Flops That Got Revivals- Page 2

[Timmer]

Posted: 7/13/08 at 11:44pm

I don't know if the original production of "Chicago" was a flop in the technical sense, but it wasn't terribly successful. It got swept up in the tide known as "A Chorus Line."

The revival came about in an interesting way. It's written that John Kander was flying across the country (I forget whether it was NY-LA or LA-NY) and reading a theatre book. He came across this bit of trivia: "Mos Tony Award nominations without winning -- 'Chicago', 1975." When he gotoff the plane, so the story goes, he called Ebb and said, "Freddie, we're reviving 'Chicago'."

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 12:31am

Well, the first one that came to mind was BOEING-BOEING, big fat flop when it opened on Broadway, and now the revival picked up a couple Tonys, and is selling fairly well.
And Zeitoujo, look up the definition of flop. It's merely a economical term. Ljay is 100% right, SUNDAY was a flop so were most Sondheim shows.

[TDavis09]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 12:37am

Not sure but I'm just sitting her waiting for Carrie to be revived. Or at least a CD. Please?

[A Fleur De Toi]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 3:20am

i know it differs from show to show but on average how long do they have to run in order to recoup? like say SITPWG for instance?

and is there a term for musicals that profit immensely but lose at the Tonys? :P a term that hopefully isnt "Disney"?

Updated On: 7/14/08 at 03:20 AM

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 3:37am

You really can't tell A Fleur, there are way too many factors. The most important is the weekly nut they have to make to break even, but other factors like size of the theatre, attendance, etc. all come into play.
For example, KISS OF THE SPIDERWOMAN ran for I believe over 800 performances and never made back its investment. Hence it's a flop.
The recent CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF revival recouped its investment in the few months that it played on Broadway.
You can't tell.

[Weez]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 4:05am

A flop is a show that fails to make back its initial investment. But I have also heard the terms "critical flop" and "financial flop" thrown around. Hell, I may even have thrown them myself. 'We Will Rock You', for example, was MAULED by the critics on opening, but it's still making money. So despite the financial success, it could be described as a critical flop. And some shows, like most of the Sondheim back catalogue, didn't make much money but were brilliant, so people like to describe them specifically as a financial flop to try and minimise idiocy like Zeitoujo's "omg u cant asy sondheim is floppy!!!!111!!!111!!!!" outburst. ^_^

[A Fleur De Toi]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 4:51am

so in short, it goes:

Wicked was such a critical flop but schwartz is laughing all the way to the bank.

financial flop example : gypsy/SITPWG/watever sondheim show won a gazillion tonys... and closed 3 weeks later.


Where might one place Glory Days then?

[Weez]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 5:03am

A big fat ol' floppy flop McFlopperson.

The only reason people need to distinguish between a financial and a critical flop is because they find it hard to believe that something so brilliant didn't make very much money, or that something so awful could possibly be popular anyway. When you have something less ambiguous, like 'Glory Day', you can just say "flop" and no one will have any argument to make. :)

[A Fleur De Toi]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 5:06am

"A big fat ol' floppy flop McFlopperson"

ah, i see now the reviews for Phantom 2 are already in the bag. :P

[Patash]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 9:10am

You're a Good Man Charlie Brown was originally a huge hit off-Broadway playing over 1500 performances. It was revived in a very unsuccessful Broadway attempt in 1971 playing less than a month, and its most recent revival I assume was not a financial success either playing about 150 performances.

Regarding Sondheim, let's not forget Assassins, which was a major flop originally, but met with more success in its revival. Again, however, its initial production was off-Broadway, not Broadway.

[folkyboy]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 9:20am

Has there ever been a show that flopped in it's initial run (during a time without cast recordings) and then went on to be revived successfully (and thus recorded)?

[Jon]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 10:41am

Folkyboy - the answer is PAL JOEY. The original with Gene Kelly was a flop. The revival with Harold Lang was a hit and got a cast album.

To answer an earlier question - ...FORUM is Sondheim's most successful show - the original and both revivals were hits. it also gets the most regional/school/amateur productions.

[folkyboy]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 10:43am

I actually thought of PAL JOEY but wasn't sure. Thanks for that information...

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 10:49am

Pal Joey comes to mind, although I'm not sure that the original was a financial flop. Interestingly, the studio recording with Segal and Lang inspired its revival in 1952, not the other way around.

Candide is probably the most famous flop that had several Broadway revivals. And I believe Porgy and Bess was a financial flop in the origional production, while the critical reaction was decidedly mixed. I don't think it truly began to come into its own until it was revived in 1942.

Slightly off topic, many shows that met early deaths have many admirers based on the OBC recording. Usually, those admirers never saw the show -- e.g., St. Louis Woman, Mack and Mabel, House of Flowers, Juno, Tenderloin come to mind -- and lose sight of the fact that sometimes a great score is stuck in a problematic (i.e., lousy) show.

[ErinDillyFan]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 10:59am

The decision to make a cast recording is usually done long before the status of the show is known.

I think "Showboat" may come close to meeting your requirements. No initial cast recording. I think it made money on the initial run, but was revived and (flopped) but recorded.

EDIT: The original "Pal Joey" with Gene Kelly was a success, it ran 374 performances.

Here's one that's closer. Porter's "You Never Know" was a flop, but was never revived, but did have subsequent studio cast recordings.

"The Hot Mikado" 1939 was a flop that didn't get a cast recording that was later revived (not on broadway) with a recording


Updated On: 7/14/08 at 10:59 AM

[Roscoe]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 11:02am

I seem to remember that the original production of SWEENEY TODD never recouped, while the revival did recoup.

Can someone confirm?

[commasplice]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 11:25am

I think that the original production of Sweeney didn't recoup during its run, but did later after touring and licensing and all of that. But I could be completely wrong.

[ErinDillyFan]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 11:48am

folkyboy:

"The Three Penny Opera" 1933 meets your requirements.

Original run 12 performances with no recording, but has been revived many times on broadway with recordings.
Updated On: 7/14/08 at 11:48 AM

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 12:13pm

I know at some point, someone decided that any show that doesn't recoup is a flop... but... that definition has never sat well with me... in the movies... a flop is a huge financial disaster... and the actual definition of the word flop... is not a small failure... so... I just think it seems odd to call a show like Grey Gardens a flop just because it lost money... it succeded in so many ways.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 12:54pm

Still a flop.
Roscoe, Hal Prince confirmed that the SWEENEY made back its investment about 10-20 years after it opened, after the tour, and whatnot. So both the original production and the Doyle revival recouped.

[WOSQ]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 1:30pm

Morning's at Seven opened in the late 30s and flopped. It opened again in the 50s and flopped again. Dead and buried twice.

Third time was the charm, I think it was 1980 and it ran over a year, made money and won 3 Tonys. Within the last few seasons Lincoln Center Theatre mounted it yet again for the 4th full Broadway production and it was successful.

Some shows run and make some but not all of their initial capitalization back. Sunday in the Park With George was one of these that it was estimated returned 75% of its capitalization. Jekyll & Hyde was another long-run that closed at a partial loss as was the original Chicago, Tommy, 42nd Street revival and Ragtime among many others.

Variety classifies as a flop any show that did not at least break even. Partial return to them is still a flop.

There is a French term for critical success but financial failure, success d'estime. I haven't seen its usage in a while, but it used to be commonplace in articles and books.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 3:04pm

This is sort of on-topic, I hope. When Pal Joey opened in 1940, it got "mixed" notices to say the least, most notably Brooks Atkinson's comment as to whether it was possible to draw sweet water from a foul well, or words to that effect. The legend grew that it had been a failure when done originally, but times had changed to such an extent that, by the time of the revival in 1952, it was recognized for the great show that it is.

My question is, critical comments aside, was Pal Joey considered a financial flop when it was done originally? It ran almost a year, not a bad run for those times when a show could recoup its investment in six months or so. Did it break even? Did it show any profit at all? Or were investors losing their shirts? Can anyone out there clarify this? Thanks.

[WOSQ]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 4:26pm

How can we forget Chu Chem? This show blew up in Philadelphia in the mid 60s and closed after half a week and the departure of both its stars in a huff.

Late 80s and the Jewish Rep revives a revised version, and composer Mitch Leigh gets the idea that it is now Broadway material. Wrong. Chu Chem dies in 5 weeks and it was one of those embarrassing productions that looked like cheap community theatre.

See the entry in Not Since Carrie which I just reread for the umpteenth time.

Neither Candide nor She Loves Me have ever had financially successful Broadway runs either the original runs or in revival.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 4:32pm

Also, this small detail seems to evade many on here but GYPSY is not a Sondheim show. He wrote the lyrics and Jule Styne wrote the music (WEST SIDE STORY -- music by Leonard Bernstein and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim).

A Sondheim show is one where he wrote both lyrics AND music.

[Scripps2]

Posted: 7/14/08 at 6:07pm

"A Sondheim show is one where he wrote both lyrics AND music."

Who decided on that definition?

When I've heard Sondheim speak he says there is no such thing as a Sondheim show as they are all collaborations. I think he said something similar for his Lifetime Achievement Tony Award acceptance speech as well.