Find out who NY Post's Michael Riedel called a limp dishrag

Last month, I had an opportunity to sit down with Michael Riedel for an exclusive studio interview.

See which modern composing team he compares to Jule Styne and Stephen Sondhiem.

See which movie actress he calls a "limp dishrag" in her Broadway debut.

Check it out:








Michael Riedel on Artwhisperer.tv

Updated On: 2/13/12 at 04:42 PM

Thanks for the video! Very interesting interview. His exact argument about "star casting" is one I've used for a while and he's exactly right about it. His arrogance is a bit off-putting. I really don't think he has anywhere near the influence that he thinks he has. His coverage of Spider-Man has certainly destroyed that show at the box office. (Or not?)

---

Yeah, I'm sure he was eating that up.

---

It was interesting and amusing. He loves Shaiman and Wittman...and seems to adore Reba McIntire. I think his influence is considerable, for sure. But, he overstated his importance in the theatre world. I'm curious about something.... how does a cast member of a particular show react when he/she realizes Michael Riedel is in the theatre? I wish I could "pick" the brain of some theatre people who have encountered Riedel in their audience. Just wondering....from RC in Austin, Texas

---

Thoroughly enjoyable interview, Joey! Looking forward to more...

I worked for TheaterWeek, obviously before Riedel arrived. His story about assuming the editorship doesn't exactly add up. I'm not saying he didn't edit the publication at some point, but he makes it sound like he got the job without expressing any real interest in theater. That just doesn't ring true to me. Also, while I see the "objective" value in not being a "fan" of theater to write a column, it wouldn't hurt Mr. Riedel to have a better understanding and respect for what it takes to mount a production, not just from the producers' viewpoint (which I think he has some measure of understanding) but much more from the perspective of directors, writers, designers and performers.

We need someone like Riedel in theater.

There will always be some in the business of show who want to make a name for themselves, but don't have the brilliance to do it with talent, so therefore, will do it by being provocative.

If anything Reidel writes sells tickets and puts butts in the seats, theatre people, the ones who actually make it happen, will tolerate the man. But do they put much stock into what he has to say or have respect for what he puts out into the universe? Absolutely not. And the ones who do... are just as vacuous as the man himself.

Reidel doesn't care what anyone thinks about what he writes... just as long as you keep reading. Has nothing to do with the theatre; it's all about the messenger.

---

Good job, Mister!

And I actually enjoyed Riedel. I have no doubt that he is exactly as he presents, which I find refreshing.

Might that be Rosie O'Donnell?

Guys--

Michael Riedel serves an important function to a lot of people...he's not just skulking around with a notepad hiding in the shadows.

People call him with stories all the time. Agents, producers, theatre owners, actors...they want to leak information (a star is misbehaving, their client is getting a huge salary, their show is in trouble and they need to fire the writer) and then leverage the publicity to accomplish what they need.

Riedel's no saint, and he likes to paint himself as the black sheep. And most of the sources who talk to him would swear on Bibles that they don't. But they do.

Sometimes he gets info that is just wrong (for example, Donna Murphy didn't apparently miss all those shows because of vocal problems, but because of something else she wasn't interested in revealing)...but a lot of the time, he gets it right. (Yes, I know he needs a fact-checker).

You need a guy in any industry who's not afraid of the sacred cows and not afraid to be the bad guy. And the fact that he has fun and a sense of humor about it makes it a bit more bearable.

It's a gossip column, folks - only to be read for entertainment purposes; not to take seriously, discuss in depth, or (god forbid) influence your decisions about anything.

In a world where we actually did things and weren't so desperate to escape our comfortable boredom, this sort of thing wouldn't even exist.

Is it safe to say that Michael Riedel is the Kathy Griffin of musical theater, or is that giving him too much credit?

---

I think that's fair.