Bright Star Box Office, Reviews & Grosses- Page 2

[mc1227]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 6:50pm

They will run through the summer for sure.  They will be receiving several Tony nominations and you will see the attendance numbers rise.  

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 6:57pm

JM226 said: "Oh. Oops. Didn't see that part. My apologies.

 

Wow! That's actually REALLY good."

 

Phantom came in with a huge advance buzz from London and became the hot ticket as soon as tickets went on sale. It was considered such a sure-fire hit that when Equity threatened to block approval to bring Sarah Brightman over (they didn't feel she was a big enough star to justify not casting an American actress) a simple threat by Lloyd Webber of cancelling the production entirely was all it took to get Equity to change their stance and quickly grant permission to bring Brightman over from the London production.

 

In regards to Bright Star, it's impossible to say. Tony nominations in and of themselves don't necessarily translate to an increase at the box office; the win is much more important. 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 6:59pm

Gentleman's Guide won the Tony Award for Best Musical. Though nothing is written in stone, I'd feel, uh, rather safe saying that Bright Star will not win the Tony Award for Best Musical.

[Cupid Boy2]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:00pm

Ragged Tear said: "This is the kind of crap that makes people hate these boards. How do we know what kind of reserves the producers have, how well they are sold for post-opening weeks, and how well they will leverage the rave from the Times. 

And very few musicals have closed very quickly the past couple seasons, even when they don't catch on."

I think you're spot on. It's going to close when the producers say it will. That's the answer. 

[mar6411]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:11pm

I really don't understand the purpose of these kinds of threads.  And I really don't understand what kind of discussion it would possibly lead to.

Who knows when it's going to close and what difference does it make.  When they post a notice we'll all know and then there can be the thread where everyone talks about what will go in the theater.  

Sorry - it's me - I don't get it.

Carry on.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:23pm

I remember those threads dedicated to what was going into a theater next even before the show currently previewing was in the same theater. Who can forget the joy brought to those who reveled in a shows problems in the ever popular  " Honeymoon In Vegas Is Still Struggling" thread.

[JM226]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:27pm

I went to the first preview in 1998 and the most expensive seats were $55, with no premium prices.  $70K is absolutely not the equivalent of $140,392.37 today.

 

really???? that must be news to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. you should probably contact them to bring attention to their faulty calculations: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

 

it is the same equivalent of purchasing power. of course no inflation calculation is PERFECT. they have to base it on the purchasing power.

[BroadMagTech]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:38pm

BroadwayConcierge said: "Gentleman's Guide won the Tony Award for Best Musical. Though nothing is written in stone, I'd feel, uh, rather safe saying that Bright Star will not win the Tony Award for Best Musical."

I agree with you there. 

 

[asmith0307]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:42pm

JM226 said: "I went to the first preview in 1998 and the most expensive seats were $55, with no premium prices.  $70K is absolutely not the equivalent of $140,392.37 today.

 

really???? that must be news to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. you should probably contact them to bring attention to their faulty calculations: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

 

it is the same equivalent of purchasing power. of course no inflation calculation is PERFECT. they have to base it on the purchasing power."

I think they meant in that the pricing structure today is completely different. If it was merely a calculation of inflation, sure your number would be correct. However, ticket prices have increased quite a bit more than inflation would account for and there were no premium tickets that jack up the weekly gross. So, while your number may be the literal equivalent of $70K, in comparison to the other shows at the time it would have been considered a much larger number. Think of it this way, in the current commercial theatre market, if Phantom sold the same number of seats at standard price the number you provided may be much lower than the gross we would see. Hopefully that makes sense. 

Updated On: 3/27/16 at 07:42 PM

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 7:42pm

I hate this thread. Sorry. 

[jbird5]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 8:17pm

Looking at the grosses, it doesn't seem like attendance is the problem, it's the really low ticket price. (I got mine through tdf)

[10086sunset]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 10:55pm

The low ticket cost is an issue. It hasn't been on TDF since it left previews. While that's only a few days, perhaps they have no intentions of returning. 

I want to see the show succeed. That said, I find it hard to believe it makes it past the end of June without some sort of drastic change in sales.

[Broadway kid 2]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:07pm

10086sunset said: "The low ticket cost is an issue. It hasn't been on TDF since it left previews. While that's only a few days, perhaps they have no intentions of returning. 

I want to see the show succeed. That said, I find it hard to believe it makes it past the end of June without some sort of drastic change in sales.

 

"

 

[gypsy101]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:13pm

Mr Roxy said: "Who can forget the joy brought to those who reveled in a shows problems in the ever popular  "Honeymoon In Vegas Is Still Struggling" thread."

 

I just thought that thread was a lot of fun (and was disheartened several months later to learn it had been deleted).

[haterobics]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 1:02am

BroadMagTech said: "It could get a nomination for best orchestrations."

 

When people mean it might get nominations, I think they are focused on nominations/wins that might actually goose ticket sales, though.

[devonian.t]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 3:32am

Firstly- like AGM, having been alive at the time (and associated with the London production), Phantom was the most anticipated ticket- probably of the decade.  The press was full of musings over whether Sarah Brightman would be allowed to transfer with the show- ALW did big strops about "if she doesn't come, the show doesn't come" etc.  It was the hottest ticket and the show was sold out for months in advance.

 

Bear in mind that we didn't have the internet and media saturation we do now- the buzz was all about word of mouth and some lavish production shots.  The full cast album took over 6 months to come out, so curiosity was intense!

 

Secondly, I think threads like these- though they are rather negative- are rooted in people wanting to know what the next new thing is going to be- same reason people wish for shows to close: they yearn novelty.

[newintown]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 7:18am

Parnes is no neophyte - he knows what he's doing. I'm sure he'll keep it going longer than many expect. Not that I think it's worthy, but that's moot to the question being asked.

[indytallguy]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 8:13am

devonian.t said: "Secondly, I think threads like these- though they are rather negative- are rooted in people wanting to know what the next new thing is going to be- same reason people wish for shows to close: they yearn novelty."

Interesting point about people yearning for novelty and no doubt true for many. I more often simply yearn for quality. How novel :)

[SLSigafoos]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 8:49am

I'm obviously no theatre expert, not a critic, and living an hour outside of NYC, I only get in on the weekends and clearly don't see as much theatre as some of the people on this board. That being said, I fully echo the statements of those wondering about the purpose of a thread like this. I was fully behind everyone here who was outraged a few weeks ago that Broadway actors were trying to get these boards shut down, but when I see things like this pop up, it makes me wonder how I'd feel, if I were giving it my all in a brand new show, to see people already predicting said show's demise. 

I've mentioned numerous times how baffled I was not to have seen any advertising for Bright Star outside of the immediate location of the Cort Theatre and surrounding blocks. That being said, I think the show has been doing a good job of building a social media audience and passing word of mouth of positive reviews. Is it safe to say that some of that should have been expected since Steve Martin, himself, has such a large social media following? Perhaps. However, the twitter audience for Bright Star has nearly doubled since it started previews in NYC, and you'll notice that the show is already getting an awful lot of repeat audience members who are tweeting they're seeing the show for a 2nd or even 3rd time. Someone pointed out here that ticket prices are low and that actual attendance isn't the problem right now; perhaps that's the smartest thing a totally unknown show can do for itself to actually BUILD an audience who will then pass on word of mouth. Believe it or not, there have been some really nice comments on FB, Twitter, and Instagram from people who have seen the show and clearly enjoyed it for what it was (myself included), and who didn't pick it apart line by line or song by song the way we tend to here. Is it that far fetched for some people here to believe that this show may survive not only because it's not as bad as you think it is, but because it could absolutely still slowly build a word-of-mouth audience? I wish it well and hope it goes on a good, long run just to prove the naysayers wrong. 

[JM226]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:01am

I was fully behind everyone here who was outraged a few weeks ago that Broadway actors were trying to get these boards shut down, but when I see things like this pop up, it makes me wonder how I'd feel, if I were giving it my all in a brand new show, to see people already predicting said show's demise. 
 

 

you cannot have it both ways. you either respect and allow conversation, even that of negative issues, to freely flow or you don't.  hurtful or harmful or abuse conversation is one thing. discussing the potential demise of a show on Broadway is not. it might be ghastly or harsh to you but it's a simple fact that shows close/end/whatever word you want to use. to lash out at those who wish to discuss the business and economics of broadway, which includes the potential closure of a show, is ridiculous and says more about you than anyone else here...

[dramamama611]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:02am

There's been a lot of nice things said HERE, too.  That's not the problem.

 

 

When a show is TANKING at the box office, week after week, I don't think there is anything wrong with questioning its demise...when it's just starting and doing decently, then its a different ballgame.

[newintown]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:06am

There's nothing wrong with discussing the end of any show's run at any time, ever, period. If one doesn't like the conversation, they're free to refrain from participating, or even reading/listening. The one thing one isn't free to do is censor.

[SLSigafoos]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:09am

JM226 said: "I was fully behind everyone here who was outraged a few weeks ago that Broadway actors were trying to get these boards shut down, but when I see things like this pop up, it makes me wonder how I'd feel, if I were giving it my all in a brand new show, to see people already predicting said show's demise. 
 

 

you cannot have it both ways. you either respect and allow conversation, even that of negative issues, to freely flow or you don't.  hurtful or harmful or abuse conversation is one thing. discussing the potential demise of a show on Broadway is not. it might be ghastly or harsh to you but it's a simple fact that shows close/end/whatever word you want to use. to lash out at those who wish to discuss the business and economics of broadway, which includes the potential closure of a show, is ridiculous and says more about you than anyone else here..."

 

Then perhaps you need to think about the difference between "lashing out" and trying to encourage positive discussion and conversation. The complaints of nearly ALL of the actors who supported trying to get these very boards shut down was that fans not only were negative about the daily operation of Broadway shows and contributed negative conversation supporting the closing of shows (or shows that hadn't even had the chance to open before being shut down), but spreading misinformation as fact. There are people in this very thread insinuating that box office will already predict the closing of a show that opened less than a week ago. For the most part, the seats at the Cort have been mostly full...just more full of patrons who paid a low ticket value and possibly ended up seeing a show they enjoyed. It's entirely possible they also saw a show that they didn't enjoy. I'm well aware that the reaction to something you've paid money for isn't always going to be positive. However, Bright Star is far from the worst thing on Broadway at the moment and wasn't treated to Zhivago-like reviews. Also, when was the last time the Cort had a list of possibly successful up-and-coming Broadway shows knocking on its door? I can't see the argument for that when the Cort has been home to a lot of plays that have run for 3 or 4 months...for more than 6 years running now. Bright Star is the first musical to hit that theatre in YEARS. Wouldn't it be more productive to discuss the economics of that rather than trying to figure out when a brand new cast is all going to be unemployed?

[theaterdude2]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:13am

What bothers me are the posters who say that this thread is a problem. This is supposed to be an open forum for people to discuss Broadway. It's no different than speaking to a friend who loves theater. 
I honestly don't see what the problem is if people talk about the fact that a show got mixed reviews and may close.

If you think that's too negative, then you probably shouldn't be participating in any kind of discussion about the theater. Broadway is a tough place. Do we need to be polite so that we don't hurt someone's feelings? This is a perfectly legit discussion. Get a thicker skin.

[newintown]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:42am

It's the new Delicate Dialectic - people think it's perfectly fine to censor others, claiming the need for a "safe space" and other such nonsense, when it's really nothing more than a total developmental arrest, never having learned how to accept opposing points of view.

Express any opinion you like, except the one that says others shouldn't be allowed to express theirs.