re: CITY OF ANGELS Revival -- Jackman and ?
Last Edit: BroadwayTonyJ 04:55 pm EDT 04/23/24
Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 04:54 pm EDT 04/23/24
In reply to: re: CITY OF ANGELS Revival -- Jackman and ? - Chazwaza 06:04 pm EDT 04/22/24

A Broadway revival of City of Angels would be expensive. If the production is designed to turn a profit, most likely the two leads would have to commit to staying with the it for a year or more. Jackman was on stage in The Music Man for 13 months and that does not include the rehearsal period. Radcliffe will be on stage in Merrily for 12 months (combining the off-Broadway and Broadway runs) and that also does not include rehearsals.

Gyllenhaal took 2 months away from films twice and 3 months away once for his 3 Broadway roles. At 43 he's at the peak of his earning power and choice of film roles, plus he's generally the leading man in his movies. I've spoken to him once. He enjoys singing on stage and loves doing theatre. Nevertheless, I think it's a long shot that he would take a year off from making films to do something like City of Angels. Maybe the movie version?

Radcliffe is undoubtedly one of the most well known actors on the planet. He's 34, 5'5", and plays character roles in films. Stine is sort of a comical character in Angels in that his own creation mocks him because Stine's writing is no match for Stone's sexual prowess.

Certainly not my first choice for Stine, but Radcliffe did a great job in Lifespan of a Fact playing a fact checker who wants to be a writer. I think he sings well enough. Also, his track record of starring in certifiable hits on Broadway (3 out of 5) is pretty damn good. I've talked to him a couple of times. He definitely wants to keep doing stage work and musicals in particular. So, who knows?
reply

Previous: re: CITY OF ANGELS Revival -- Jackman and ? - AlanScott 12:00 am EDT 04/27/24
Next: re: CITY OF ANGELS Revival -- Jackman and ? - JereNYC 11:00 am EDT 04/24/24
Thread:


Time to render: 0.440771 seconds.