Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Because Salad Days would have flopped and Charlie Girl would have been a disaster | |
| Last Edit: AlanScott 01:09 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 01:08 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: "Charlie Girl" and "Salad Days" - both long West End runs - why not Broadway? - PlayWiz 07:47 am EDT 07/10/21 | |
|
|
|
| The reviews for the original production of Charlie Girl generally ranged from dismissive to derisive. The only reason to have produced it on Broadway would have been for the investors to get tax write-offs (if that was part of the tax code at the time). Charlie Girl was a hit in London despite the reviews. I can only imagine the Broadway reviews would have been even worse, and that not even the sort of makeover that Half a Sixpence got would have made them much better. And I can't imagine that any Broadway director or choreographer of note would have been interested in trying to do a makeover. As others have said, Salad Days was an extremely twee, extremely British show, not to mention an intimate one. Brooks Atkinson wrote, "[N]o one can make anything funny out of such amateur horseplay," and Walter Kerr's review was basically "If you like this sort of thing, you'll probably like it." But I can't imagine anyone ran to the box office after reading his review or even took a leisurely stroll there. Some of the other reviews were more favorable, but not enough to make it a hit. Just as some Broadway and Off-Broadway hits are not suited to London tastes, some London hits are not suited to New York tastes. And Robert and Elizabeth would have been a disaster on Broadway. |
|
| reply to this message |
| I wonder if "Charlie Girl" might have cast someone like Bobby Darin in the male lead? | |
| Last Edit: PlayWiz 11:25 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
| Posted by: PlayWiz 11:22 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Because Salad Days would have flopped and Charlie Girl would have been a disaster - AlanScott 01:08 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Joe Brown's voice sounds something akin to the jazzy and brash Darin's in the title song. Have you ever seen a production? The book of it, while somewhat based on a Cinderella theme, is kind of original. Darin died too young and never did a musical. Btw, if you ever get a chance to see his Oscar-nominated performance in "Captain Newman, MD", it's one of the greatest acting performances of a character with post-traumatic stress disorder captured on film. He could certainly act as well as sing. He was probably too in demand to do a Broadway musical in the 60s. Has "Charlie Girl" had any major productions in the US? | |
| reply to this message |
| re: I wonder if "Charlie Girl" might have cast someone like Bobby Darin in the male lead? | |
| Posted by: Alcindoro 06:08 pm EDT 07/12/21 | |
| In reply to: I wonder if "Charlie Girl" might have cast someone like Bobby Darin in the male lead? - PlayWiz 11:22 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| And here it is! | |
| Link | Captain Newman M.D. (1963) |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: I wonder if "Charlie Girl" might have cast someone like Bobby Darin in the male lead? | |
| Last Edit: PlayWiz 08:26 pm EDT 07/12/21 | |
| Posted by: PlayWiz 08:26 pm EDT 07/12/21 | |
| In reply to: re: I wonder if "Charlie Girl" might have cast someone like Bobby Darin in the male lead? - Alcindoro 06:08 pm EDT 07/12/21 | |
|
|
|
| Oh, it's really good -- great cast with Gregory Peck as the titled doctor, Angie Dickinson his romantic lead, Tony Curtis as energetic comic relief, Eddie Albert in such a different role that it takes while to realize it's Eddie Albert, Robert Duvall very fine in an early role, and Bobby Darin incredibly moving, especially in his big scene. There are some other recognizable faces in the cast as well. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| About tax write-offs | |
| Posted by: tmdonahue 08:51 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Because Salad Days would have flopped and Charlie Girl would have been a disaster - AlanScott 01:08 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| No one wants tax write-offs that are the result of losing money. So, you lost $20,000 on a show. The write-off would depend on your marginal tax rate but might be as high as $7,000. You still lost $13,000 in real money. The tax write-offs that are good are in situations where the tax codes treat income differently than you do. So a common one is rental property ownership. Under the tax code, the building is depreciated, a certain percentage each year is counted as a cost, even though a well-maintained building may actually appreciate in value over time. Once you sell the property, you pay taxes on all the depreciation you recovered in the sale. But that may be at a different tax rate and will be years later. Meanwhile you've had cash to invest. I am not your tax advisor. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: About tax write-offs | |
| Posted by: ryhog 02:38 pm EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: About tax write-offs - tmdonahue 08:51 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| You are answering a question in the present tense but I assume any discussion of bringing these shows to Broadway contemplated that it would have happened relatively contemporaneously, when the tax landscape was hugely different. Also, regarding rental property (off point but since you offered it), you leave out the fact that passive loss deductions are generally meaningless because of the extremely low maximum deduction. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: About tax write-offs | |
| Posted by: tmdonahue 07:54 am EDT 07/12/21 | |
| In reply to: re: About tax write-offs - ryhog 02:38 pm EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| You're right. I assumed in the case of rental property that you would be an active investor, not in a REIT. Rental property was not off-topic 'cause I used it as an example of tax write offs that are desirable. Losing real money affects your taxes, sure, but you still lose money. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: About tax write-offs | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:44 am EDT 07/12/21 | |
| In reply to: re: About tax write-offs - tmdonahue 07:54 am EDT 07/12/21 | |
|
|
|
| I wasn't intending to criticize you for the example. I just didn't (and don't) want to go off on a tangent. Plus, the mechanics and strategies of passive losses are not susceptible to being understood from a few sentences on a chat board. While it is correct that no one invests in a production to lose, taxes very much factor into one's aversion to losing money. I'll just add one thing which is that investing in a REIT is just one was to participate passively in real estate. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Hopefully before the 1968 film of "The Producers" spelled it out, folks were looking to make money by producing what they thought might be a hit | |
| Last Edit: PlayWiz 03:13 pm EDT 07/11/21 | |
| Posted by: PlayWiz 03:11 pm EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: re: About tax write-offs - ryhog 02:38 pm EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| and not trying to find taxably-advantaged ways to finance something they thought might flop. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| "And Robert and Elizabeth would have been a disaster on Broadway" | |
| Posted by: young-walsingham 03:59 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: Because Salad Days would have flopped and Charlie Girl would have been a disaster - AlanScott 01:08 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| Would be interested to know why you think this? As other have said (and I am sure you know) the score is strong and there is a compelling story. I would have thought in the 1960's it would have had a chance. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: "And Robert and Elizabeth would have been a disaster on Broadway" | |
| Posted by: Snowysdad 11:42 pm EDT 07/11/21 | |
| In reply to: "And Robert and Elizabeth would have been a disaster on Broadway" - young-walsingham 03:59 am EDT 07/11/21 | |
|
|
|
| I saw Robert and Elizabeth at the Chichester revival and I can only imagine that the original was a much better production. The leads were underwhelming singers where great voices are called for. I doubt it would have played well on Broadway in the 1960s, too old operettaish when audiences were rejecting the style. The D'Oyly Carte Opera did several american tours around this time with the same strong casts that recorded the stereo versions of all the operettas on Decca London and yet the tours were only moderately successful. Another few years and the company stopped american tours for lack of box office. Robert and Elizabeth belonged at City Opera which was doing these kind of things at the time. Now only Ohio Light Opera is the only place I could imagine tackling it, but they are never able to produce two thrilling leads capable of making the piece take off. Despite the incredible score, it is too out of date and was even 60 years ago. Sit back, enjoy the great cast album. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.029612 seconds.