BREAKING: Mandy Patinkin Withdraws from THE GREAT COMET- Page 17

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 3:38pm

^It's probably too small a part to attract a name.

[schubox]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 3:50pm

GeorgeandDot said: "^It's probably too small a part to attract a name.

 

"

Plus she does a lot of ensemble stuff, like the female opera part, that would probably be odd to plug a big name in to 

[Mossee]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:11pm

schubox said: 
"Yeah I imagine they're scrambling to either beg Patinkin back, or have a big name start real soon. Or, more likely, accepting the inevitable and preparing to close "

So did they not have post-Oak/Patinkin plans after all? Or were they still scrambling to find someone with enough draw? 

How did the show do the weeks Malloy was Pierre? Granted, he's not the big name they need, but with what seems like a "save the Comet" backlash-against-the-backlash, could they not limp along with him in the role for a couple weeks until they find a replacement?

[hmph]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:31pm

froote said: "Assumptions are great.

"

Eh, that was more of an interpretation of what Rafael Casal tweeted than an assumption. It's the first response in the thread linked below. He's certainly hinting at something, and to me it seems to be that Rafael Casal is doing and saying what Oak can't. What's your interpretation of "what does silence tell you"?

https://twitter.com/ldotlawson/status/890702664509607936

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:34pm

I was told that I was "speculating" or "making assumptions" on here, but yeah, how else am I supposed to interpret those tweets by Casal?

[froote]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:36pm

Interpret or assume whatever you like, doesn't mean it's reality.

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:41pm

^ Well actually it is.  Casal was saying what Oak contractually wasn't allowed to say.  Casal admits that.

[froote]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:43pm

So why would Oak retweet others condemning the backlash if he agreed with it and encouraged it? Nonsensical.

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:45pm

^ Because this entire situation is completely nonsensical.

[CorkySt.Clair]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:48pm

Agreed. I just want them to say SOMETHING. The longer the producers stay silent, the more room there is for this speculation

[froote]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:48pm

Which makes trying to interpret the situation and make any sense of it pointless.

[hmph]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:49pm

froote said: "So why would Oak retweet others condemning the backlash if he agreed with it and encouraged it? Nonsensical.

"

That's actually exactly what Rafael Casal is doing now. At least Oak has the cover of never doing this stuff himself. Like I said, it's only how I'm interpreting a tweet that Casal absolutely wanted people to interpret. What's your interpretation of his tweet?

[froote]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 5:51pm

As I said above, I find trying to make any interpretations of the situation pointless as none of it makes any sense. Casal is trying to save his ass because people are directly accusing him of causing this. Oak doesn't have to do that so his condemnation has more weight behind it. I don't believe in calling people out for something without direct evidence.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:06pm

spidernight said: "i didnt like his response. I thought an ideal response would be something like "what happened to Oak sucks but it was caused by our financial situation sucking. Our composer and director aren't racists, just people trying to keep the show alive" rather than saying race is always relevant (no, it really isn't always relevant), and that Malloy and Chavkin are flawed people who have tried very hard to overcome their prior failings (?).."

 

Exactly. His response is actually quite bizarre and disturbing. He is pretending to say it's not about race and the producers are great people, but then says exactly the opposite, and makes everything about race.

I have the feeling that we can never talk with a person like this on a constructive level because this twisted mindset will always come in.

The following was also very weird: "The show employs (on stage alone) 15 actors of color and is among the upper echelon if not the most diverse musical on Broadway. I'm not saying the show doesn't have it's flaws when it comes to diversity, I personally have had multipe open, fruitful convo's with Rachel and Dave of the failing in some regards when it comes to the opportunity for an even more diverse show. And they have always listenend, problematized."

First of all, why talk about race when this whole case has nothing to do with race. Second, what a strange way to speak about this subject and calling the most diverse show out for being not enough diverse? Does he want it to be a problem about race? 

And thirdly, what a condescending way to speak about the producers in a passive aggressive way. They were even brainwashed to apologize for not taking race into consideration in this case and were even so brainwashed that they unfairly apologized for it. Sick. It's like this guys feels he is above them and has some kind of privilege.

But I'm glad he forgave the producers for their failings that prevented the most diverse show on Broadway for being even more diverse and that every business decision is based on race, and if not, mental manipulation will make the producers bend over anyway.

And if something is not about race at all he just throws in a one-liner: "race is always relevant".


Ps. Has there ever been a show where nobody got replaced? Isn't that a normal showbizz thing? And why should any human being be excluded from that?

Updated On: 7/30/17 at 06:06 PM

[rg7759]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:13pm

not being racist, but just because someone was in hamilton doesnt make them a name, meaning they should be the last minute 3 week thing, not the thing announced 6 months in advance. talking about phillip too, way too much overestimating in both instances. saw it with oak and its great.

[bear88]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:30pm

Here's my uninformed speculation. Take it for what it's worth.

Oak gets told he's out. He's upset and tells friends. Some of those friends, with Casal in the lead and joined by some actual Broadway stars, blast the show. They're filled with righteous indignation at the treatment of their friend, and of black performers in general. Great Comet seems like an easy target, as it appears to be a successful, moneymaking show whose producers are only getting greedier by wanting Patinkin to replace Oak - who was basically fired, albeit with pay. The Great Comet producers didn't want to admit their show is in really bad shape once Ingrid Michaelson leaves, even though reasonable deductions can be made. But they don't have a permanent, big-name Pierre replacement, and admitting that your show is in deep trouble is not a typical marketing strategy (and wouldn't help attract any sort of big name).

Internet outrage frenzies tend to build on themselves, so I highly doubt that Oak did much (or had to do much) to prompt the other responses besides Casal's, and maybe not his either. (I don't know their relationship, or whether he was acting as Oak's mouthpiece, as Casal implied.)

The Kagans made a series of errors based on unrealistic hopes (a Best Musical win, perhaps) and set Oak up to fail. This is, in some ways, the strangest part of this. There was no reason to think Oak would draw a big audience, and certainly not a Groban-sized audience, by himself. Long before I saw the show, I was surprised to learn he was getting the job, not because I thought he would be bad but because the only way his casting would work is if the show became a Hamilton-like phenomenon.  

And then they made matters worse, with a first announcement that included the clumsy, "make way for Mandy" line without getting everyone on board - if that was even possible. The backlash scared away Patinkin, and the producers kept sending out cringe-worthy apologies that managed to be both groveling and offensive to Oak. By that time Malloy, who seems like a well-intentioned white liberal who just wants to write ambitious musicals and make people happy, had admitted the truth. The show was toast without a big star, as soon as mid-August.

By that time, Oak had already put out his somewhat pissy statement saying he won't be coming back and that Aug. 13 is his last day. 

But now the social media worm has turned somewhat. #makeroomforoak has given way to #savecomet. POC cast members are pointing out the diversity of the show, which after all cast an unknown black woman as an above-the-title star as a Russian countess. The show will die, costing POC their jobs, and Oak and his friends will be blamed almost as much as the producers. So there's at least a little backtracking.

Great Comet was always a vulnerable show, a downtown musical with a large budget that didn't win the awards it needed to draw a steady crowd. And it relied in part on its reputation as a groundbreaking, hip show, which made it especially vulnerable to attacks from the left. Miss Saigon could get away, 20-plus years ago, with ignoring the left. Great Comet can't.

So to my great sadness, I think it's doomed. (It might have been doomed by Labor Day anyway.) Who wants to jump into this mess now? The long-term implications may be nil, because of the unique circumstances, but this has damaged Oak (who now has a reputation as a show-killer), the creators of the show (who can only hope at this point to go out with dignity) and the hardworking cast (who will be out of work sooner than expected).

There are no winners here. 

 

Updated On: 7/30/17 at 06:30 PM

[trpguyy]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:33pm

^ that's pretty accurate, except everyone at the Imperial has known that business wasn't great and a star was needed to right the ship

[hmph]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:34pm

froote said: "As I said above, I find trying to make any interpretations of the situation pointless as none of it makes any sense. Casal is trying to save his ass because people are directly accusing him of causing this. Oak doesn't have to do that so his condemnation has more weight behind it. I don't believe in calling people out for something without direct evidence.

"

Casal was probably riding the high of his Oak/black actor savior role at that point, so I don't think he was trying to save his ass then. Now, oh hell yes. Unless he only tweets on work days, there's been a poignant silence in that twitter feed. I really find Casal to be one of the most annoying players in this mess.

I'd really like to hear how it actually played out with the producers telling Oak he was being replaced. I mean, it's got to be devastating, but them's the breaks if you're not selling tickets on Broadway. How would that have come down to disrespecting the actor and misunderstanding "how Oak felt about the casting announcement"?

[Born in a Ditch]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:35pm

Dave28282, I'm not really sure what's bizarre or disturbing about the statement. He very eloquently stated that he personally does not believe the decisions made were based on race BUT that race should always be discussed, especially within regards to actors of color being treated poorly/passed on/****ed over etc in this industry.

He stated that the show is one of, if not, THE most diverse show on Broadway. He goes on to explain he believes the show could be more diverse and when he brought this up to the creative team it was taken very seriously, further giving examples that Rachel and Dave are great allies. I think you're misunderstanding the way he's using the word "problematized". 

He goes on to talk about capitalism as the root of this whole controversy, which is 100% the truth. They were just doing what they though would keep the show alive. 

It seems that you are the one who cannot discuss race on a constructive level because you're making broad stroke statements choosing to ignore the nuance and complexity of the whole issue. The statement was honest, detailed , constructive, and supportive. 

Race IS always relevant. Do I think this whole thing was because Oak is black? God no. Was the producing messy? Wildly. Was the twitter hive mind vicious? Incredibly so. Should race be discussed when more than capable black performers are passed over? Absolutely. This country/industry was built on racism. Racism isn't just hating and killing black people. It can be nuanced and subtle and still be devastating. We can continue to learn, progress, and move forward. I'm happy we have shows that are wildly diverse (Like Natasha), but to say that's enough or we should just shut up and be happy with what we have and choose to not learn from/listen to black feelings and viewpoints is ludicrous. 

[binau]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:45pm

I find it funny that the show with Mandy WOULD be more diverse - more age diverse - but as usual when people say 'diversity' they usually mean just race (and in business contexts they often mean just gender). People seem to attatch themselves to a particular demographic they care about - usually their own - to the exclusion of others. 

[Dave28282]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:50pm

bear88 said: "The Kagans made a series of errors based on unrealistic hopes (a Best Musical win, perhaps) and set Oak up to fail. This is, in some ways, the strangest part of this. There was no reason to think Oak would draw a big audience, and certainly not a Groban-sized audience, by himself. "

Seeing the Kagans reactions now it seems like they are very naive and susceptible for manipulation. Especially after reading the Azudi Onyejekwe tweets and the conversations they had.

They must have been in some kind of state of confusion. They might have thought they were making a great statement by casting a black person in the role and that people (who are now screaming on twitter) would actually buy tickets......but they didn't.

 

hmph said: "How would that have come down to disrespecting the actor and misunderstanding "how Oak felt about the casting announcement"

That's strange indeed. Because maybe they lived in some kind of fantasy that he would attract people or that mindset is the way he and the producers treated eachother and how they approached his casting? Like kissing eachothers ass but not realizing that would not sell any tickets. And then when they indeed did not sell any tickets, maybe the producers mistakenly thought that Oak would understand business but Oak was surprised about being treated as a human suddenly instead of some privileged god who was promised great acclaim by the people around him? That the producers had the idea that they were on the same page on a human level, but that it was a 1 way street. That he still had the idea that it's such a "happening" that he plays the role. That this "racial aggression" he was surrounded with/used to/thinks his identity is maybe blinded his reasoning a little? That's the only surprise/misunderstanding about such news I can think of. Thinking that it's all about him and his race but then being surprised by reality.

What other misunderstanding can there be about how Oak viewed the news, besides normal disappointment about being passed over for a big name?

The Azudi Onyejekwe tweets and the conversations they had and the producers reactions really give insight about how unhealthy their relationship was, how brainwashed, manipulative and confused (Azudi in this case) is, and how much the producers fell for it.

The combination of this attitude from the actors, the producers and racists on twitter destroyed the show. Success needs a different attitude and kind of people.

Updated On: 7/30/17 at 06:50 PM

[Dave28282]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 6:53pm

Born in a Ditch, the only thing he should have said was that it's purely business. And that now 35 actors (including many poc) are out of a job. So if you feel for them, the only ones to blame are the ones who did not try to help save the show.

Race is NOT relevant in this case.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 7:56pm

CorkySt.Clair said: "Really eloquent response from a Great comet cast member: https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Sunday-Update-THE-GREAT-COMETs-Azudi-Onyejekwe-Addresses-Casting-Controversy-20170730"

Interesting, I found his response anything but eloquent.

[LxGstv]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 8:17pm

hmph said: "froote said: "As I said above, I find trying to make any interpretations of the situation pointless as none of it makes any sense. Casal is trying to save his ass because people are directly accusing him of causing this. Oak doesn't have to do that so his condemnation has more weight behind it. I don't believe in calling people out for something without direct evidence.

"

Casal was probably riding the high of his Oak/black actor savior role at that point, so I don't think he was trying to save his ass then. Now, oh hell yes. Unless he only tweets on work days, there's been a poignant silence in that twitter feed. I really find Casal to be one of the most annoying players in this mess.

I'd really like to hear how it actually played out with the producers telling Oak he was being replaced. I mean, it's got to be devastating, but them's the breaks if you're not selling tickets on Broadway. How would that have come down to disrespecting the actor and misunderstanding "how Oak felt about the casting announcement"?

 

"

Casal was actively telling people to complain at the great comet twitter. He was obviously enjoying the attention, now that the tides have turned, not so much.

What I find baffling is Mandy tweeting that he wouldn't have taken the job if he had known it would harm another actor. How was he harming Oak exactly? It makes no sense. Now the whole cast might be harmed because of his decision.

And I cannot say this enough: Oak only re-tweeted support for the show well after his departure announcement and after Mandy had dropped out as well. It looked more like damage control.

Updated On: 7/30/17 at 08:17 PM

[schubox]

Posted: 7/30/17 at 8:23pm

LxGstv said: "hmph said: "froote said: "As I said above, I find trying to make any interpretations of the situation pointless as none of it makes any sense. Casal is trying to save his ass because people are directly accusing him of causing this. Oak doesn't have to do that so his condemnation has more weight behind it. I don't believe in calling people out for something without direct evidence.

"

Casal was probably riding the high of his Oak/black actor savior role at that point, so I don't think he was trying to save his ass then. Now, oh hell yes. Unless he only tweets on work days, there's been a poignant silence in that twitter feed. I really find Casal to be one of the most annoying players in this mess.

I'd really like to hear how it actually played out with the producers telling Oak he was being replaced. I mean, it's got to be devastating, but them's the breaks if you're not selling tickets on Broadway. How would that have come down to disrespecting the actor and misunderstanding "how Oak felt about the casting announcement"?

 

"

Casal was actively telling people to complain at the great comet twitter. He was obviously enjoying the attention, now that the tides have turned, not so much.

What I find baffling is Mandy tweeting that he wouldn't have taken the job if he had known it would harm another actor. How was he harming Oak exactly? It makes no sense. Now the whole cast might be harmed because of his decision.

And I cannot say this enough: Oak only re-tweeted support for the show well after his departure announcement and after Mandy had dropped out as well. It looked more like damage control.

 

"

Either Patinkin just said that because he didn't want to step in to the minefield. Or he was told Oak was stepping aside and had no issue with it, and that obviously wasn't the case. It seems as if Mandy was mislead.

Or maybe Oak said it was fine and he understood, and he was actually super pissed and then all the stuff on Twitter happened. Whatever happened, you can't blame Patinkin for steering clear