DRS ?

[jacobp]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 10:28am

I really enjoyed Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, it was funny fast paced and the music was funny and catchy. I t was a fun night at the theatre. Why did it do so poorly and why is it doing poorly on tour....I think it deserves better

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 11:10am

The show was buried beneath the hit shows such as Wicked and Spamalot. Also Spamalot opened that year. It just didn't attract audiences as much.

Also, John Lithgow was a star vehicle, I think he was partly the reason the show lost even more interest among theatergoers after he left.

Posted: 3/18/07 at 11:47am

But there was Norbert..

The show cot alot to run and was a great show, but mixed with romance(Piazza), comedy(Spelling Bee), and cheese(Spamalot). Just alot of competition, but I loved the set, Norbert, and th costumes.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 11:48am

I'm so glad you enjoyed it!

I wouldn't say it did "so poorly" on Broadway, it almost recouped, and for weeks in the early part of the run was one of the top 5 revnue producers.

It had a couple of key things going against it though. Brantley pretty much panned it in the Times. If Spamalot was not out that year, even though some may feel Piazza might have deserved it more, with Tony politics what they are, I'm pretty sure DRS would have won the Tony, which would have helped. Also opening right around the same time as Spamalot didn't help. Attendance went down after Lithgow left, and moreso after Norbert left.

Also, some prospective attendees just grouped it in their heads among all those musicals based on movies, even though IMO, DRS is far superior to most of those. That also affects the tour I think. And if people didn't like the movie...

It really deserves better.

Updated On: 3/18/07 at 11:48 AM

[D2]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 11:50am

Actually, the box office went up after Lithgow left and Jonathan Pryce got such glowing reviews. But it couldn't sustain the bump, and after both Pryce and NLB left, audiences seemed to lose interest completely. Shame. It was a fun show.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 12:02pm

No it didn't, unless info disclosed to the public was falsified. I checked the grosses every week after Lithgow left and it stopped being among the highest Bway revenue producers. Percentages went down, something you could certainly tell from being in the audience.

[actor]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 12:05pm

It was a fun show, but certainly wasn't at the top of the list for tourist "must sees". There was way too much competition at the time. Had it come out now, IMO, I think it would do better.

[D2]

Posted: 3/18/07 at 12:08pm

I seem to remember the first few weeks after the Times went nuts over Pryce's performance that the numbers shot up into the 90's in terms of percentage of seats sold. But the bump didn't last long, and you're right that attendance kept dwindling each week throughout the spring and then plummeted after Pryce and NLB left. I do know that after I read that review I considered getting a ticket to see Pryce, but had difficulty getting a seat so I didn't bother.