BroadwayBen said: "I don't understand all the shock people have at producers wanting to spend a lot of money to create big, exciting shows. It always happens, and occasionally one is a huge success which inspires others. My guess is that they are hoping that, like Moulin, "Elephants" can eventually be produced around the world, so they're investing a lot in this production. Sometimes it works (Disney shows, Wicked, Moulin), sometimes it doesn't (Here Lies Love, King Kong, Rocky.). And when producers spend little on a show (Doll's House) everyone here gets equally uptight."
I think the concern about WFE has multiple layers:
1) Above all, it's shock about the reality of the situation. The value of a dollar being less than what it was just a few years ago. $25 mil for this show vs $19 mil for SUFFS is not that big a difference.
2) We all have recent memories of big-budget financial failures (Bad Cin, New York New York, Here Lies Love).
3) There's a lack of trust in the IP (which can sometimes work in its favor, like Kinky Boots...or it could end up like Tuck Everlasting). It doesn't have the built-in brand of Disney or Moulin Rouge or Oz.
4) A $25 million proof-of-concept for a show that MIGHT have future life on the road or internationally is a huge risk. Yes, those subsequent productions generate royalties, but they trickle slowly, and each requires its own capitalization.
5) Bigger does now always equal better. Something like PIPPIN delivered wows and played worldwide at a fraction of this budget.
This doesn't mean it can't succeed. We all love a success story. The odds are just stacked against it.
Updated On: 11/7/23 at 12:52 AM