Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 2/11/24- Page 3

[SweetLips22]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 2:48am

kdogg36 said: "SweetLips22 said: "I loved his comment 'my people contacted Sweeney's people'"

Actually he said the opposite: "theSweeneyteam got in touch with my team." It's around 4 minutes into the interview."

Oops. My bad.But that makes it even MORE intriguing. How did Sweeney's people even know about Joe and that he could sing. Would love to know how this came about. Probably just a case of someone who knows someone who suggested etc etc. Probably happens a lot but this is certainly totally out of left field.

Any other improbable fabulous castings?

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 12:11pm

Kad said: "The current Production contract salary minimum is going to be over $2.6k weekly this year- and a good percentage of performers in a big musical like & Juliet will be making over minimum, whether because of bumpsbecause they’re understudies, swings, fight captains, have featured moments, or more. And if the performer is a name or has won or been nominated for awards, they can negotiate substantially higher. But even without those common salary increases, producers also have to make an 8% contribution to the performers’ pension and make a contribution to the Equity League pooled trust that pays for AEA insurance. I’m not sure what that current rate is- it was close to $700/wk pre pandemic so it’s likely close or even well over $800 now. So a very conservative estimate of the cost per performer per week for a production is around $4000 but likely higher, maybe much higher depending on circumstances. So if a show has 20 performers, you’re looking at almost $100k in costs a week based on this most conservative of estimates and assuming everybody is getting minimum. And that’s just performers! There are dozens and dozens of people offstage and in offices that make the show run, and the production has to pay salary and benefits to them. There are royalties and residuals. There’s PR and marketing and advertising. And of course there’s rent and any associated expenses."

Just wanted to state that the health contribution you posted is currently at $150 per member per week (that’s taken from the summary of changes that was released in December of 2022, since the full rulebook for 22-25 still hasn’t been published)

It’s a huge sticking point for LORT producers since the health contribution on their contract is actually higher than that on Production.

[Kad]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 12:27pm

Ah, you're right- it's been a while since I was dealing with those numbers regularly- I think I swapped it with the salary for another contract type. For LORT and even some other smaller contracts, the contribution can be closer to $170 or $180, I believe?

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 12:35pm

Yeah, I think LORT is up around $180 now. I assume the underlying theory is that even though Production has a lower payment, they still end up contributing more to the Fund overall by nature of the generally larger casts and longer runs (even a flop show these days tends to run longer than most LORT contracts between the rehearsal process, a month of previews, and the several months of limping along hoping to win a Tony)

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 1:31pm

“ How did Sweeney's people even know about Joe and that he could sing. Would love to know how this came about.”

there’s no conspiracy here…the original cast member was a lead in a popular Netflix series. They then cast the lead from another popular Netflix series. Easy to see the logic. 

[Rainah]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 2:14pm

If there's a heartstopper boy in Sweeney, that's definitely driving sales. The youths are just crazy about that series.

And some good news,

Hadestown seems to be holding pretty steady, they seem to have found a way to make it work for a while longer. Happy for them.

The Notebook seems to be starting strong. Doubt seems to be doing decent, for a play. Not gangbusters, but enough.

[Theatrefan2]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 3:30pm

Some people here are a bit out of touch. Heartstopper is huge. Yes it has a massive young adult following, but their fans go beyond that. Many adults of various generations love the show, and them.

Joe isn't quite as popular as Kit, but still enough to drive box office sales upward.

The second either of them are announced for any project it spreads across social media in no time. 

 

[SweetLips22]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 4:03pm

BroadwayNYC2 said: "“ How did Sweeney's people even know about Joe and that he could sing. Would love to know how this came about.”

there’s no conspiracy here…the original cast member was a lead in a popular Netflix series. They then cast the leadfrom another popular Netflix series. Easy to see the logic."

That doesn't make any[conspiracy??] sense. Why not the kid from Young Royals he was in a boy band or Kit or 100s of other teens in popular High school series?

However he got there it seems a brilliant choice. The role doesn't need a 'name' as there are countless locals who could fill that part but fortunately for Joe,and Broadway his dream has come true, and PL his new BF.

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 2/14/24 at 4:56pm

I literally don’t know what you want here. What I said is the truth, there’s no “story” to his casting. Hes the lead in an extremely popular Netflix series, as was the original cast member.

Updated On: 2/14/24 at 04:56 PM

[SweetLips22]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 12:49am

and I've got a good deal on the sale of the Sydney Opera House. Interested?

[Kad]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 10:14am

I’m also deeply confused by what you’re trying to imply. Before he was cast on Heartstopper, Locke was doing theater. It’s not a secret. Sweeney’s people knew about him because he’s the lead on an extremely popular show. All it needed was a single inquiry to gauge his interest and ability. 

[MysteriousLady]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 11:09am

Kad said: "I’m also deeply confused by what you’re trying to imply. Before he was cast on Heartstopper, Locke was doing theater. It’s not a secret. Sweeney’s people knew about him because he’s the lead on an extremely popular show. All it needed was a single inquiry to gauge his interest and ability."

I think he's just wondering how a performer not known for musicals ended up in this. The general public doesn't know how things get cast. What is mundane to an insider might seem odd to a casual fan.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 11:34am

To add:

@BroadwayNYC2

Perhaps you haven't heard but productions pay these people called casting directors (and quite well). They do this because they want someone to develop, analyze, and remember the "talent pool." Your conspiracy theory (like most) is facile. 

Knowing capabilities, not knowing how to google, is why we keep them around. 

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 11:59am

@Hogan

 

I’m assuming you’re referring to Sweetlips, not me… I wasn’t the one with a “conspiracy theory.” I’m well aware how casting works, it’s an industry in and of itself and one that I worked in for years. I was explaining to Sweetlips that there wasn’t a “story” as to why he was cast, and the thought process to go from Gaten to Locke was an obvious one for casting teams. 

[OhHiii]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 12:03pm

Imagine questioning a casting decision that, by all accounts, has been an excellent performance in the show. Sweetlips needs a dose of the great outdoors it would seem.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 2/15/24 at 4:53pm

BroadwayNYC2 said: "@Hogan

I’m assuming you’re referring to Sweetlips, not me…I wasn’t the one with a “conspiracy theory.” I’m well aware how casting works, it’s an industry in and of itself and one that I worked in for years. Iwas explaining to Sweetlips that there wasn’t a “story” as to why he was cast, and the thought process to go from Gaten to Locke was an obvious one for casting teams."

I acknowledge (now) that this prong of this thread is confusing, and I think it started for me back at #57 when Sweetlips quoted themself without the attribution right after YOUR attribution in the quote, and the quoting you after quoting themself. 

Now that that is sorted out, I still read your actual comment [free of "conspiracy"] as an oversimplification of the "thought process" because I don't think it was "obvious." What hit me wrong was the impression (probably not intended by you) that all that the casting director did was recommend the "obvious" choice to the production. To me that does not ring true. First, the Netflix "connection" is very attenuated. Heartstopper is UK front to back whereas Stranger Things is US. Second, Netflix is a producer of the latter but not the former. Third, logically, if the "obvious" choice was to cast from streaming, there are a number of other Netflix shows and many more on other platforms. So what makes this the obvious choice? So while I have decoupled you from Sweetie, I still think you are promoting a "story" and I don't know why. Maybe you have something more to convince me otherwise.