There are patterns that can be seen in the types of musical produced in the West End (NOT fringe) venues and Broadway, as well as the type that are successful in both. There is nothing offensive about saying that, and I say that as someone in the UK. Look at the massive Broadway success of Rent vs. its short run in the West End. Look at the last time an original musical (not an adaptation or jukebox) had a successful run in the West End that wasn't a Broadway transfer. I live in the UK and am constantly frustrated by the state of musicals vs. those in New York and often find myself having to go to fringe theatre in order to be satisfied the way I am when I visit New York and go to big Broadway houses. I personally think there is an element of British theatregoers and critics being pleased that this has been in London first and therefore viewing it positively to start with as a somewhat (but not really) 'British musical'. If it had started on Broadway and transferred, I doubt that there would have been this type of excitement. Perhaps I'm wrong!
neonlightsxo said: "aaaaaa15 I honestly think it's a matter of British vs American taste in musicals. They love spectacle, jukebox musicals and recognizable names. We like...actual substance.
Oh I definitely will...although I need to stir up some interest (on my part) for the storyline. Just interested in why folks thought Ben Platt is so "special" Maybe by the time this show opens. And I'm usually a minority in the boards, not liking shows most everyone on here are singing praises for (Fun Home, School of Rock, AAIP for the more recent examples)