It is a strange one since this does not say 'Broadway; in the title.
Legally Blonde (which did recoup in the UK) Footloose, 9 to 5 etc have also done great business here. Saturday Night Fever also did well here as did Sister Act. Ghost had a healthy run here but i dont think it recouped (though i know the UK tour did very well)
Namo i love u but we get it already....you don't like Madonna
HITS THE LION KING THE FULL MONTY THE PRODUCERS HAIRSPRAY SPAMALOT MARY POPPINS BILLY ELLIOT ONCE NEWSIES KINKY BOOTS
FLOPS HIGH SOCIETY BIG FOOTLOOSE SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER URBAN COWBOY DANCE OF THE VAMPIRES THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG THE WEDDING SINGER TARZAN GREY GARDENS HIGH FIDELITY LEGALLY BLONDE XANADU CRY-BABY YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN THE LITTLE MERMAID 9 to 5 SHREK CATCH ME IF YOU CAN LEAP OF FAITH PRISCILLA, QUEEN OF THE DESERT GHOST SISTER ACT HANDS ON A HARDBODY BIG FISH THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY ROCKY BULLETS OVER BROADWAY
HONEYMOON IN VEGAS
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
A few of these, like Lolita, My Love, were based on earlier source material as well as their film adaptations. Also, while none were financial successes, some and in at least one case (Passion) many will consider them far from failures.
Roza
Carmelina (of course, there's a successful musical based at least unofficially on the same material; Mamma Mia!)
How would a "failure" or "flop" be defined? Financial, critical, both? Or general popularity?
I ask because, though Shrek and Thoroughly Modern Millie weren't gigantic successes on Broadway, they are still two of the most licensed shows to date. Just curious.
"if we're talking about money, then sure, MILLIE flopped, but in the area is fans, or people wanting to see the show... I think it did fine..."
A previous poster got their facts wrong. Thoroughly Modern Millie won five Tony Awards, including Best Musical. It introduced Sutton Foster (Tony winner for Best Leading Actress) to Broadway as a leading lady and was directed by Michael Mayer (Tony nomination) and choreographed by Rob Ashford (Tony wonder for Best Choreography).
It ALSO recouped. Shows recoup from tours, which typically provide revenue to the mother company, as well as the Broadway run; Millie was no exception.
It clearly was a hit. Saying otherwise is a factual error. But don't worry -- I hear there may be a job vacancy soon at Rolling Stone. :)
The Broadway production (you can read, right?) of Thoroughly Modern Millie was a flop. There is no way around the fact that it closed on BROADWAY without recouping its investment.
If it eventually made money back by performing in their mom's garage, that is another story. That is not Broadway.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
"It ALSO recouped. Shows recoup from tours, which typically provide revenue to the mother company, as well as the Broadway run; Millie was no exception."
My understanding is that, in general, Broadway shows do not recoup from tours. My understanding is that, today at least, tours are separately financed with separate contracts. There may be an overlap of investors - so an investor in Millie, for example, may eventually make money if the tour is a financial success. But, if you were only an investor in Millie on Broadway, for example, you did not get all of your money back. There generally is no "mother company".
That said, the producers for the Broadway and Tour of Millie may have been the same - but not all investors are identified as "producers": (Also, the tour started in July 2003 - while Millie did not close on Broadway until June 2004)
Of course, each show's investment contract is separately negotiated and some may provide anciallary (souveniers, cast recordings) and tour income to the investors. Some may not. I have no idea what Millie's contract said. I tried to see if there was any information on Ken Davenport's website as to Broadway investors getting money from a tour, but didn't find a definitive answer.