#26
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:11pm
I was really looking forward to seeing Gladys Knight in this.
Breaking News: AFTER MIDNIGHT to Close on Broadway in Late June — Page 2
#27
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:29pm
Uncageg,
They were hoping to have the unions agree to a one week layoff, where a star name could not be booked. The unions would have to agree to a one week closure with no pay. At least one union refused. The financial loss that week would shutter the show if they had to pay salatied staff with no performances or dismal sales, so the refusal of a layoff forced the producers to close the show.
They were hoping to have the unions agree to a one week layoff, where a star name could not be booked. The unions would have to agree to a one week closure with no pay. At least one union refused. The financial loss that week would shutter the show if they had to pay salatied staff with no performances or dismal sales, so the refusal of a layoff forced the producers to close the show.
#28
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:33pm
A DOZEN unions? The performing unions (AEA, AGMA, AGVA), musician's, stagehands's... what other unions were involved?
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#29
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:34pm
I'd imagine that whichever union balked at the proposed shutdown did so as to not create a precedent where producers could decide to institute a hiatus whenever sales look bleak. I do realize that this union essentially cut their noses to spite their faces as the show could've run for another 8-10 weeks beyond the hiatus instead of just shuttering.
#30
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:43pm
What a shame. It was my favorite show of the season. Took my mom to see it for Mother's Day and she enjoyed it as well.
Hey Dottie!
Did your colleagues enjoy the cake even though your cat decided to sit on it? ~GuyfromGermany
#31
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:51pm
Is it possible that the closing announcement is a ploy designed to incite public opinion to shame the union into changing its position?
#32
Posted: 6/14/14 at 5:54pm
Awww. Sad news. I was hoping to catch the show again on my next NY trip. I wonder which union refused the hiatus plan. Anyone have insight on that one? Perhaps Riedel will try and get the dirt. I'm kind of surprised they didn't wait another week or so to see if a big name guest star could inject some life into the box office.
I'm slightly cheered by the talk of a possible tour, but this seems like a tricky one. With all due respect to tour performers, are they really going to find dancers and musicians of this caliber to do a national tour? An extended sit-down seems more feasible. Especially if it's in a major city like LA where it would be easier to call on a roster of big name guest stars.
Those of you who are on the fence about seeing this one? I say, get your tickets now. Even if you're not a Patti LaBelle fan. The woman sings 4 songs in a show with 27 numbers. Numbers like this:
I'm slightly cheered by the talk of a possible tour, but this seems like a tricky one. With all due respect to tour performers, are they really going to find dancers and musicians of this caliber to do a national tour? An extended sit-down seems more feasible. Especially if it's in a major city like LA where it would be easier to call on a roster of big name guest stars.
Those of you who are on the fence about seeing this one? I say, get your tickets now. Even if you're not a Patti LaBelle fan. The woman sings 4 songs in a show with 27 numbers. Numbers like this:
Updated On: 6/14/14 at 05:54 PM
#33
Posted: 6/14/14 at 6:34pm
"The Best Musical Broadway has seen in years."
"Pardon my prior Mcfee slip. I know how to spell her name. I just don't know how to type it." -Talulah
#34
Posted: 6/14/14 at 6:40pm
There are many unions involved besides the ones mentioned above. Dressers, Hair and Make-up, Box Office, front of house etc. etc. etc. I'm sure the union objecting is thinking this could set some sort of precedent and other shows would try it also. It's a shame they couldn't come up with some sort of agreement to keep this wonderful show open. VEGAS must've been breathing down their necks since they announced the closing and the opening on the same day.
#35
Posted: 6/14/14 at 6:53pm
Wish they could get Vanessa Williams back for a week.
Hey Dottie!
Did your colleagues enjoy the cake even though your cat decided to sit on it? ~GuyfromGermany
#36
Posted: 6/14/14 at 7:23pm
What a shame. But it was losing lots of money. I thought Vanessa was very underwhelming. The best in that slot was Amber Riley who originated the role at City Center where it was called Cotton Club Parade.
#37
Posted: 6/14/14 at 7:28pm
Would it have really hurt sales if they played without a 'name' star? I can't see the desire to hear a famous person sing 3 songs as the driving force behind the show. I certainly didn't buy my ticket just to see Fantasia (who was brilliant) and if she wasn't in it I still would have wanted to see it. So I just can't understand the initial decision to want to close for a week.
#38
Posted: 6/14/14 at 7:52pm
But, I think for many, the thought would be: if I go a week early, I'll see star A or go a week later I'll get star B.....I might as well alter my plans than see NO star.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#39
Posted: 6/14/14 at 9:05pm
I think we should write to the unions and complain.
#40
Posted: 6/14/14 at 9:09pm
I think it certainly helps having a star name in any show- it is a draw for many people or a least an extra incentive. I know the only reason i bought tickets to After Midnight was for Patti.
Darreyl with an L!
#41
Posted: 6/14/14 at 9:12pm
"Would it have really hurt sales if they played without a 'name' star? I can't see the desire to hear a famous person sing 3 songs as the driving force behind the show."
I think so given that ticket sales even with Vanessa Williams were abysmal. The fact that they weren't willing to risk it suggests the show might not have been in the best financial state (e.g., low reserve funds, little prospects for recovering with future ticket sales etc.).
I think so given that ticket sales even with Vanessa Williams were abysmal. The fact that they weren't willing to risk it suggests the show might not have been in the best financial state (e.g., low reserve funds, little prospects for recovering with future ticket sales etc.).
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
#42
Posted: 6/14/14 at 9:23pm
Sure, blame the unions. A ready made and easy villain. I can't imagine there's not more to this decision than just that. Even if there isn't, if you know this (the possibility of a gap) might be a problem, you have this discussion with the unions waaaaay ahead of time and then book accordingly from the beginning to make sure you don't run into this problem. You don't stand there with your d**k in your hand two weeks before the problem and say well we could have stayed open but the big bad unions wouldn't let us. Sorry, I'm not joining the bash the unions bandwagon.
#43
Posted: 6/14/14 at 9:45pm
Lord knows the unions have been bashed enough... still it will be fascinating to learn (or infer) the "truth" as it develops.
#44
Posted: 6/14/14 at 11:22pm
"...if you know this (the possibility of a gap) might be a problem, you have this discussion with the unions waaaaay ahead of time and then book accordingly from the beginning to make sure you don't run into this problem."
Producer: "Hi Mr. Union, I know it's way in advance, but I'm kind of worried I might not be able to sell tickets for a week after the Tony's. Will you please agree now to a concession on your contract?"
Union: "Sure! Thanks for asking in advance. I'm glad you let me know you were worried and that I could help."
Producer: "Hi Ms. Big Name Star. I know you're in your 60's and have millions of dollars, and don't need to work a day in your life, much less eight performances a week, but are willing to do so for a few weeks on a lark. But I'm worried I might not be able to sell tickets when you're not in the show. Will you please come out of retirement and work full time until Gladys feels like doing the show?"
Big Name Star: "Sure! I'm glad you asked in advance. Anything for you."
Not.
Producer: "Hi Mr. Union, I know it's way in advance, but I'm kind of worried I might not be able to sell tickets for a week after the Tony's. Will you please agree now to a concession on your contract?"
Union: "Sure! Thanks for asking in advance. I'm glad you let me know you were worried and that I could help."
Producer: "Hi Ms. Big Name Star. I know you're in your 60's and have millions of dollars, and don't need to work a day in your life, much less eight performances a week, but are willing to do so for a few weeks on a lark. But I'm worried I might not be able to sell tickets when you're not in the show. Will you please come out of retirement and work full time until Gladys feels like doing the show?"
Big Name Star: "Sure! I'm glad you asked in advance. Anything for you."
Not.
#45
Posted: 6/14/14 at 11:55pm
Overrated show. Should be glad it lasted this long.
#46
Posted: 6/14/14 at 11:59pm
@Theater'sBestFriend - I'm assuming you're not a producer because I would not guess you'd be very good at it. If the unions said no, you would then have months and months to prepare for it. Maybe you book different stars in a different order that won't leave you with a weeklong gap if you know that gap is going to be fatal. Maybe you book a lesser star or an up and comer with at least some name recognition who would jump at the chance to headline a Broadway show even if it's only for a week. If 54 Below and every other nightclub across the country can figure out how to book a name star for a one week engagement, why can't After Midnight? You figure something out and you don't wait until a few weeks before the fact to realize you've got a problem you can't solve.
Many Broadway shows have had a "name star in the lead role" leave the production and the new "name star in the lead role" is not able to start for a week. They have an understudy cover it for 1 week. Maybe attendance is down that week but they don't have to shut the whole show down completely because of 1 person in a cast of dozens. It's July 4th week. Tourists will be pouring in to NYC for the holiday and the fireworks and unlike some of the folks in this thread, they don't have the ability to wait until the following week when a name star starts. They will have heard the show is good and will go anyway cause that's the week they are in New York, especially if the producers get a little creative with the pricing for that week and offer some great deals.
There are lots of different ways they could have handled this but apparently they have Theater'sBestFriend's creativity and apparently just couldn't figure it out.
Many Broadway shows have had a "name star in the lead role" leave the production and the new "name star in the lead role" is not able to start for a week. They have an understudy cover it for 1 week. Maybe attendance is down that week but they don't have to shut the whole show down completely because of 1 person in a cast of dozens. It's July 4th week. Tourists will be pouring in to NYC for the holiday and the fireworks and unlike some of the folks in this thread, they don't have the ability to wait until the following week when a name star starts. They will have heard the show is good and will go anyway cause that's the week they are in New York, especially if the producers get a little creative with the pricing for that week and offer some great deals.
There are lots of different ways they could have handled this but apparently they have Theater'sBestFriend's creativity and apparently just couldn't figure it out.
Updated On: 6/15/14 at 11:59 PM
#47
Posted: 6/15/14 at 12:06am
Let's remember that the A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC revival announced a closing, then revoked it, took a hiatus, and opened with new stars.
This sounds like a done deal though.
This sounds like a done deal though.
#48
Posted: 6/15/14 at 12:56am
This reminded me of that situation, I wonder if all the cast were being paid during the hiatus.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
#49
Posted: 6/15/14 at 4:19am
I seem to recall, based on numerous Facebook posts from cast members, that the ALNM cast was paid during that hiatus.
#50
Posted: 6/15/14 at 4:25am
God, that must have been a very expensive endeavour. I guess because the show ended up recouping the risk paid off. And how exciting it was to see both casts (sorry I'm going completely off topic now but I was just talking with friends today how I miss the NYC theatre landscape from that time).
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95