A Mackintosh plan?

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 4:47pm

I'm having a debate with some colleagues about the return of Les Miserables.
They claim that the six months will turn into eight, then a year, then never go away again.

One of them claims that when Les Miserables closed on Broadway, it was part of an already existing plan of closing a show, and mysteriously bringing it back not so long after, for what seems to be a limited run, but was really only a break to boost up sales of both the Broadway production and the tour.
He also claims that it won't be long before the felines come back to Broadway from their 25th anniversary tour on a "six months only" engagement...

Would something like this be possible?

Updated On: 3/15/06 at 04:47 PM

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 4:51pm

I dunno, though I wouldn't be surprised. If ticket sales are strong, then I don't see why he wouldn't.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 4:53pm

I think it will turn into an open-ended run.

[timote316]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 4:56pm

As long as tickets sales stay strong (which will be for quite a while), the engagement will be extended, I'd bet. They dont call Mackintosh a marketing genius for nothing.

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 4:58pm

Does that mean that the Rum Tum Tugger will be on Broadway again then?

Mmmm, I wouldn't be sad if other shows start "closing" then, they could be just following the new Mackintosh business plan.

[thez914]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 4:59pm

How bad was the production doing (tickets sales wise) when it originally closed on Broadway?

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 5:17pm

I would think it was pretty even - high and low depending on the season, but in average with most shows.

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 5:21pm

Mackintosh joked, even at the final performance, that he had to close the show in order to be able to revive it. I guess maybe there was some truth in that!

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 5:22pm

I doubt it will extend. I hope it doesn't extend. The reasons for bringing the show back were pretty pathetic.

[jo]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 6:45pm

If he is bringing in cast members who have done the show for some time for the same roles, then perhaps that is probable. Renew interest by stopping the Broadway run and revive it within a few years.

If he brings in a special cast and makes the run part of the overall 21st anniversary celebrations in London ( which would emphasize that it is the longest-running musical in the world), then maybe it will be a limited run.


Updated On: 3/15/06 at 06:45 PM

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 6:48pm

I don't understand the whole "21st Anniversary" thing. Who celebartes a 21st?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:13pm

Word on the "street" is it will extend at least thru $mas.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:15pm

I expect 100% that it will play an open-ended run. I also expect that no other revivials will open next season. Nothing will be able to beat Les Mis and Chorus Line at the Tonys.

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:17pm

There should be some sort of Broadway rule that makes sure when a production closes it can't come back to Broadway, to protect it from becoming a huge recycling factory.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:19pm

By that standard, blaxx, we'll never have any revivals.

However, there is a Tony regulation that for a show to be considered a revival, it must be produced 3 years after the original closed.

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:24pm

No, a revival, with a whole different creative team on board, I understand, and I'm all about giving all those shows a new life.

What I'm against is opening and closing the exact same production, I think it diminishes the credibility of Broadway as a huge part of the American culture... I think it's important that the development and new creations for Broadway are always taken care of, because if Cats, Phantom, Wicked, etc. are going to close and come back, and back and forth, it's a huge step back from advancing. The show had its life, it finished and could continue touring all over the planet, but, please, no recycling!

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:26pm

There is no way LES MIS can be considered a revival. It will probably be eligible ONLY for acting (and nothing else), or considered a special event.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:29pm

Les Mis will be considered a revival. There was an article in the Times a few weeks ago about it.

Broadway is a dying industry, though. Tickets are $111 a piece for shows that close before they reach 100 performances. People don't want to spend money to see a new production of Les Miserables or A Chorus Line. Critics don't want to see a new production of shows that defined the theater, like Les Mis or ACL.

The audience wants to see something they're familiar with. Why do you think that the bulk of the shows opening this season are based on movies/books/prewritten music?
Updated On: 3/15/06 at 07:29 PM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:31pm

There was an article in the times that the tony committee decided LES MIS will be a revival before any of them have seen it? Not possible.

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:32pm

Yes, Yankee, I understand, and I think it's very sad.
But this "let's close and bring them back" sounds like a very smart business move, but very very low in many ways.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:35pm

Munk, the statute of limitations is 3 years. Anything after 3 years (Les Mis would be at 3 1/2) is fair game.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:39pm

Even if it's an EXACT replica of the original production?

I would put money on the fact that the Tony's will not consider LES MIS eligible for best revivial, considering the direction, scenery, lighting, costumes, EVERYTHING - will be identical to the original production. It's just not logical.

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:48pm

wow, Macintosh is sure cutting that 3-year Tony rule really slim, i mean i dont think it even has been 3 years since LES MIS closed...
but anyway, back to the point, i have mixed reactions for this revival. I am very excited because I never got to see the Broadway production, so that is a positive thing. And I do agree it is a very smart business move. But I just hope they keep it limited to the 6 months, because I am eagar to see newer shows, and just because a lot of ALW's recent shows have not faired so well, I don't think they should revive all of his hits this early on.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 7:59pm

What? Revive all of his hits this early on in what?

[BSoBW3]

Posted: 3/15/06 at 8:02pm

Is there a rule for revivals? That they have to have different directors?

I think it is considered a revival.