Avenue Q Vegas: Not doing well?- Page 2

[MissNY]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:04pm

"Whose website? Do you have a link?"

John Tartaglia's www.johntartaglia.com If you read his guestbook, he posts his schedule as he finds it out

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:12pm

Hushpuppy: "Hoping Avenue Q fails miserably because it did not tour". HUSH PUPPY! OY!!!!
That is just evil. Will you give it a rest already. I hope it succeeds as it is one of the greatest shows ever written and has the most talented cast.
Is it John Tags fault? Give it a rest.
Sounds like someone is bitter about Q not touring.
The material is great and if Steve Wynn offered to build you a gorgeous theater for your show, you would do what was best for the show.
Q, did what was best for the show. Move on already!
Personally, I hope Q sells out every show and John Tartaglia will have a gig for as long as he wants.
Go John!

Updated On: 9/13/05 at 02:12 PM

[Tom1071]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:13pm

All the hookers out at the Bunny Ranch are steeling all the business.

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:16pm

Ave Q would do better if they WOULDN'T CANCEL SHOWS!

My boyfriend and I planned on seeing it either Saturday or Sunday. We hadn't bough tickets for either one.

Seriously... I didn't get to see Kelly Clarkson or Avenue Q. Makes me sooooo mad.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:24pm

Unlike Hushpuppy, I would never root for 'Avenue Q' to 'fail miserably' in Vegas. It's a great show, and I'm happy for its creators and producers. They want to protect the show and made what they believed was the best decision. Sure, I would've loved to see it tour in S.F., where I have friends, but it'll get there someday. I don't think Wynn's deal is forever. And it's unfair to write off Vegas audiences as a bunch of 'clueless drunks.' I didn't see any of them when I was there; both of my audiences gave the show a standing O. Here's an interview with Jeff Marx and Robert Lopez and they spell out their reasoning:
The Gothamist: Jeff Marx and Robert Lopez

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:30pm

Hail to W WONG!
Go Wong. Go Wong. GO GO WONG!

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:36pm

Of course they're going to give it a standing ovation. Most of them don't know a deserving show from a crackpot.

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:38pm

Hey Metal Jacket,
Good name, you might need a metal jacket if you say anything bad about Q.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:49pm

Maybe if they throw a pizza party in Vegas they can trick people into coming to see the show.

[Full Metal Jacket]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:58pm

I'm not saying a thing bad about Q. I love Q. I was just wondering why it cancelled.. and it was stupid of them to do it.

Kelly, I can understand. She's sick and well, she's Kelly and you really can't throw in an understudy.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 3:01pm

Wayman do you mean Vegas is only for now?

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 3:23pm

Yessica, ALOT of families go to Vegas--it may be unseemly, but they go--don't forget a great deal of the tourists are foreign, so they bring their children to the US. That's why a few casinos (the Bellagio comes to mind) do not allow children in the casino at all. On the flip side, Circus Circus, Aladdin, and Treasure Island cater to children and families.

[YessicaB]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 3:35pm

Okay lildogs. I believe you. It just seemed like a very odd choice for a family vacation...lol.

I agree with you Corine, I think Hushpuppy is just a little bitter.

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 3:47pm

Namo,
Avenue Q is here to stay. Deal with it.
I thought you loved Q!

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:12pm

I'm sorry, but I don't believe Avenue Q will be a big success in Las Vegas. I go to Vegas a couple of times a year and have for the past 15 years. Avenue Q will not have the long runs that Blue Man , Mamma Mia , or the Cirque shows have for a simple reason, and it has nothing to do with the quality of the show.

The show is too verbal, you need to have a very strong command of English and a knowledge of American culture to "get" Avenue Q . There are many international tourists that support the other shows which are more spectacle and almost no words. Look around the more upmarket casions (Bellagio, Wynn, Venetian, etc.), you will note that a large percentage of the people are international.

I saw the show last week and there were many people that were waking up when the house lights went on at intermission. Some of these folks didn't come back for the second act. That's not the way to create good word of mouth.

This plus they are doing 2 performances a day in a theatre that seats 1200. That's 2400 people capacity a day, almost three times the amount on Broadway.

Please don't bash me for making these comments because I love this show, but I don't think it's going to go for several years. I believe it's a bad match for the Las Vegas market.

Just my opinion and observations, and , truly, I hope I'm wrong.
Updated On: 9/13/05 at 04:12 PM

[hushpuppy]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:13pm

Hmmm. I think I'd refer to myself as crabby, not bitter.
I just think that Q did the rest of the country a disservice by not touring and opting for a lucrative Las Vegas deal instead. As for that tired old wheeze that they would've had to change lyrics and sanitize the show, I just don't buy it. Instead of booking subscription series like 'Best of Broadway' in 2500-seat houses, they could've toured in places with smaller houses and theatre-savvy audiences. Don't tell me that Q couldn't have found an audience in places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, Atlanta, Miami, and Chicago. You can't turn on HBO without hearing 'f**k this' and 'f**k that' and every movie has somebody's bare butt on the screen so don't tell me that everyone outside of New York is a prude. The creators opted for the big bucks that Steve Wynn dangled in front of them instead of working at putting together a carefully thought out tour schedule. If this succeeds, don't you think other producers will do the same thing? Broadway shows need to tour to keep the road vital. Endless revivals of Oklahoma and Cats do not keep the road vital. That's why I hope this Las Vegas thing fails.

[Hairspraydoll]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:13pm

Um first of all - Vegas is becoming a huge FAMILY destination. More and more things are being geared towards families. But I don't think Avenue Q is really a family show. Also if Vegas wants to bring theatre to a new crowd, why hope they fail? This is spreading theatre around to more people who might not have otherwise experienced it. I think Steve Wynn is evil, but Vegas should not have to suffer because they are trying to bring the arts and culture to a town that desperately needs it.
Why be mad/upset that things aren't going the way everyone wants and focus on the bright side of developing thattre in a town that seriously lacks it?

Also Vegas audiences are not just a bunch of drunks and anyone who assumes that is ignorant.

Updated On: 9/13/05 at 04:13 PM

[LariTheLoud]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:19pm

I agree that Vegas is becoming a very huge family destination... Considering the first time I went to Vegas was when I was about 10. With my family. And I had an amazing time.

I'm 18 now; it has probably grown as far as the family-oriented activities go...

Also, Avenue Q is not a family show at all. But I think it's nice that they're trying to bring theatre to Vegas. As someone in this thread mentioned earlier, Cirque du Soleil is certainly more artsy than the average Vegas glitter n' glitz shows--why doesn't Avenue Q have a chance at success?

It's a comedic show, besides. I don't think it's THAT far from the usual Vegas fanfare.

[YessicaB]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:21pm

Hushpuupy, now that you've explained yourself: I do understand your point. BUT I still do not think that the "creators opted for big bucks" and nothing else. I think Vegas makes sense (even though I had to chuckle at ShowPeople when they wrote that Q will do great in Vegas since of course the frist thing someone who just gambled away their life savings wants is to see a gay puppet sing).
I agree with you HairsprayDoll and i allready admitted not knowing much about the pull factors for families

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:39pm

Ok Hushpuppy. So get yourself to City Crab.

(This shrimp loves shrimp from City Crab)
It will make you less CRABBY.


Updated On: 9/13/05 at 04:39 PM

[leefowler]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:41pm

There's always the chance that Avenue Q might do well in Vegas, but here's the question: Has there EVER been a cerebral show to succeed there? To my knowledge, there has never been a successful Vegas show that didn't involve spectacle and glitz.

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:42pm

The time is NOW!

Shoot. La Cage would be perfect for Vegas!
I miss Andy Pellick. ;-( Updated On: 9/13/05 at 04:42 PM

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:46pm

It could still tour while in Vegas, Mammia Mia did it. Hairspray did it. Spamalot is going to do it. You all need to just calm down! Anyways, is there a lot of advertising for Q in Vegas? I've never been but does it have a big marquee? Are there posters around town? Just wondering. Q in NYC isn't doing so well either. If you check this weeks sales, it was down in the 70s I think.

[hushpuppy]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:51pm

"Has there EVER been a cerebral show to succeed there? To my knowledge, there has never been a successful Vegas show that didn't involve spectacle and glitz."

Actually, way back in the 50's and 60's performers such as Noel Coward, Sophie Tucker, Johnny Mathis, Nat King Cole, and even Ethel Merman regularly performed in Las Vegas. While not 'shows' in the technical sense, these were considered hi-brow entertainers that classed up the town. Men wore black-tie (or at least suits) and women wore elegant gowns and furs (in the desert, no less). The t-shirts, shorts, and flip flops people wear to the shows today were only seen around the swimming pool back then. I remember my parents taking me to the dinner show at Harrah's South Shore Room to see Andy Griffith in 1969 and everybody was all dressed up. Going to see a show was a classy affair back then.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 5:01pm

Hushpuppy suggests: 'They could've toured in places with smaller houses and theatre-savvy audiences.'

Co-producer Kevin McCollum's response (at TheaterMania): The problem with a traveling 'Avenue Q' is that 'most of America has heard that ours is a little puppet show.' Most of the musical's road engagements city to city would have been brief, and he says, 'We didn't think that served us. We didn't constantly want to be leaving when people were just discovering the show.'

It took awhile for Broadway to discover 'Avenue Q' and it didn't sell out when it first hit the Golden. Maybe it'll take time for it to catch on in Vegas, too. I, do, however, think mlsheehan raises legitimate concerns: Many of the Vegas audiences are tourists, and 'Avenue Q' is a very verbal show. Can they win over audiences - and especially foreign-speaking ones - that are much more used to spectacle and stunts (like the Cirque du Soleil shows)? Also, 'Avenue Q' needs to many more times people each night, as opposed to Broadway. It's a reality. And will rave reviews bring in the locals? Only time will tell.