BIG FISH to Close on Broadway December 29, 2013- Page 4

[broadway_show_fan]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 12:02am

Someone asked about shows canceling their closing notices due to an uptick in sales:

While the recent revival of RAGTIME still closed (far too early, in my opinion), it was able to lengthen its run due to demand - and at the same theater, the Simon.

Surprised it's closing so soon. Anyone know what the weekly nut was?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 12:07am

Your. opinion Nothing more and nothing less.

Doubt a smart businessman like Jimmy Buffett (also has some sense of music) would invest his. money in a show that "sucked". I doubt Butz would have gotten involved if he thought it sucked. Ditto to Strohman. They all saw potential. This was not a Dude ot Via Galactica. Now they sucked

[gavyj]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 12:14am

Very depressing. I was hoping to see this in the spring. I'm so sad for the cast and crew...they deserve better than an early closing

[grumpyoptimist]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 12:34am

Mr Roxy, how long did Buffett work on that "Don't Stop the Carnival" project? Seems like at least 3-5 years.

Capn Hook, do you know if they've got Allegiance capitalized? Last I heard they were still in need of investors (there was talk of a Seattle run hoping someone in the japanese-American community there might fall in love with the show)?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 12:49am

He obviously gave up on Carnival. He invested his $$ in Fish

[E.Davis]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 5:08am

A lot of the fault is in Lippa and his lackluster score. There are a few gems, but I cannot remember most of the songs.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 5:11am

Ragtime only extended for about two weeks after they posted the closing notice. Can't see it happening here.

As for Big Fish being a "popular" movie -- not even close. Many know it WAS a movie, but not many have seen it. And that won't sell tix: Gee, I heard of it, but never saw it. I wasn't interested enough to see when it would have only cost me 10 bucks, so I think now I'll go drop 100 bucks and see what it was about. (Not going to happen.)

[onedaymore]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 6:36am

Shame. It'd be nice to see Steggert and Baldwin in something that truly showcases their amazing talents. Giving a great performance in a flop musical is something they are, sadly, both familiar with.

[indytallguy]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 6:50am

I know Lippa will receive blame from many folks, but I think the storytelling and staging was as problematic as any blandness of his songs.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:08am

Aside from people not putting Norbert Leo Butz's bankability into perspective, they're also not putting "Big Fish" into perspective.

This was not a hit film. It cost $70 million and made $66 million. It's what you would call a "successful art film," but it's not as recognizable as you think it is. Also, not everybody likes the film, or the story.

So you've got a subject matter that already doesn't appeal to some people right off the bat, then you add a very capable Broadway actor with two Tonys, but most people outside of the theatre world have no idea who he is.

Then you add to it that it got mediocre reviews ... and that's three strikes, you're out.

Updated On: 11/11/13 at 07:08 AM

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:17am

^^^ I totally agree with you on that. Lippa is not the only problem = not even the main problem. The whole concept for this "movie to stage" was just "off".

"Kinky Boots would have had the same problem and closed quickly if not for Cyndi's name on it. It's completely unknown, but it quickly surpassed being just Cyndi's show once word of mouth spread."

I agree too. Kinky Boots like Big Fish was not a mainstream hit movie..and Cyndi's star presence helped develop interest in the show. But the audiences are having a great time at KB while at BF, a lot of people like myself were left just scratching their heads and trying to figure out why something with so much potential could be just so dull.

[bryan]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:24am

boo but get the cast cd out today because if they do not they will not have a cd.

[newintown]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:24am

It was a "Meh" show, with a few fun moments, that couldn't draw an audience. That's why it's closing.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:36am

Kinky Boots has Cyndi's name on it, which most people know, and it was well received, with positive word of mouth, and won a bunch of awards. That's good enough for a decent run.

Plus nobody is saying, "Wasn't that the movie I tried to watch on HBO, but I couldn't get through it?" ... the way some people are with Big Fish.

Updated On: 11/11/13 at 07:36 AM

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:40am

Big Fish was never something halfway thru, you thought gee this would make a great musical. Kinky Boots on the other hand.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:48am

I appreciate the attempt, and for once I'm glad it wasn't some dumb, popular tween movie being adapted.

But the film and the story were flawed. This wasn't like adapting "Smiles of a Summer Night" by a master like Ingmar Bergman. That was "lesser known" to most people, too, but carried with it a slew of rave reviews and recognition.

And if Big Fish (the musical) had gotten rave reviews, I think it could have run at least through awards season and then hopefully gotten a boost at that point.

But with a questionable property and a capable star with limited recognizability outside of the theatre community, they needed those rave reviews to survive. And they didn't get them.

Updated On: 11/11/13 at 07:48 AM

[newintown]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 8:50am

Not that anyone in the arts ever "learns lessons," but one here is the danger of letting a screenwriter, with little to no theatre experience, adapt their own screenplay for the stage (which also helped turn 9 to 5 into a quick-closing money-loser).

It can't be repeated enough - the book of a musical is too important to be left to guesswork, and yet so few people recognize that a musical generally succeeds or fails because of the book.

[dannyboy]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 8:57am

I agree with you about Norbert. There really is a very small group of people who would run to see him in this musical. The music killed this show. There is one redeeming factor....this is a musical for high schools...a new show for community theatre...good size...good themes...nice and clean. I think that some shows are written with this in mind. It can keep money coming in for some time. What do you think?

[Up In One]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 9:51am

Big Fish had an uphill battle from the start, a film basis which didnt wow everyone for a start, a title and subject matter which couldnt resonate in an elevator pitch. I dont think the general ticket buyer knew what it was about. For me it went terribly wrong using Stroman as director and the screenwriter as book writer, Big Fish needed an etherial touch, its darker aspects should have been explored and a modern theatrical equivalent to Tim Burton should have been found. Instead we got a "BROADWAY MUSICAL" from material that couldnt support it.

SPOILERS **** The one thing it had going for it was the twist at the end where the son understands the father and gives in to story telling in an attempt to save his father and their relationship. The movie had that also, an ending which made up for all that came before. That's ok at home on HBO but not on Broadway at those prices.

Updated On: 11/11/13 at 09:51 AM

[Up In One]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 9:51am

Big Fish had an uphill battle from the start, a film basis which didnt wow everyone for a start, a title and subject matter which couldnt resonate in an elevator pitch. I dont think the general ticket buyer knew what it was about. For me it went terribly wrong using Stroman as director and the screenwriter as book writer, Big Fish needed an etherial touch, its darker aspects should have been explored and a modern theatrical equivalent to Tim Burton should have been found. Instead we got a "BROADWAY MUSICAL" from material that couldnt support it.

SPOILERS **** The one thing it had going for it was the twist at the end where the son understands the father and gives in to story telling in an attempt to save his father and their relationship. The movie had that also, an ending which made up for all that came before. That's ok at home on HBO but not on Broadway at those prices.

Updated On: 11/11/13 at 09:51 AM

[musicalfool]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 10:03am

"Rosscoe: Chicago was only a six or so week season, i don't think they did a lot of work to the show between those two cities."

Rosscoe - I saw it in both cities, and I believe they did do a lot of work. The whole first act seemed tweaked to me (including an entirely new opening number). Did you see it in both places?

[bdn223]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 10:25am

In recent years it has become exceedingly difficult for a large scale musical production or any new musical for that matter to open in the Fall and stay open through award season or even the new year. The only recent example being Spiderman, which opened in the summer and nearly as much publicity as a presidential election. The last time a new musical opened in the fall and made it through award season was 2009 with Memphis and Fella!. The latter loosing its entire investment and then some and the former only recouped within its final weeks of its nearly 3 year run. It was not as if Memphis had as high a weekly nut as Spiderman which caused it to take so long to recoup, but rather they ran for nearly 6-7months not hitting or barely covering their costs, creating a huge deficit in their budget. The last time a new musical opened in the fall and actually made money during most weeks through award season were Billy Elliot, which opened to raves and had Elton John's name on it, and Shrek, which barely covered costs week to week and its based on a household name. The odds were not in Big Fishes favor to begin with being based on an "art house" film, having a no marquee names attached, and having a massive production, which were only worsened by the lukewarm reviews Big Fish received.

[Kad]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 10:38am

I did not see the show in Chicago, but everything seems to indicate that it opened in New York with the SAME PROBLEMS it had in Chicago. It was not a case of "we should swap this song for another that does the same thing." It was a case of "we need to cut entire sequences and replace them with conceptually new material." It was a case of 'we need to change and clarify a character's entire arc." It was a case of "we need to drastically rethink the entire show."

But when the sets and costumes have been built, and you've given yourself a Broadway opening date before the tryout ends, and when money has been poured into something- you're reluctant to do the massive rethinking needed to make it work.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 10:49am

That Western Showdown number was one of the most conceptually confused things I have ever seen on a Broadway stage, in a show with so many other storytelling concepts at work. It MUST have been kept exclusively because a bunch of money was spent on those costumes.

[Kbradstein]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 10:52am

Very sad to hear this. Not the best show, but very enjoyable. I'll be really sad to see this go, as everyone involved is very talented and deserving. Norbert and Baldwin both deserve tony nods.