| Stop Clause or Better Theatre: Why did shows move theaters so much in the past? |
| Posted by: Musicals54 05:10 pm EST 03/10/22 |
| In reply to: Why did shows move theaters so much in the past? - bobby2 12:31 am EST 03/10/22 |
|
| Shows moved for two opposite reasons. The stop clause could be triggered (in most cases) if a shows grosses fell below a given level for two weeks (usually break-even) forcing the show to vacate the theatre. The show could either close or move. The Broadway Theatre was historically considered to big (hard to fill so the show would be SRO and a tough ticket) and too far uptown. Many shows moved there at the end of their runs South Pacific, My Fair Lady, The Music Man, Fiorello, Funny Girl, Fiddler, Cabaret. You see that point. The Adelphi-54th ST-Abbott was the bottom of the barrel and shows opened there as a last resort. Shows moved there at the end of their runs (Damn Yankees). Shows moved at the other end of the life-cycle. If a show opened and became a hit it would move to a more desirable theatre. Hollywood/Ukraine opened at the small (800 seat) Golden but the reviews were really good and the next door Royale (1050 seats was available) so it moved. I suspect it opened at the Golden because it had been the home for many small musicals. The most famous moves were when Breakfast at Tiffanys - Holly Go no so lightly was closed by Merrick after 4 previews at the Majestic (the most desirable musical house). Hal Prince moved his two smash hits: Fiddler from the Imperial and Cabaret from the Broadhurst to the Imperial. |
|
reply
|
|
| Previous: |
re: Why did shows move theaters so much in the past? - TheOtherOne 07:15 am EST 03/11/22 |
| Next: |
re: Why did shows move theaters so much in the past? - Singapore/Fling 12:50 am EST 03/10/22 |
| Thread: |
|
