Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 7/9/17 — Page 3

Its interesting reading these posts...

War Paint was way too niche of a piece to demand this huge elaborate production. A musical about women/cosmetics and a faux rivalry that they try to drum up some drama about... Perhaps if they decided to make it more dramatic and make it something "inspired by" the lives of these two women. As for the Tony Performance being blamed for the fall off... I doubt people decide to buy or not to buy based on that. It didnt really help or give anyone a real reason to go... but the Tonys were such a bore this year anyway and I found all of the acts (except DEH) really flat.

I'm really surprised at Miss Saigon floundering as it is. Seems Cameron Mac really mis read this whole thing. Saigon ran a decent length of time in its original run - it seemed a bit soon to revisit this, particularly opening in the midst of such an incredibly crowded season. I wonder had they waited till around now, (like Cats did a year ago) if that would've given them a bit more oxygen to do the PR they needed to take off a revival with zero names to attract.

Do hope to get to see Groundhog Day. I tend to try to purchase tix online -so far I see lots of seats available, but I'm not paying premium prices when I know how easily available they are on tkts, etc. and the discount code is really pathetic ($10 off rear orchestra)

I mean it's not like Grey Gardens was some huge hit, so I think they tend for the "niche." I think the show is relatively easy to produce and will do well regionally.

And the problem with Miss Saigon is it is essentially a pimped-out national tour. The sets are are cheap, the whole show just feels cheap. I hated it when I saw it. Save for the Kim, I didn't think anyone was particularly interesting or good.

Miss Saigon faltered quickly in London too, its just not as much of a classic as say Les Mis or Cats. I think this is probably the reason Cameron made the Broadway revival a limited engagement

Saigon is a stinkeroo. Strictly for tourists. Cameron totally miscalculated this one. War Paint is a stinkeroo. Strictly for those wanting to see Patti camp it up. GHD is a stinkeroo. Strictly for those who like the movie. Cats is a stinkeroo. Strictly for those who. Well who the hell knows.

evic said: "Saigon is a stinkeroo. Strictly for tourists. Cameron totally miscalculated this one. War Paint is a stinkeroo. Strictly for those wanting to see Patti camp it up. GHD is a stinkeroo. Strictly for those who like the movie. Cats is a stinkeroo. Strictly for those who. Well who the hell knows.



"

GHD has lots of admirers, and not just from movie fans. I didn't love it, but it was entertaining enough.

Cats has had a more impressive run than anyone thought possible



And the typical revival seems to trend to a year to 18 month run.

---

RippedMan said: "And the problem with Miss Saigon is it is essentially a pimped-out national tour. The sets are are cheap, the whole show just feels cheap. I hated it when I saw it. Save for the Kim, I didn't think anyone was particularly interesting or good."

I didn't think it looked cheap at all; on the contrary, it felt like a lot of money to me. I also really enjoyed the performances of Jon Jon Briones, Devin Ilaw, and Alistair Brammer.

---

I didn't thing "Saigon" looked cheap. It was redesigned, but with with more documentary feel, to de-romanticize the show's access. The earliest stage pictures, as Saigon is literally falling apart, are seedy and disturbing. I attributed that to intentional effort to make the show less faux Vietnam and more honest. The set pieces had the same epic qualities as the original.

Slightly OT, but maybe not: The Chris understudy -- who has gone on a lot - is simply not very good, big voice aside. It hurts the show in powerful ways. I was startled that a better 1st replacement wasn't chosen. The night I saw it (full disclosure here: free ticket) Eva did all of the heavy lifting in the romance department. It made me more in awe of her, but decidedly less involved.

---

Updated On: 7/11/17 at 08:51 AM

chernjam said: "As some of you know I saw Sunset 4 times. And I noted that yes they had premium seats for $299 - but a week out or so, those seats if they were unsold were discounted on TM for $199, then $149... which I took advantage of. They really are silly and foolish to play games with customers who are willing to pay a little more - but aren't tourists willing to be taken advantage of"

Having seen Sunset with people who expressed a bit of disappointment with the set/visuals relative to the "premium" ticket prices (i.e., big money for a semi-staged show), I can't help but wonder if the revival could've had a longer, more successful run in a smaller house with ticket prices commensurate with the scale of the production.

---

Lot666 said: "...Having seen Sunset with people who expressed a bit of disappointment with the set/visuals relative to the "premium" ticket prices (i.e., big money for a semi-staged show), I can't help but wonder if the revival could've had a longer, more successful run in a smaller house with ticket prices commensurate with the scale of the production.

"

I doubt that a smaller house would've changed the dynamics much. The producers seemed happy that it was consistently in the million + range (obviously were hoping for a smash, sold out, top ticket price selling thing) but with this crazy, crowded season, that was a crap shoot. Had that happened, there probably would've been another extension with another actress at the helm. But from the beginning this was to be a 16 week run that turned into 20 weeks. I think in London, it was highly successful since it was done at ENO so the overhead and costs surrounding it were much less than doing it here.

TRP- do you have any idea how close to breaking even they came? Trying to guesstimate I was figuring it cost about $750K a week to run - which over the course of the 20 weeks meant they made over 8-9 million back. Could the capitalization have been 10 million?

Miss the old days when Variety would report "Hits and Flops" with these details

Regarding GHD pricing: They're doing what they have to to survive. Premium prices have become a way of business, so they sort of have to follow suit. I don't think prices are what's keeping most people away from GHD, it's just not selling at all.

Regarding Sunset: I guess I don't understand those who were disappointed in the presentation. I was paying premium prices for Glenn Close and a 40 piece orchestra. That's what I got. Was it ever advertised as more than that? I, too, would be very curious to know how they ended up financially.

chernjam - On a day where a number of premiums are avail on TM, go to TKTS about an hour before curtain. 5/6 row center orchestra for around $90.

You might be in luck! They filmed Sunset the night I was there (June 23). Glenn made an announcement that it was for the Lincoln Center Archives.

RippedMan said: "I think it's a great show. I just wish it was re-imagined as I don't think the original is that classic. I'd like to see a totally different take on this. Plus, I don't think the cast is all that unique or interesting. Most of them have played the parts somewhere else, etc. It just felt cheap and not specific.



"

I have been thinking about this the last few days. I wonder if doing some color blind casting as to Chris and Ellen would have made the show more interesting or provocative to draw more people in. Bummer about the show being such a dud. It is a beautiful score.

Sorry, I thought the set and design looked clunky and cheap. The sets weren't automated. The staging seemed clustered and stagnant. The leads were all very boring. The whole thing felt like I was seeing the 10 national tour and not a big highly anticipated revival. There was just no wow factor.