BBAJ Not lasting

[MattDe]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:05pm

Why did BBAJ not last one of most critically acclaimed shows ever !!!

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:12pm

You were either dropped from a great height as a baby, or else you are a troll. Please stop with the nonsense.

Updated On: 11/20/12 at 07:12 PM

[Kad]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:14pm

It belonged off-Broadway. They did a good job at making the house accommodate the show and feel more intimate, but it needed a truly smaller house and a different audience.
Although it got great reviews (though I wouldn't say best ever) at the Public, it's acclaim did diminish in its transfer.

I loved the show at the Public, and happily saw it 7 times there. It just wasn't the same at the Jacobs.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:18pm

Glossary:

BBAJ = Bloody,Bloody Andrew Jackson

[MattDe]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:18pm

Jay its not crazy to ask questions about BBAJ

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:20pm

You're quite right, Quiche.

[MattDe]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:20pm

Kad I live in Australia it just sounds so amazing to me. I just think that it was like chicago ahead of its time.

[TalkinLoud]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:24pm

Kad's right. Should have stayed Off-Broadway and could have lasted a long time there. It's truly one of the greatest things I've ever seen.

[little_sally]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:26pm

I feel like I've been saying this in every thread lately but I feel like the problem with BBAJ is that it was not marketed right. The posters made it look dark, like a Spring Awakening rip-off (in terms of tone, etc.) when it reality I was shocked at how hysterical some of it was. I wish it had lasted because I loved it.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:27pm

Matt, The original Chicago didn't fail because it was ahead of its time. It actually didn't fail at all--it ran for almost three years, a very respectable run. Comparisons to the flop that was Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson don't really work. Many people do believe that Chicago could have run even longer if it hadn't opened three weeks after A Chorus Line. Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson just could not properly fill a Broadway-size theatre.

Updated On: 11/20/12 at 07:27 PM

[MattDe]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:28pm

I felt from all the reviews and press it would get 12 tony nominations including best musical.

[MattDe]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:32pm

It didn't help A Chorus Line got the Pulitzer and 9 tony awards

[WestwardHoHo]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 7:36pm

It sukt.

[MarkBearSF]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 8:09pm

Just saw it in SF. In this case, it was a good production with a great troupe and the right size house.
I thoroughly enjoyed the show, but afterwards, I asked my husband, "Who, in their right mind thought this was a Broadway show?" It was a clever (if at times, too convinced in its cleverness) little 90 minute skit.
Even with a top cast, it just ain't Broadway.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 11/20/12 at 8:54pm

We saw it 3rd row center on Broadway, and agree with MarkBear, except for the "thoroughly enjoyed it" part-- it was a Saturday Night Live skit with songs, extended beyond endurance. Should have been on a cabaret stage where its collegiate sense of humor would have hit a home run. Inane characters singing inane lyrics, as far as we were concerned. Had some great music though.

Oh, and the design work was absolutely superb.

Updated On: 11/20/12 at 08:54 PM

[newintown]

Posted: 11/21/12 at 10:01am

It began fun and silly and very quickly wore out its welcome; sophomoric silliness from 30-somethings, the sort of thing writers should get out of their system in college. Perfectly fun downtown, totally out of place on Broadway, swallowed up in even one of the smaller houses.

I like the score, though - just not in a big commercial Broadway house.

[kadu335]

Posted: 11/21/12 at 1:17pm

As a foreign theatergoer, i feel like the premise of the show is not as appealing as the actual show.

I only saw it at the Public and had major reservations before going in... I'm not the biggest fan of emo rock and I though my lack of knowledge of the American political history would make the show not as fun for me. I couldn't be more wrong... I loved it.

[GlindatheGood22]

Posted: 11/21/12 at 7:01pm

This was one of the worse things I've ever seen. Forgettable songs, and the jokes were all so painfully forced. ("Aren't you dead by now?" "Oh, my God, you're right.") It really was awfully unfunny and never should have moved to Broadway.

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 11/21/12 at 9:03pm

I saw it on Broadway and didn't love it. I assume it worked much better at the Public, because it really got swallowed up in the Jacobs even though that house is one of the smaller ones on Broadway.

I did like that the set design incorporated the whole of the house and it was really fun, but the show just didn't work in the Broadway environment.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 11/21/12 at 11:48pm

I think it's a great show, but it needed to be expanded for Broadway. The set needed to open up, and the show needed to be a little bit "bigger." I mean, it's a musical on Broadway. People expect certain things. The show started off-Broadway at the Public's smaller space, and then moved to the Public's mainstage, then to Broadway. Why should I pay $120 for the same show that I paid $10 for the Public Lab? It needed to be more.