BEACHES Previews- Page 8

[George in DC]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 6:05pm

Kad said: "George in DC said: "

Kad is wrong, I saw "Beaches" at Signature Theatre in Feb of 2014 and "Wind .... " was in the show.
"

Yes, I was indeed wrong- I misread an article about Iris Rainer Dart from before the debut. My apologies."

 

It's funny, that's the only thing I remember about the show except I was totally blown away by Alysha Umphress. Otherwise , the show was completely forgettable. 

 

Updated On: 4/8/26 at 06:05 PM

[Ensemble17701165943]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 9:46pm

Wasn't this show only meant for a limited run and then to go out on tour?

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 9:58pm

Ensemble17701165943 said: "Wasn't this show only meant for a limited run and then to go out on tour?"

It is a "limited run" of 6 months and it will allegedly tour after that.

free advice: If you want to play the scarcity game, start with 12 weeks on sale and announce an extension mid-previews if there is actual demand and great word of mouth!

[pmensky]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 10:30pm

Jordan Catalano said: "We know by now that the people who can make changes and should make changes in so many of these shows, are aware that message boards exist and people who actually know what they're talking about provide instantaneous feedback on the products they put out but - and someone please give me specific instances because I'm still working on my first cup of coffee - I can't think of a time they've actually used the feedback to their advantage. Of course there's financial logistics to take into account but if you make, let's just say, a new brand ofcookie and give it out and people say "Oh, I don't like this there's glass in it" and you have millions of dollars invested to make sure that cookie is profitable, you'd do what you needed toremove the glass and make people enjoy your cookie. Not double down and pretend that your cookie is glass-free and just go "Oh, well. Nothing we can do about it now." and then goes on like a lot of productions have done, to blame the public for not wanting to spend money on glass shard cookies.

This message board has been around for longer than a lot of users have been alive. It has it's good and it has it's bad but the GOOD has always been there to provide the feedback and it amazes me that after DECADES, it (and now countless other social media outlets) isstill not viewed by most to be a productive tool for them. It's a free, real time focus group for every single performance, people.

Again, I'm not talking about "Beaches" specifically for some of this stuff because (I guess?) there have been changes made since the earlypreview I went to and I will go back to see the final result but folks I know who were there just last night had the same reaction or worse, than I did."

I appreciate your enthusiasm as an audience member, truly. But I think it’s worth acknowledging the irony here. You’re arguing that professional artists should treat message board opinions as a “real time focus group,” yet your own history on this board shows why that’s not a reliable or productive idea.

You’ve championed Almost Famous as a “perfect musical,” praised Getting the Band Back Together, and wrote such glowing mid intermission praise for Beanie Feldstein and Jane Lynch at the first Funny Girl preview that anyone reading would’ve assumed they had Tony Awards incoming. None of those assessments aligned with the artistic or commercial outcomes that followed.

There’s nothing wrong with loving what you love, that’s the joy of being an audience member. But that’s exactly the point: you’re an audience member, not an artistic advisor. And your taste, historically, has not been a useful predictor of what works on a professional level.

So when you suggest that producers and creative teams should be mining this board for actionable notes, it ignores the reality that this board is a mix of informed perspectives, personal biases, and wildly inconsistent taste, yours included. That’s why professionals don’t treat anonymous message boards as development tools. Enthusiasm is great, but enthusiasm is not expertise. 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 10:40pm

I am constantly amazed (and I do mean that) when you and others bring up (AND REMEMBER) that I had a great time at certain shows and use that as some sort of argument that I don't know what I'm talking about. As if you do not enjoy anything at all that the masses didn't. That your tastes align EXACTLY to what the people who have the most favorable opinions on things, do. I know it's used as some sort of "gotcha" thing against me and after 20 years on this board - cool. 

So to further comment what I said, I in no way said I personally need or want to be listened to on any topic by any creative on this board. I'm saying that they have the entire internet to look at and see it people are enjoying their product or not. Is that opinion not valid because I enjoy some flops? There's more than a few people here who appreciate "flop musicals" and still are very knowledgable about theater. And there's a lot of shows that people LOVE that I saw once and that was more than enough for me. Does that mean that nobody should listen to me? Curious where you stand on that.

[pmensky]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 11:00pm

Jordan Catalano said: "I am constantly amazed (and I do mean that) when you and others bring up (AND REMEMBER) that I had a great time at certain shows and use that as some sort of argument that I don't know what I'm talking about. As if you do not enjoy anything at all that the masses didn't. That your tastes align EXACTLY to what the people who have the most favorable opinions on things, do. I know it's used as some sort of "gotcha" thing against me and after 20 years on this board - cool.

So to further comment what I said, I in no way said I personally need or want to be listened to on any topic by any creative on this board. I'm saying that they have the entire internet to look at and see it people are enjoying their product or not. Is that opinion not valid because I enjoy some flops? There's more than a few people here who appreciate "flop musicals" and still are very knowledgable about theater. And there's a lot of shows that people LOVE that I saw once and that was more than enough for me. Does that mean that nobody should listen to me? Curious where you stand on that."

That is not what I wrote. I wasn’t commenting on your taste. I was pointing out that your argument about creatives using this board as a focus group falls apart when the reactions here, including yours, are too inconsistent to offer anything useful to people making a show. That contradiction stands.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 11:07pm

Groovy. 

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 11:14pm

In my professional role, when I facilitate meetings or focus groups, one thing I see consistently is that groups gravitate towards common themes and then set side the other opinions.

I make them take a second look for what I call "interesting outliers," the comments that aren't reflected in the majority's themes, but hold some interesting potential.

That's often where the real insight or innovative idea is found.

Message boards and review sites are never going to be a statistically valid focus group, but they do give you a sense of the common themes from a specific, small sample.

But perhaps more importantly,  they may have some interesting outlier opinions in the comments, ones that might spark a new understanding or insight for a creative team.

[MezzoDiva47]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 11:14pm

pmensky said:

You’ve championed Almost Famous as a “perfect musical,” praised Getting the Band Back Together,

 

almost famous was far from perfect but it was good

unfortunately these days good is not good enough

costs are too high and when a show fails to catch on in the first month

the show is already bleeding money profusely

in a previous decade almost famous might have had a respectable run

but getting the band back together doesnt even belong in the same category

gtbbt was nothing more than a ken davenport vanity project

the show was produced as a broadway show because he could

not that it had any crumb of artistic value

the plot was paper-thin trite

the score was lame and the orchestrations were anemic

if u want to talk about a 'bomb' as is being discussed in another thread

getting the band back together never even cracked $300k and ran for a pathetic 5 weeks

making the heart of rock and roll look like a smash hit by comparison

but yes beaches looks headed to be another 'glory day' 18 years later

 

MezzoDiva47 has spoken

u know what to do

 

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 11:16pm

Everyone has their own taste, sure. But when multiple people are posting the same things on BWW, Reddit, Twitter, etc. they should take note and discuss - not ignore, like the vast majority of shows during their preview periods.

[tomwsjr]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 7:09am

Wasn’t New York New York “going to be a smash hit and run for years and years?”

Updated On: 4/9/26 at 07:09 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 7:30am

Although the board (or any other social media) is hardly representational sampling of ticket buyers, what does make it useful is that it’s a sampling of more informed theatergoers (meaning people who see and know a lot more about theatre than the average ticketbuyer) freely discussing shows, in depth, in an environment in which opinions are often challenged and so force the opinion holder to refine and better support their opinions, anonymously and on a neutral platform unaffiliated with any production,  where few have any material or financial skin in the game and it is very hard to shill or herd opinions. 
 

It is not necessarily a predictive place of discussion and the demographics here mean shows that appeal to other demographics can be overlooked or dismissed  (especially shows appealing to younger audiences). But generally you’re getting a lot of freely accessible, very honest, and generally well-informed and thought out opinions that frequently, if not usually, at the very least align with critical consensus and it would be foolish to not look into it at all. It doesn’t matter if people here like certain flop shows. Cherry-picking instances of Jordan liking certain shows in order to dismiss the value of the entire board as lacking expertise is silly. Productions defer to the opinions of investors, stars, rights holders, and others on a transactional basis frequently, not because of expertise but because they need something from them. 

Updated On: 4/9/26 at 07:30 AM

[perfectliar]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 8:00am

pmensky said: "Jordan Catalano said: "We know by now that the people who can make changes and should make changes in so many of these shows, are aware that message boards exist and people who actually know what they're talking about provide instantaneous feedback on the products they put out but - and someone please give me specific instances because I'm still working on my first cup of coffee - I can't think of a time they've actually used the feedback to their advantage. Of course there's financial logistics to take into account but if you make, let's just say, a new brand ofcookie and give it out and people say "Oh, I don't like this there's glass in it" and you have millions of dollars invested to make sure that cookie is profitable, you'd do what you needed toremove the glass and make people enjoy your cookie. Not double down and pretend that your cookie is glass-free and just go "Oh, well. Nothing we can do about it now." and then goes on like a lot of productions have done, to blame the public for not wanting to spend money on glass shard cookies.

This message board has been around for longer than a lot of users have been alive. It has it's good and it has it's bad but the GOOD has always been there to provide the feedback and it amazes me that after DECADES, it (and now countless other social media outlets) isstill not viewed by most to be a productive tool for them. It's a free, real time focus group for every single performance, people.

Again, I'm not talking about "Beaches" specifically for some of this stuff because (I guess?) there have been changes made since the earlypreview I went to and I will go back to see the final result but folks I know who were there just last night had the same reaction or worse, than I did."

I appreciate your enthusiasm as an audience member, truly. But I think it’s worth acknowledging the irony here. You’re arguing that professional artists should treat message board opinions as a “real time focus group,” yet your own history on this board shows why that’s not a reliable or productive idea.

You’ve championed Almost Famous as a “perfect musical,” praised Getting the Band Back Together, and wrote such glowing mid intermission praise for Beanie Feldstein and Jane Lynch at the first Funny Girl preview that anyone reading would’ve assumed they had Tony Awards incoming. None of those assessments aligned with the artistic or commercial outcomes that followed.

There’s nothing wrong with loving what you love, that’s the joy of being an audience member. But that’s exactly the point: you’re an audience member, notan artistic advisor. And your taste, historically, has not been a useful predictor of what works on a professional level.

So when you suggest that producers and creative teams should be mining this board for actionable notes, it ignores the reality that this board is a mix of informed perspectives, personal biases, and wildly inconsistent taste, yours included. That’s why professionals don’t treat anonymous message boards as development tools. Enthusiasm is great, butenthusiasm is not expertise."

How is Jordan or any other poster's enjoyment of a variety of shows, including some the masses disliked, any different than any human being, including those with "expertise" like other artists or professional reviewers? Producers and audiences listen to critics, but they're just people, and they have opinions a lot of folks wouldn't agree with. They champion things that the masses don't always enjoy, and deride things that become massive hits. I don't really understand the point of this post.

Updated On: 4/9/26 at 08:00 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 8:06am

tomwsjr said: "Wasn’t New York New York “going to be a smash hit and runfor years and years?”"

Did somebody say that at some point here? Probably. But there were no shortage of opposite opinions here. And that production had some of the most accomplished and experienced people currently working in the industry behind it, so it’s not like a positive opinion here can be taken as a laughable outlier.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 8:19am

tomwsjr said: "Wasn’t New York New York “going to be a smash hit and runfor years and years?”"

I think the general consensus here was that it wasn't all that great. There were a few contrarian defenders, some shills, some trolls, who liked to claim otherwise, but if memory serves most here were betting against it.

In fact, now that I've gone back and read through the thread, the outlook was quite poor poor.

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 11:46am

jimmycurry01 said: "tomwsjr said: "Wasn’t New York New York “going to be a smash hit and runfor years and years?”"

I think the general consensus here was that it wasn't all that great. There were a few contrarian defenders, some shills, some trolls, who liked to claim otherwise, but if memory serves most here were betting against it.

In fact, now that I've gone back and read through the thread, the outlook was quite poor poor."

It's telling that most of early positive outlooks in that thread are "hey, it might be good" and "we should be happy to have new shows" (also me on page four being like "boy i hope we don't hit that iceberg" lol). That show had stink on it from the minute it was announced.

[pmensky]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 4:14pm

A few people seem to be interpreting my post as an attack on anyone’s right to enjoy what they enjoy. What I was pointing out is that the opinions on this board often conflict with box office results and professional critics’ reviews. That inconsistency is why it would be unwise to treat this place as a real time focus group for theatre professionals. The irony is that this suggestion came from someone whose reactions are frequently out of step with broader audience response. People seem to be jumping over that point to defend the idea of having opinions when the point I made was about reliability, not permission.

[binau]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 4:41pm

The only person I know who publicly said they read every online comment and made changes was Gregg Barnes in FOLLIES. Bernadette requested a red sexy dress, which they went with in DC. But the online chatter was very negative saying it wasn’t in character. When they opened in New York she came out in the pink frumpy dress instead. Gregg Barnes went onto win a Tony.

Not sure if Marianne Elliot read online comments for her Company or if it was just in the reviews but they seemed to take seriously the complaints of another hundred people and restaged it for New York. 

I kind of get why people would ignore the comments. There is a lot of noise to filter through. But also artists have fragile egos. Some have told me they simply can’t bear to read it for their own emotional wellbeing. Didn’t Anthony Rapp have a meltdown on this board at the response to the RENT movie? 

There are also multiple artists that seem to closely attempt to police what is said about them here via the moderation team. 

People like to pretend that this message board doesn’t matter (and maybe in terms of artistic influence it doesn’t matter as much as it should - I 100% would rather read what Jordan or quizking or wickedrocks or many others would have to say about a show before even the NYtimes these days, for example). 

But I am confident that people are reading, obsessively who work in this industry. If only so they can gossip.

Updated On: 4/9/26 at 04:41 PM

[Kad]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 4:55pm

pmensky said: "A few people seem to be interpreting my post as an attack on anyone’s right to enjoy what they enjoy. What I was pointing out is that the opinions on this board often conflict with box office results and professional critics’ reviews. That inconsistency is why it would be unwise to treat this place as a real time focus group for theatre professionals. The irony is that this suggestion came from someone whose reactions are frequently out of step with broader audience response. People seem to be jumping over that point to defend the idea of having opinions when the point I made was about reliability, not permission."

Because the crux of your point is still "why should anybody take opinions here seriously when some people here liked a flop like Getting the Band Back Together, or when many on the board thought Great Gatsby would quickly close." Productions spend lavishly on expertise from seasoned marketers, publicists, consultants, and others to get shows up and try to get tickets sold and still usually fail.  Jordan was hardly saying that opinions here should be the sole source of input into a production- just that there is a wealth of informed opinion here as a resource. 

 

Updated On: 4/9/26 at 04:55 PM

[pmensky]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 5:03pm

Kad said: "pmensky said: "A few people seem to be interpreting my post as an attack on anyone’s right to enjoy what they enjoy. What I was pointing out is that the opinions on this board often conflict with box office results and professional critics’ reviews. That inconsistency is why it would be unwise to treat this place as a real time focus group for theatre professionals. The irony is that this suggestion came from someone whose reactions are frequently out of step with broader audience response. People seem to be jumping over that point to defend the idea of having opinions when the point I made was about reliability, not permission."

Because the crux of your point is still "why should anybody take opinions here seriously when some people here liked a flop like Getting the Band Back Together, or when many on the board thought Great Gatsby would quickly close." Productions spend lavishly on expertise from seasoned marketers, publicists, consultants, and others to get shows up and try to get tickets sold and still usually fail.Jordan was hardly saying that opinions here should be the sole source of input into a production- just that there is a wealth of informed opinion here as a resource.

At this point the responses say more about people wanting to scold me than about anything I actually wrote. The point was straightforward and it keeps getting rewritten into something else entirely. Either people are determined to feel self‑important or they’re not reading. The inconsistency of opinions here is exactly why this board isn’t a reliable focus group, and the way this thread keeps misinterpreting a simple argument only reinforces that.

 

[MezzoDiva47]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 6:29pm

would you two like a bowl of meow mix?

 

MezzoDiva47 has spoken

you know what to do

 

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 9:00pm

If you don't what what to do, it's

1.  Go to Account.

2.  Select Settings.

3.  Select Managed Block Users in the Message Board section.

4.  Type in name and click Block User.

[perfectliar]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 9:03pm

pmensky said: "Kad said: "pmensky said: "A few people seem to be interpreting my post as an attack on anyone’s right to enjoy what they enjoy. What I was pointing out is that the opinions on this board often conflict with box office results and professional critics’ reviews. That inconsistency is why it would be unwise to treat this place as a real time focus group for theatre professionals. The irony is that this suggestion came from someone whose reactions are frequently out of step with broader audience response. People seem to be jumping over that point to defend the idea of having opinions when the point I made was about reliability, not permission."

Because the crux of your point is still "why should anybody take opinions here seriously when some people here liked a flop like Getting the Band Back Together, or when many on the board thought Great Gatsby would quickly close." Productions spend lavishly on expertise from seasoned marketers, publicists, consultants, and others to get shows up and try to get tickets sold and still usually fail.Jordan was hardly saying that opinions here should be the sole source of input into a production- just that there is a wealth of informed opinion here as a resource.

At this point the responses say more about people wanting to scold me than about anything I actually wrote. The point was straightforward and it keeps getting rewritten into something else entirely. Either people are determined to feel self‑important or they’re not reading. The inconsistency of opinions here is exactly why this board isn’t a reliable focus group, and the way this thread keeps misinterpreting a simple argument only reinforces that."

What are you talking about? I've been in several focus groups, and the literal whole point is to get a range of opinions, not consistent ones. If you know what to expect or what you want out of a focus group, there's no reason to have the focus group. 

[pmensky]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 9:07pm

perfectliar said: "pmensky said: "Kad said: "pmensky said: "A few people seem to be interpreting my post as an attack on anyone’s right to enjoy what they enjoy. What I was pointing out is that the opinions on this board often conflict with box office results and professional critics’ reviews. That inconsistency is why it would be unwise to treat this place as a real time focus group for theatre professionals. The irony is that this suggestion came from someone whose reactions are frequently out of step with broader audience response. People seem to be jumping over that point to defend the idea of having opinions when the point I made was about reliability, not permission."

Because the crux of your point is still "why should anybody take opinions here seriously when some people here liked a flop like Getting the Band Back Together, or when many on the board thought Great Gatsby would quickly close." Productions spend lavishly on expertise from seasoned marketers, publicists, consultants, and others to get shows up and try to get tickets sold and still usually fail.Jordan was hardly saying that opinions here should be the sole source of input into a production- just that there is a wealth of informed opinion here as a resource.

At this point the responses say more about people wanting to scold me than about anything I actually wrote. The point was straightforward and it keeps getting rewritten into something else entirely. Either people are determined to feel self‑important or they’re not reading. The inconsistency of opinions here is exactly why this board isn’t a reliable focus group, and the way this thread keeps misinterpreting a simple argument only reinforces that."

What are you talking about? I've been in several focus groups, and the literal whole point is to get a range of opinions, not consistent ones. If you know what to expect or what you want out of a focus group, there's no reason to have the focus group."

This isn’t a focus group. It’s an anonymous message board, and the inconsistency of reactions here is exactly why it can’t function as a development tool for creatives.

[Kad]

Posted: 4/9/26 at 11:12pm

You are taking an idle comment about the board being like a focus group extremely seriously.