Commercial Flop to Hit Revival

It is almost unheard of in the modern era, as far as musicals are concerned.

Sunday In the Park? (original flopped, Gyllenhaal broke even)

But there’s also an accounting asterisk on the original PARADE, because it was produced by LCT in association with LIVENT. So while it ran only a short time and didn’t connect with audiences, there wasn’t a traditional capitalization to recoup for LCT. That said, it was still a money-loser for LCT.

Updated On: 11/7/22 at 10:48 AM

Yes, it seems almost unheard of, of commerical flop to hit revival. Although, I feel like their are shows where the revival may have still flopped (if you considering not making its oney back a flop), but did better than the original production. The most recent revival of Follies comes to mind. It was on track to be the first (at the time) Sondheim Broadway production to recoup. It didn't, (IIRC), but it came close! Also, I would assume that the 1998 production of Cabaret, did better than the original, despite it being at Roundabout.

You can then also consider shows that were commerical Broadway failures, that have become hits in regional/communty theatres: Addams Family, Shrek, etc.

While it was heavily revised, the Hal Prince version of Candide ran 740 performances- much better than the original's 73.

Did the original production of Chicago recoup?

fashionguru_23 said: "The most recent revival of Follies comes to mind. It was on track to be the first (at the time) Sondheim Broadway production to recoup."

The John Doyle production of Sweeney Todd recouped. I don't think the original Broadway production did, so this would be another answer to the OP's question.

BakerWilliams said: "The original Sweeney Todd recouped."

Michael Riedel reported otherwise back in 2005, but I am definitely open to correction!

¿Macavity? said: "I think it recouped on tour."

Correct.

As the OP, recouping on tour does not meet the criteria. Also, I thought tours are under separate contracts and capitalizations, such that money earned on tour does not go towards paying back the Broadway investors (of course this depends entirely on the contract).

Also, it seems to me that, if producers are relying on a "name" to sell a revival of a prior commercial flop, then the producers can't count on the tour succeeding without that "name".

ggersten said: "As the OP, recouping on tour does not meet the criteria."

Then I think Sweeney Todd is another answer to your question: I think we all agree that the original did not recoup on Broadway, but the Doyle revival did.

I won't belabor the point any further, though!

She Loves Me is one of my favorite shows ever. That said, I remember that the commercial run of the first revival did not return its investment, and the second was limited run non-profit. We’re they well reviewed? Yes, I think they suffered from the same fate of the original. Many people loved it, but a lot of people had little interest in seeing it. The original had a respectable run, but that’s it…sorta similar with the revivals.


I guess it is just too ‘special’ for mass audiences.

Yes flop is an accounting term, but it's also a matter of "how many people actually paid to see this in its original incarnation and what kind of interest did it generate."

More often than not, as data has shown us, once a flop always a flop. Shows like SIDE SHOW and FOLLIES and RAGTIME and CAROLINE OR CHANGE failed multiple times on Broadway, financially, and you cannot divorce that from their ability to attract mass audiences. It's kind of a rare thing for something to flop really hard originally and then do a complete 360 in terms of public perception.

Updated On: 11/8/22 at 07:55 PM