BONNIE AND CLYDE only selling tickets until Dec. 30...- Page 18

[bobbybaby85]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:27pm

Updated On: 2/20/18 at 10:27 PM

[fingerlakessinger]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:28pm

Okay hold on bobbybaby.

What you are writing is, IMO, extremely offensive. You really need to learn there is a difference between what YOU think, and what is fact. And to be honest, you are coming off as a complete jerk. Are you a jerk? Nah, I'm sure in real life you are a nice person with a lot of knowledge. But what you posted is pretty offensive.
I'm not gonna sit here and argue everything you just posted because I'm in a hurry but I would like to point out that when I saw the show, the house was very much a full one. And friends I had that seen it after I did also said it was about 80% full every time they saw it. What made the grosses so bad was the fact that they papered it so much.

[bobbybaby85]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:36pm

Updated On: 2/20/18 at 10:36 PM

[GatorNY]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:38pm

I saw the show twice in previews and the house was full on both of those occasions, and of that I am certain. Obviously that means nothing, with regard to the run of the show, but I was there twice when the theater was full.

I can only imagine what the haters will do on Friday if anyone is inclined to post their thoughts on the final performance. I wonder what the next show will be that gets people all riled up like this.

[bobbybaby85]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:40pm

Updated On: 2/20/18 at 10:40 PM

[fingerlakessinger]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:49pm

I hope not. I really hate it when people have preconceived notions of a show before they see it. With Carrie I can see why they could be a bit cautious cuz it's a revival of a HUGE bomb but it's being reworked so lets pray it's not ripped apart for it's previous incarnation.

[SamIAm2]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:51pm

"I'm sorry if what I'm writing sounds offensive. A lot of people on this board need to realize that what THEY think is just that. THEY think Bonnie and Clyde is a good show. A LOT of other people don't. Why keep trying to convince people otherwise?"

bobbybaby, if you don't like the conversation here, don't click on the thread. It's that simple.

Don't you see that you won't convince anyone over to your view? What are people going to believe, what some guy on an internet board tries to bludgeon into their brain, or their own direct, personal experience with a show? To each their own.

[bobbybaby85]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 10:58pm

Updated On: 2/20/18 at 10:58 PM

[Starcarolina]

Posted: 12/28/11 at 11:07pm

bobbybaby85, about the only word you have not used to malign the work of Frank Wildhorn is tripe. Thank you for saving that word for me to use in describing, imo, what you have written on this board. Honestly, how you do go on but to each his own, I guess...

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 12:22am

It seems to me like Wildhorn has good source material for a lot of his shows, and the shows do have potential to be great. The story of Bonnie and Clyde is has the potential to be a thrilling, exciting, and intriguing musical. I cannot comment on the production on Broadway now as I have not seen it, but I will say that I love the music. If the show lacks excitement and intrigue, that really is a shame since it is a show about two criminals on the run from the law.
I think a lot of Wildhorn's earlier shows had source material that could have made excellent shows... The idea of a grown up Alice returning to Wonderland is a very interesting one, but the show itself was just dreadful. I liked a lot of the score, but the book was an abysmal mess that made absolutely no sense. I also think Dracula could have made a great musical, but the book made it impossible to follow the story. I have no problem sharing that I am a fan of Wildhorn's music, but I will admit that most have his shows have just not worked which is a shame because the original ideas and concepts have great potential IMO.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 12:34am

"I really hate it when people have pre-concieved notions of a show before they see it."
My head is still spinning from that one, everyone has some notion of what they are going to see, you would have to have a lobotomy machine in the lobby for that would happen (which might help Wildhorn).

To whoever said I should have imagined the real Clyde getting beat up cause he was 5'6" and skinny, not the hunky actor playing the role, I ask WTF?

I did not hate this show, my problem was the boredom and lack of getting ME, (not you, reading) interested in the characters and story. Of course I had "notions" going in, but I read positive things here and was very interested, paid and was disapointed.

[MillieDillmount]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 12:47am

I have a question, I don't want to start anything, I just want to hear your guys thoughts. But how can you say Bonnie & Clyde did have a fair try to find its audience when the producers stopped selling tickets after Dec 30th and started to refund money a week after the show opened? That's the part that gets me - if the producers really believed in this show, they should have backed it, not pulled out so soon. Maybe the advanced sale wasn't great at first, but whose to say it wouldn't have picked up after the word of mouth spread more?

No, I'm not delusional, I'm curious.

[fingerlakessinger]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 12:59am

Okay whoa curtainpulldowner, you know what exactly what I meant when I said "preconceived notions."
First off, read what I was talking about BEFORE your head starts to "spin" lol. I was talking about Carrie...not even B/C.
And I meant judging a show before they see it live. Of course people walking in knew it was about Bonnie and Clyde, I'm talking about judging the shows merits before seeing it.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 1:28am

Gotcha fingerslake...

The Producers would pull the plug if they had failed to drum up future sales and did not have enough funds to maintain a show losing money each week. I'm not a producer but some things they do make no sense.
If you have no Stars, a midly known title and a composer/name who has never returned a profit (on Bway)you better have the bucks to give the show time to build on word of mouth.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 8:27am

Millie - Lots of producers pull the plug like this -- but it's their money so it IS fair. I felt the same way about The Scottsboro Boys. I couldn't understand how they closed it before the holiday rush last year. It's their toy, they get to take it home wheneve they want. It's all about the $$$$. Each and evey time.

On the other side: this had plenty of buzz-- from its out of town tryouts and pre-b'way. It was failing miserably at the box office and advance sales. Obviously, what little PAID audience they did get was not spreading the word of mouth needed. IF they got good to great reviews, they MIGHT have held on a little longer to see if it made a difference.



CPD -- I'm 100% with you.

[WestVillage]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 9:34am

Curiosity got me to see B&C last night. Went in thinking and hoping it would be as good as many people here claim it is. Here's my question ... what on earth were you smoking? The show is DREADFUL. A musical about two of the most infamous criminals in history, and it is just dull, dull, dull. No excitement, no emotion, no tension. It dragged on forever. I couldn't wait for it to be over. I am certainly not a Wildhorn hater, but this score is boring. No soaring ballads, no "wow" numbers. The book is lame. No chemistry between Jordon and Osnes, although they were fine individually with what little they had to work with. The reviews were certainly warranted in this case. With all the adoration being flung at this completely mediocre show, Broadway has sunk to new lows, and I fear for what's in store and accepted as quality work 10 years from now. 30 years ago, this show would have closed opening night.

[newintown]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 9:55am

Here's a good analogy - Bonnie and Clyde (and the rest of the Wildhorn oeuvre) is like The New York Post.

The Post is a simply terrible rag; to call it a "newspaper" is an insult to newspapers. However, people who like the Post are not equipped to understand the qualitative difference between the Post and a real newspaper (like the Times).

People who think that Bonnie and Clyde, Wonderland, Jekyll and Hyde, etc. are good theatre are, like the Post-readers, not yet equipped to see that those works are simply awful theatre - bad story-telling, amateurish composition, juvenile lyric-setting, strings of clichés, two-dimensional characters.

Scream away all you like at that, but it's just the simple truth. Ideally, the art-lover progresses from a love of the cheap and vulgar to an appreciation of the better-crafted stuff. Sadly, not everyone takes the time or effort to make that journey.

[WestVillage]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 10:16am

Very well said, NewInTown ... and I couldn't agree more!

[phantom8019]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 10:59am

Wow. I rarely post on these boards, but that’s quite a thing to say. I enjoy Wildhorn as well as Sondheim. I am fairly confident in my maturity as a theatre viewer and my intelligence overall as a human being. But thanks for your opinion. To explain it another way, I like listening to Abba as well as Beethoven. I worry about the humanity/souls of those who do not. I would never want to live in a world without fluff.

Updated On: 12/29/11 at 10:59 AM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 11:05am

I've very clearly stated that those accusing critics of conspiracy and that Bonnie and Clyde wasn't given a fair shot are delusional.

I think the most delusional of all is when you keep claiming that others are accusing critics of conspiracy or trying to do Wildhorn in when that's not what they are saying. You keep harping on that like a Tea Partier and Obama's birth certificate.

And if your definition of any financial flop is "trash" then I guess you really hate of lot of very well-respected musicals. I'm not saying Wildhorn is well-respected, but your blanket statements seem to leave a lot of room for double-standards. If you think all of Wildhorn's works are trash, then that's just based on your own subjective qualifiers, but don't pretend they are universal.

Ideally, the art-lover progresses from a love of the cheap and vulgar to an appreciation of the better-crafted stuff. Sadly, not everyone takes the time or effort to make that journey.

That is one of the FUNNIEST posts I've ever read. You're not at all familiar with Broadway, are you? It's no wonder you're so easily dissatisfied. Condescension is not an admirable trait.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 11:14am

I hope Wildhorn has another new show on Broadway soon so we can all have the EXACT same 18 page discussion.

[newintown]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 11:17am

I would like to see Wildhorn and his collaborators take on the entire Bible next.

Ruth and Mary Magdalene could have a terrific power ballad together.

[newintown]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 11:25am

"You're not at all familiar with Broadway, are you?"

More than someone who lives in Chicago - a city proud to be called "hog butcher for the world."

Updated On: 12/29/11 at 11:25 AM

[Chester3]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 11:36am

The reason this show is closing has nothing to do with the producers pulling the plug (they fought to keep it open), little to do with ticket sales or advance ticket sales (which were decent for a show with no stars in previews) and less to do with reviews than everyone thinks (yes they were bad, but lots of shows get bad reviews and run). The truth is this show, despite what you think about it artistically, was dead in the water from the first rehearsal because it was under capitalized. The budget basically got the show to opening, assuming the show didn't lose money in previews (which it did) and stayed on budget (which it did), But as we all know, opening a show (even a good one) in december is difficult and you have to have a reserve to get you through Jan/Feb (which they didn't) and money to capitalize on good reviews or battle bad ones (which they didn't). The show was at least 1.5 million under capitalized when they started (2 million by opening) and the main producers hoped they'd get the rest while in previews, which they didn't. From a commercial stand point it was a failure of producing, not because the show is terrible or couldn't sell tickets, but because even if it got great reviews and broke even in previews it would have still needed money to keep running past opening. It was a risk and it failed. The show actually almost closed on the 11th and had to get an infusion of cash to keep it open to the 30th, I think to get all the Tony voters there. Then with almost no advertising it actually made it's operating costs the week after opening and had it done it two weeks in a row, the producers might have been able to pull together the capital, but they couldn't dig themselves out of the hole they'd put themselves in and that ladies and gentlemen is show business!

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 12/29/11 at 11:50am

"I would never want to live in a world without fluff."

Right on!