Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 07:30 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
| In reply to: following the Spring Awakening playbook? - nyhkguy 07:20 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| Interesting comparison. One question: what is the "traditional audience" and is that really the show's target? (I guess that's two questions, but in 1 sentence :-) ) | |
| reply to this message |
| re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? | |
| Posted by: nyhkguy 09:25 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
| In reply to: re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? - ryhog 07:30 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| By "traditional audience" I meant the older crowd that pays attention to reviews, pays full price and could reliably turn a show that's just received raves into a hit long enough til the show's natural constituency and tourists could find it. As for the show's target, I would guess David Stone wants the same audience who made the similarly quirky Spelling Bee a hit - I would guess the 2022 equivalent might be GenX and millennials and families with sophisticated older kids? I'm sure he would love to get the Dear Evan Hansen constituency as well - I would never have guessed it would become the hit it did. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: "the same audience who made the similarly quirky Spelling Bee a hit" | |
| Posted by: Dale 10:49 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
| In reply to: re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? - nyhkguy 09:25 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| That was in 2005. Over two decades ago! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Math | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 12:17 am EST 11/23/22 | |
| In reply to: re: "the same audience who made the similarly quirky Spelling Bee a hit" - Dale 10:49 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| It’s 2022. Minus 2005 is 17 years, which is less than 20. So Spelling Bee was not even two decades ago, much less “over” two decades ago. If you’re trying to go by decades as a unit of 10-year time (i.e. The Oughts, the Teens), then you would not include The Twenties until we were at the end of it, so that The Oughts would be only “two decades ago”. In any event, I don’t think Theater has changed that drastically. And while I wouldn’t necessarily compare Spelling Bee to Kimberly, that’s an argument based on aesthetics and dramaturgy, not spurious math and a vague idea that comedy has changed. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: "I don’t think Theater has changed that drastically" | |
| Posted by: Dale 08:34 am EST 11/23/22 | |
| In reply to: Math - Singapore/Fling 12:17 am EST 11/23/22 | |
|
|
|
| It has. Both on stage and in the audience! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: "I don’t think Theater has changed that drastically" | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 11:16 am EST 11/23/22 | |
| In reply to: re: "I don’t think Theater has changed that drastically" - Dale 08:34 am EST 11/23/22 | |
|
|
|
| It hasn’t! Both on stage! And in the audience! (Awesome, do I win the argument now?) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: "I don’t think Theater has changed that drastically" | |
| Posted by: ryhog 10:02 am EST 11/23/22 | |
| In reply to: re: "I don’t think Theater has changed that drastically" - Dale 08:34 am EST 11/23/22 | |
|
|
|
| and yet you again fail to put any meat on the bones. Hard to pay much attention when the strongest point you make is at the bottom of an exclamation point. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: "the same audience who made the similarly quirky Spelling Bee a hit" | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:17 am EST 11/23/22 | |
| In reply to: re: "the same audience who made the similarly quirky Spelling Bee a hit" - Dale 10:49 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| 2022-2005=17 2 decades=20 I won't rule out the possibility that there is a causal shift but it'd help if youu could put some meat on the bones. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:59 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
| In reply to: re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? - nyhkguy 09:25 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| That's what I thought you meant. To me, that's the Leopoldstadt audience and they have not had a problem because of non-returning oldies. I would suggest the problem here is that there is nothing in the marketing that is drawing them in. To be fair, I don't know that thy are drawable but I think the pitch could be better than what we have seen. I just think there have been miscues but yes Mr. Stone can loan the production as much as he wants (and not miss it in the least). Hopefully that money would be spent on a rethink of what's being conveyed. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? | |
| Posted by: nyhkguy 10:38 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
| In reply to: re: following the Spring Awakening playbook? - ryhog 09:59 pm EST 11/22/22 | |
|
|
|
| I agree - I'm fully expecting a revamped ad campaign within the month. David Stone has been with Serino since at least Wicked so I wouldn't expect him to with mid-stream. They were at least smart to blanket the theatre sites, local tv with the raves the day after opening and bombard ticket buyers with email blasts. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.059441 seconds.