ATC: Spider Man is officially off....- Page 3

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 5:46pm

Were the loading doors open? I saw them working on the stage when I was in NYC in June. It was kind of neat to see.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 5:51pm

The investors should be glad as they saved themselves a ton of money

Conversely, the critics have lost what would have been their biggest target.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 6:48pm

We've known that construction has been on hold for like a week...how was this construed to TEH SHOW IS CANSULLED!!!

All that money already spent...

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 7:00pm

Julie Taymor Director + Lady + Spending Budget = ??????????

[SNAFU]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 7:06pm

I am sure there are people running around like crazy right now trying to reign in the projected spending costs so that the investors will release the money needed to complete. If not then I wouldn't be surprised if it was a "Cut Your Losses" scenerio.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 7:43pm

I shudder to think what Roundabout's going to do to Miss Julie.

[BrianS]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 8:23pm

officially

(my best spanish accent)
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 8:40pm

Rox wrote: "The investors should be glad as they saved themselves a ton of money

Conversely, the critics have lost what would have been their biggest target."

But what about YOU Mr Roxy? What about what you've lost. If it had been a huge financial and critical hit (which nobody predicted for Lion King) you will have lost bitching about the high ticket prices and proudly braying "No, thank you!" because you aren't going to contribute to the market for such OUTRAGEOUS costs. And also the theater restoration fees!! And the taxes!!!

If it had been a critical and financial flop, you will have lost the opportunity to run out and see it and then declare it wasn't "that bad" and that "the critics had it in for Spidey from day one."

And why? Because you play both sides against the middle.

So sorry for your loss.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 8:53pm

Shame shame shame SHAME on ANYONE who is glad the project is off and think the investors are better off spending their money on a different project.

NO ONE knows what this show could have been. Not even the WRITERS or Taymor.

You may not like the source material, you may think the idea was dumb, you may hate Taymor or other creative members' previous work, but it is completely pathetic to already cast judgement on ANY show without seeing it.

The most recent example I can think of is XANADU. Plus, Taymor has also surprised us in the past with THE LION KING, a show that successfully takes four-legged animals and makes them believable on stage. And from what I remember, there was a ton of criticism at the idea of transferring that film to stage.

I hope the project gets back on its feet and is successful. Even if it is not successful, even if the show flat out sucks, I hope it opens and at least gets that chance.

[PastorErnst]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 8:58pm

I could not have said it better myself, CapnHook.

[blaxx]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:12pm

NO ONE knows what this show could have been. Not even the WRITERS or Taymor.

Isn't that the problem, though?

[James885]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:16pm

I hope the project hasn't been shelved. While I was VERY skeptical when I first heard about it, all the interviews and everything have kind of made curious to see what Taymor would do with the material.

[wdwfreak]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:33pm

If this doesn't open, I'm going to be very disappointed because I was actually looking forward to seeing it. I mean come on Alan Cumming and music by U2, how could it get better?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:35pm

My biggest problem is the $$$$$!
I mean who gives anyone 10 million just to re-do a theatre that is only 11 years old?
Can you imagine Gower Champion telling David Merrick:
"Hey Dave, before we do HELLO DOLLY I need half a Mil
(it was long ago)to re-do the ST JAMES to fit the show.
It's just absurd.
I don't want to see anyone out of work, but all the money in the world can't compete with pure theatrical magic than can be 4 poles and a single curtain.
The 10 million alone could support hundreds of gifted young artists.

[Artemis2]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:38pm

As you said it was LONG ago. Hello Dolly didn't NEED all the technical changes to their theatre that Spider-Man needs.

[blaxx]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:45pm

As you said it was LONG ago. Hello Dolly didn't NEED all the technical changes to their theatre that Spider-Man needs

Julie, is that you?

[SNAFU]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:49pm

Does Spiderman need a reworked theatre and the spectacle? What ever happened to simple stage craft and story telling?

[Artemis2]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 9:49pm

Yes I am Julie Taymor, you caught me. I still do thing that she is an idiot for bleeding all this money.

Snafu, I would much rather not have another Tarzan with slow swinging. Updated On: 8/11/09 at 09:49 PM

[Eris0303]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:08pm

CapnHook, I don't hate the source material or think the idea of a musical based on Spider-Man is a joke. I am, however, concerned about the ramifications of a show this expensive. As has been stated the show would need to run for 800 years playing to packed houses every night to recoup. That's crazy.

My concern is that this will get going and other, similar, shows will start popping up. Soon all of Broadway is nothing but spectacle with tickets of $200 or more each.

[CSonBroadway]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:13pm

"My concern is that this will get going and other, similar, shows will start popping up. Soon all of Broadway is nothing but spectacle with tickets of $200 or more each."

If that is what happens, my broke ass is watching community theatre for the rest of my life.

[Artemis2]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:17pm

When Spider-Man crashes & burns no producer would be stupid enough to charge $200 a ticket.

[CSonBroadway]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:19pm

So I guess we should just stop this thread because it obviously isn't true if it hasn't gotten deleted yet.

Unless the mods are like...dead

[Artemis2]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:21pm

I've seen them post today.

[CSonBroadway]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:24pm

Okay

[CapnHook]

Posted: 8/11/09 at 10:36pm

"Soon all of Broadway is nothing but spectacle with tickets of $200 or more each."

It's leading that way anyway, It practically IS that way right now. It doesn't matter what prices are -- if the people are paying, then there is obviously a market and the the producers can charge what they want. *I* won't be able to afford the show, and most of my friends and people I know won't be able to afford to see it, but if others can and the show can make a run for its money, then kudos to them.

BUT if they charge $200 a ticket, and people DON'T buy them, thus forcing the show to close or lower prices, then that has taught the producers a lesson and next time prices won't be set that high.

But they never said they would set a $200 ticket price, did they?

The facts are that the producers took on the project with a projected expense. They knew what theater they had months in advance, thus knowing how many seats it has. They're not gonna put money into this without knowing they can profit off of it. They're smart with numbers. They know the math. They knew all this even before the project was green-lit.

IF the show is cancelled, it's not due to the original expense. It's cancelled either because the cost is growing higher than anticipated, there are creative differences, original funds are lost, etc. But it's NOT because of the original projected expense.