is rarely done and, aside from a London production in 2017, has been seen by very few over the past 20 years. I would put that in a different category from Thoroughly Modern Millie and Into the Woods, which are done regularly throughout the country. This "new mission" is probably more about finding a moneymaker than anything else, but given the current state of things, I don't really blame them. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I'm inclined to cut them some slack | |
| Posted by: ShowGoer 03:47 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
| In reply to: I'm inclined to cut them some slack - MockingbirdGirl 03:40 pm EST 11/18/20 | |
|
|
|
| They’ve always tried to get big names, but certainly haven’t always succeeded, even for star vehicles (Carmen Cusack in Call Me Madam and Jennifer Bowles in Irma la Douce come to mind- and I had to look one of those names up). I’m more surprised if the direction they’re heading in seems to be the actual shows themselves being largely the kinds of musicals you could see in a high school (Millie, Into the Woods), with the occasional out-of-the-box wild card ‘flop’ being not a rarity by Gershwin, Porter or Weill, but a show that ran for a full year and a half only 25 or 35 years ago (like “The Life” or “Tap Dance Kid”). But I certainly wish them well. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.037060 seconds.