A Question for all the Old-Timers (Golden Age Broadway)

John Tartaglia? Don't think so. His vast Broadway repertoire doesn't really scream Broadway Superstar.

Our Golden Age? Most definitely Kristin Chenoweth, Patti LuPone, Bernadette Peters, Nathan Lane, Christine Ebersole, Sutton Foster, Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, Christopher Sieber, Ann Reinking, Bebe Neuwirth, Ben Vereen, Liza Minnelli, Charlotte d'Amboise, Terrence Mann, Karen Ziemba, etc.

Do you think we have any stars today of the golden age caliber?

There were SOOOOO many BROADWAY names back name, often playing in theatres across the street from each other. Ethel Merman, Julie Andrews, Mary Martin, Chita Rivera, Angela Lansbury, Carol Channing, Marlon Brando, etc. etc. etc.


History exaggerates, there are great stars today, but Peters isn't one of them.
However, also understand that in the "golden age" a lot of the broadway stars were mainstream stars, because the music they sang was pop music.

Just a few moments ago on television someone made a remark about "Broadway stars" on television. And I was asked who some of the "stars" are. And the only name that came to my head was BERNADETTE PETERS.

Some other stars I could name (regardless of my opinion of them) are Lupone, Bebe Neuwirth, Nathan Lane, Chenoweth, etc.

Also one of the reasons we dont have any stars with longevity (lots of shows) to their credit, is that they can make more money and get more notoreity doing television and film (Lane, Chenoweth, Neuwirth, Lupone all did/do television.

It's not that there are a lack of stars, its just that the media isn't giving the form enough real attention to make stars out of anyone.

---

SOmething else we should consider too... Teh Broadway stars had shows written around their talents. CALL ME MADAM for Merman. SOUTH PACIFIC for Martin. HELLO DOLLY! for Channing. KISMET for Drake, adn so on.

The trend today is NOT to write for specific stars because the shows have to run years while few stars will stay more than a year or two.

---

Plus the Broadway stars back then had the status of a movie star, right?

As far as talent? First names that come to mind are Sutton Foster (for her triple-threat being) and Victoria Clarke (that's self-explanatory)

---

"there are great stars today, but Peters isn't one of them"

fenchurch, why do you think that? I would think Peters is one of musical theatre's biggest stars right now.

---

It's a whole different environment now on Broadway, as far as "stars."

On the positive side, the Internet has given added life to special interest audiences. So those of you who like Broadway can be exposed to SO many things you wouldn't have been, even 15 years ago. This web site talks about the third replacement for so-and-so in a mediocre show that runs less than two years. People know their names, their resumes, attendance records, spouses, and everything about them. They are treated by this relatively small, fiercely loyal group as mega-stars in their own rights.

So people who really care about all things Broadway now have access to detailed information about "who and what" whenever they want it. The Internet has created more buzz and a much wider audience for these performers who in a different era would have gone forgotten, simply because the information wouldn't have been readily available.

But, as far as "real" Broadway stars that "everyone" knows... if you're running a general popularity contest with the masses, stop someone on the street (outside of NY) and ask them if they know who Bernadette Peters is. Probably more than half (not all) would say yes. Ask them who Kristin Chenoweth is? Most of them (not all) would say they don't know. Bernadette is from a different era though. Not the Golden Age, but she also had a TV and film career first, before returning to Broadway in the '80s. She arrived in Sunday in the Park with a nationwide recognizability-factor that had nothing to do with her previous stage appearances.

Kristin created a role, had songs written for her, etc., in the biggest hit show Broadway has seen in the past decade. But that show was never sold to the public as a "Kristin Chenoweth/Idina Menzel" show. It was sold as a commodity. A machine. The producers didn't want it to matter who you saw in pink or green. They sold the spectacle and the story... not the stars.

---

Updated On: 1/1/07 at 09:15 AM

If you watch Rick McKay's film the question of whether or not the Golden Age existed is raised. The past always seems better than the present, and I believe that we do have Broadway stars now - though not as widely known as those in the past.

---

you can kiss my old-time ass, you pollywog.... ;oP

Nathan, Bernadette, and Patti

---

Rodgers and Hammerstein would have written for Sutton Foster and Nathan Lane. As would Cole Porter (he'd have loved Natan at a dinner party) and Irving Berlin. I think Gershwin would have been moved by Audra MacDonald and Kurt Weill would have thrown Lotta over for Bebe Neuwirth.

Our big stars would have flourished back then, but what we lack are the Robert Prestons and Phil Silvers. Matthew B. is not THAT talented and Nathan Lane can't do everything.

We need two more Nathan Lanes.

---

Updated On: 1/1/07 at 03:21 PM

Good points, Miss.Vanessi!

I would say that Ethel Merman and Bernadette Peters have had similar career paths. They both did theatre in NY early on, but then were taken away to Hollywood. Both made national names for themselves on film (and for Bernadette on TV as well) before returning to NY as major Broadway stars. People do forget that both of these ladies had film careers. Just as Jean Arthur did. (Although Jean's biggest and most-remembered successes came on film, as you have said.)

There are very few Broadway stars that have worked exclusively in the theatre, and yet maintained a nationwide "star" status. The Lunts made only a couple of rare film appearances. Katharine Cornell barely at all (except as herself in Stage Door Canteen). Same with Laurette Taylor, who made a couple of silent films. Gertie Lawrence and Noel Coward made a handful of film appearances.

Helen Hayes won an Oscar as Best Actress in the early '30s, even though she was "The First Lady" of the American Theatre. She also toured the country in most of her Broadway shows, so she had a nationwide exposure as a theatre actress that few (if any) achieve today.

We have only a few theatre stars today who have made "box office" names for themselves without gathering steam via other media... and before getting their name-above-the-title treatment.

---

The Times do change everything.
In "The Golden Age" there were no coperate sponsers on shows (that I can think of) and I agree most shows today are produced to exist without a "star".
I think a good example is MARY POPPINS, as beautiful and talented as Ashley Brown is, she is basically an unknown in the entertainment business.
If this show was done in "The Golden Age" it would have probably been shaped on a performer like Mary Martin who already had a theatre following. After her stay she would then have been replaced by an up in coming name like Florence Henderson or Shirley Jones and they would have made a name for themselves in future shows.
Most shows today are looking at the long term and as has been stated, must work whoever plays the leading role.
That said I believe their are many young and not so young performers who are just as charasmatic and talented as those that came before them.
Like Ms. Brown, Sutton Foster, Cheno, Gavin Creel, Michael Arden, Jenn Collela, Will Chase, Chris Seiber, John Tartaglia come to mind as talents who would have fit right in back then.
(and many more also)

Updated On: 1/1/07 at 04:32 PM

When my family saw Brian Stokes Mitchell's solo CD ads in my Spelling Bee playbill, the only thing they recognized him from was The Fresh Prince of Bel Air.

---