#1
Posted: 12/6/06 at 1:56pm
Performances begin October 31, 2007, at Toronto's Royal Alexandra Theatre.
www.dirtydancingtoronto.ca
www.dirtydancingtoronto.ca
DIRTY DANCING to have North American Premiere in Toronto
#2
Posted: 12/6/06 at 2:09pm
Saturday Night Fever
Footloose
This
Sometimes you can smell 'em.
Wouldn't it be a terrific surprise if I'm wrong?
Footloose
This
Sometimes you can smell 'em.
Wouldn't it be a terrific surprise if I'm wrong?
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true. And that would be unacceptable."
--Carrie Fisher
#3
Posted: 12/6/06 at 2:17pm
Yech....WE WANT DROWSY CHAPERONE.
Akiva
Akiva
#4
Posted: 12/6/06 at 2:25pm
Isn't this show a smash in London?
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
#5
Posted: 12/6/06 at 2:26pm
Yup it's a huge hit in London.
#6
Posted: 12/6/06 at 2:26pm
Please, let it not get past Toronto.
"If you are going to do something, do it well. And leave something witchy."
-Charlie Manson
#7
Posted: 12/6/06 at 2:34pm
Remember that Footloose did well in London. It's a different market.
Faced with these Loreleis, what man can moralize!
#8
Posted: 12/6/06 at 3:33pm
But on the other hand...Dirty Dancing is a 'classic' and MANY people love the movie.
#9
Posted: 12/6/06 at 3:35pm
Saturday Night Fever was a smash in London too! Although, I always felt Dirty Dancing would be great on stage. It just has a good story and you can do a lot with it.
for fierce, fabulous and fun times visit eric mathew's world.
http://ericmathew.blogspot.com/
#10
Posted: 12/6/06 at 4:38pm
Let's hope this never has an American premier
#11
Posted: 12/6/06 at 5:16pm
I doubt it will be a success in Toronto. I'm not sure why but the Toronto theatre attendance seems to have shrunk in recent years. Even the sit-down of The Producers closed early and lost money in Toronto. For-profit theatre is not doing well in Canada- the shows that do well are the Canadian-produced shows that get subsidized by the (provincial and federal) governments. The Ontario government did end up investing $10m in the commercial production of "Lord of the Rings" and that of course flopped.
"It does what a musical is supposed to do; it takes you to another world. And it gives you a little tune to carry in your head. Something to take you away from the dreary horrors of the real world. A little something for when you're feeling blue. You know?"
#12
Posted: 12/6/06 at 8:45pm
Does the music from the movie carry over to the show?
#13
Posted: 12/7/06 at 1:15am
The London production had a $20 million (US) advance by the time it opened.
I have a feeling that the Toronto production will also have a substantial advance. The women will just eat this up... just imagine all the "girls' nights out" that this show will generate.
I have a feeling that the Toronto production will also have a substantial advance. The women will just eat this up... just imagine all the "girls' nights out" that this show will generate.
#14
Posted: 12/7/06 at 9:47am
Footloose was a huge hit in london and on tour because it was changed from the bloody awfull broadway staging of the show.
Dirty Dancing is huge here ,but having seen it i dont see why.
The funny thing is this could have been great as a musical ,but just to lift the film and put it direct on stage with people in the background singing songs every so often just seems pointless,it offers nothing new in any way shape of form and the audience is made up of people who dont go to the theatre.
Its not that its a bad show its just it's pointless but it will make its millions of the name and i would bet my life on it opening on broadway,its to much of a cash cow not.
Dirty Dancing is huge here ,but having seen it i dont see why.
The funny thing is this could have been great as a musical ,but just to lift the film and put it direct on stage with people in the background singing songs every so often just seems pointless,it offers nothing new in any way shape of form and the audience is made up of people who dont go to the theatre.
Its not that its a bad show its just it's pointless but it will make its millions of the name and i would bet my life on it opening on broadway,its to much of a cash cow not.
Namo i love u but we get it already....you don't like Madonna
#15
Posted: 12/7/06 at 9:49am
I love DD. I watched the movie last night...
#16
Posted: 12/7/06 at 10:05am
The movie is great,the show not so great
Namo i love u but we get it already....you don't like Madonna
#17
Posted: 12/7/06 at 5:34pm
Well I've always said this would be one of the movies that would adapt well for a show. I will be very curious to see how they did. In fact I'm gonna go put together a group for one of those "girly" nights out right now.
#18
Posted: 12/7/06 at 6:20pm
Hah...Sabrelady...I am pretty sure I am going to end up getting dragged to it by my group of friends.
Akiva
Akiva
#19
Posted: 12/10/06 at 2:45pm
This is hands down the worst musical I have ever seen.
There is no reason at all why it is onstange. When a musical makes a transition from screen to stage, there has to be a REASON WHY! I would hesitate to even call this a musical. It's more like a direct transition from the screen to the stage.
There were so many moments that seemed amateur-ish in respect to the acting and design decisions. It was trying to be a movie onstange...they took every single scene from the movie and put it onstange...which makes for insteresting scenes that result in sometimes 3-5 line exchanges between characters. A blackout, then another 30 second scene with 3-5 lines.
Also, the audience could not recognize that there were actually people on the stage performing. Sex deprived thrity year old sloshed women were shouting "You go, Baby!" and "We love you Patrick!" (as in Patrick Swayze) during the sexual scenes. It completely ruined the ounce of ambiance that was in the theatre.
I feel bad for the actors. Perhaps they did not know what they were getting into. What a dissapointment to be in a musical as a lead, and not sing any songs...but perhaps that is what they wanted?
I will give them the credit that they enjoyed being on stage and DANCING. But...the entire production was just...awkward. If I had not had paid so much money to see it, it would have been the first production I would have walked out on. There was no reason for me to stay! I knew exactly what would happen and how it would pan out.
The act one cliffhanger is that they have sex! Congraulations! That won't make me want to come back and see the second half.
Very unfortunate, mis-understood conception. If they took a completely, COMPLETELY different approach this could perhaps be entertaining.
For me, at least. That's my opinion.
There is no reason at all why it is onstange. When a musical makes a transition from screen to stage, there has to be a REASON WHY! I would hesitate to even call this a musical. It's more like a direct transition from the screen to the stage.
There were so many moments that seemed amateur-ish in respect to the acting and design decisions. It was trying to be a movie onstange...they took every single scene from the movie and put it onstange...which makes for insteresting scenes that result in sometimes 3-5 line exchanges between characters. A blackout, then another 30 second scene with 3-5 lines.
Also, the audience could not recognize that there were actually people on the stage performing. Sex deprived thrity year old sloshed women were shouting "You go, Baby!" and "We love you Patrick!" (as in Patrick Swayze) during the sexual scenes. It completely ruined the ounce of ambiance that was in the theatre.
I feel bad for the actors. Perhaps they did not know what they were getting into. What a dissapointment to be in a musical as a lead, and not sing any songs...but perhaps that is what they wanted?
I will give them the credit that they enjoyed being on stage and DANCING. But...the entire production was just...awkward. If I had not had paid so much money to see it, it would have been the first production I would have walked out on. There was no reason for me to stay! I knew exactly what would happen and how it would pan out.
The act one cliffhanger is that they have sex! Congraulations! That won't make me want to come back and see the second half.
Very unfortunate, mis-understood conception. If they took a completely, COMPLETELY different approach this could perhaps be entertaining.
For me, at least. That's my opinion.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95