Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#1
Posted: 8/22/10 at 2:15pm
Obviously, the overwhelming majority of us who have seen this revival of SOUTH PACIFIC fell in love with and adored it. If Lincoln Center was not kicking them out (from what I heard, that was the case), could it run for alot longer than it has.
(Don't get me wrong, this had an amazing run, but I think the plug is being pulled too early).
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/28/05
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#2
Posted: 8/22/10 at 2:26pmIt was still selling well, so I would guess it could have got another year or two at least.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#2
Posted: 8/22/10 at 2:30pm
It could've, and as proven by Laura Osnes, the production was strong even with replacement cast members.
But I agree with the choice to close the production on a high point.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#3
Posted: 8/22/10 at 2:42pmI think we should just be grateful for its long run in the first place - it initially wasn't an open-ended run but was so well-received it extended over a year longer than it was intended to be on for. A remarkable achievement and a truly dazzling show.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/15/03
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#4
Posted: 8/22/10 at 4:04pmLincoln Center has several productions waiting to use the Beaumont stage. From what I understand, the next play (is it called WAR HORSES?) is large and physically complicated.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#5
Posted: 8/22/10 at 5:58pm
If you look at the grosses going back to Jan, it has not been doing all that well with many weeks below $500K. With the large orchestra and cast it is not an inexpensive show to run week after week
I am not sure what kind of a run you were expecting. 2+ years is excellent for a 60 year old show that is still a staple with regional and community theatres and has never been completely off the radar.
It is not necessary or even desirable for shows to be running 5 or 10 years or more.
Cast albums are NOT "soundtracks."
Live theatre does not use a "soundtrack." If it did, it wouldn't be live theatre!
I host a weekly one-hour radio program featuring cast album selections as well as songs by cabaret, jazz and theatre artists. The program, FRONT ROW CENTRE is heard Sundays 9 to 10 am and also Saturdays from 8 to 9 am (eastern times) on www.proudfm.com
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#6
Posted: 8/22/10 at 6:09pm
Maybe it could have, but it's had a decent run.
They could prolonged their stay by reducing costs (orchestra, etc)... but they chose not to reduce quality - which should be applauded.
If War Horse is their next production, they've got something excellent coming. Big critical and commercial hit in London
Updated On: 8/22/10 at 06:09 PM
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#7
Posted: 8/22/10 at 6:12pm
but they chose not to reduce quality - which should be applauded.
Not really. They are closing the show to make way for new shows to satisfy the LCT subscribers.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#8
Posted: 8/22/10 at 6:17pm
By not reducing the quality I meant the quality of this particular production of South Pacific.
Some shows go on for too long and lose freshness and quality. Wasn't it Cameron Mackintosh who fired part of the cast of Les Mis on Broadway after seeing their performances weren't good enough ?
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/4/07
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#9
Posted: 8/22/10 at 6:26pm
The Lincoln Center NEEDS to be concerned with their subscribers -- that's the kind of theater they run.
But other than that: Frontrowcenter said it well.
Two years for a revival is AMAZING.
COULD and SHOULD are two different things.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#10
Posted: 8/22/10 at 10:44pm
They are closing the show to make way for new shows to satisfy the LCT subscribers.
The Lincoln Center NEEDS to be concerned with their subscribers -- that's the kind of theater they run.
Subscribers were starting to complain about the show running so long. I know I saw some people on the board mention it. So if it was mentioned here then I have to imagine that TLC was hearing about it too.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#11
Posted: 8/22/10 at 11:36pmAccording to the Lincoln Centers Website... War Horses beings previews March 2011... is there really that big of a gap between the productions?!
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#12
Posted: 8/22/10 at 11:38pmA Free Man of Color begins at the Beaumont on October 21st.
Broadway Star Joined: 11/24/04
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#13
Posted: 8/22/10 at 11:58pmSince I started watching shows in 1988, I've never heard of a LCT production running as long as SOUTH PACIFIC had so it's quite an impressive feat. Despite recent dips in grosses, correct me if I'm wrong, whatever initial investment LCT put into the show must have been recouped by now when totaling ticket, souvenir and CD sales. But LCT *is* a venue for new works, and The Vivian Beaumont's ready for a new resident, as beloved as SOUTH PACIFIC is. I'm just glad the show ended at LCT rather than attempting a commercial transfer. End on a high note indeed.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#14
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:05am
War Horse has QUITE a bit of technical requirements and absolutely needs a large stage, such as the Beaumont. It's really the only New York theatre that could be home to the production.
This production did phenomenal business- especially since it wasn't intended to be open-ended.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#15
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:13amAnything Goes was in the Beaumont just a couple months short of two years, and Contact made it's home there for just over two years. So it's not completely unheard of for the Beaumont to have had such a long running tenant.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#16
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:22amHow long did "Carousel" run for?
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#17
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:27amAbout 10 months, according to ibdb.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#18
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:41amThanks. Thought it could have been longer.
Broadway Star Joined: 11/24/04
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#19
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:44amI'm aware of ANYTHING GOES and CONTACT having long runs. So my question is: does anyone know if SOUTH PACIFIC now holds the record as The Vivian Beaumont's longest resident?
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#20
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:52am
Contact Mar 30, 1999 - Sep 1, 2002
Just about three years and five months
Past Productions
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#21
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:54am
According to ibdb, Contact opened on March 30, 2000.
Also according to ibdb, Contact had 1010 performances. I believe South Pacific had 996 performances, but I'm not positive.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#22
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:58am
It seems the show opened at the Newhouse and then moved to the Beaumont which is the reason for the two different opening dates
Red Hot Contact Moves to Vivian Beaumont on March 9, 2000
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/5/04
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#23
Posted: 8/23/10 at 12:58amI think the confusion lies in that CONTACT was at the Mitzi in '99 before transferring to the Beaumont.
Could SOUTH PACIFIC have run for much longer than it did?#24
Posted: 8/23/10 at 1:01amAlso, according to ibdb.com Anything Goes played from October 19, 1987 to September 3, 1989 just under two years.
Videos
