Good news for THE PRODUCERS- Page 2

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 5:42pm

Thank you, millie_dillmount I never thought about that... And maybe Lee Roy won't boost ticket sales, but he'll give the cast a kick.

[OOTI2004]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 6:06pm

I actually had no desire to see Lane and Broderickin the show. I saw the show out of town, and loved every minute of it. Then when I saw the movie, I didn't think that the pair lived up to the performances I had seen.

I'm suprised some serious stunt casting isn't occurring with this show. I am one of the appearing to be few, who want to see the Producers run for a while longer.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 6:33pm

I saw THE PRODUCERS with Nathan and Matthew, and to tell you the truth, I enjoyed several replacement casts more than them. I have only recently started to enjoy the show for what it was. When I originally saw it, I thought the cast was horrible from top to bottom, and I found it to be the most overrated musical of all time.

I last saw the show about 5 months ago, and it was sheer joy.

On another note, I don't think that it's a matter of finding another star-powered duo. When Jason Alexander and Martin Short starred in the show, it failed to attract and audience. On paper, Alexander and Short sound like the perfect star pair to stop into the roles - it jsut didn't work.

At this point, I think people just aren't into it anymore. The hype has worn off, and the show has started to collect dust.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 7:58pm

I saw the show when it first opened and felt it was nothing more than two hours of legalized screaming.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 8:01pm

How is this good news?? It's not like he's a big celebrity, only a big theatre star. The only way the Producers will be a be hit is if they get some big celebrities in it. I've always hoped that Kelsey Grammer & David Hyde Pierce would do the show for about 6 months. That'll pack 'em in again.

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 9:39pm

I really liked this show, but it's time has passed and its audience is trickling away. I think it may close by January IF losses this winter are in the extreme. If not, then until this time next year.

I'm not sentencing it to death, but at the rate it's been going...

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 9:39pm

DOUBLE POST

Updated On: 9/16/06 at 09:39 PM

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 9:43pm

yeah, maybe it will have a new year's eve closing...dont know

[adamgreer]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 9:51pm

Unless this show gets a major new star(s) soon, it won't make it through the winter. I have no idea who might be able to pack them in again, however.

[alterego]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 10:37pm

I could never understand why they didn't bring Jason Alexander to Broadway with the show. He would create some interest, or at least a lot more than some of the replacements.

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 10:40pm

They may not have brought him because he really wasn't a draw during the LA sit down.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 10:42pm

Seinfeld was too long ago for him to be a draw now - he hasn't done anything since then besides a series that only ran a few eps and some Kentucky Fried Chicken commercials.

[alterego]

Posted: 9/16/06 at 10:58pm

Maybe he should of been brought here, Australia. Seinfeld is still a ratings winner on Oz TV.

[wickedfanatic34]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 11:41am

i agree so what if it closed

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 11:50am

L.A. didn't have a "sit down." They had a defined, limited run that extended a couple of times and then closed.

It was very successful, but it was a limited run.

Updated On: 9/17/06 at 11:50 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 11:56am

True, Best12, but everyone expected and hoped that THE PRODUCERS would turn into an open ended run in Los Angeles. The disappointing ticket sales were unexpected and the first sign that the show really might not be the global sensation everyone was sure it would be.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 12:01pm

Yeah, I think they extended it one too many times.

The minute Jason Alexander and Martin Short were leaving, the audiences decided to do the same. It closed very soon after.

A telling sign, indeed.

It really is a star-vehicle show... and doesn't do so well with "Sam Lipsh*tz" and "Joe Schmo" in the leads.

Updated On: 9/17/06 at 12:01 PM

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 12:16pm

What gets me is that during the past few weeks there have only been 20-23 shows on the boards and the Producers has only had an attendance of 40-60%. I can't imagine the show picking up during the rest of September, October, and November when you consider the high number of new shows that are coming in. I'm sure the second half of December it would do strong business, but I don't see it doing well at all from now until that time. I enjoy the the show thoroughly and don't wish it any ill will, it's just going to be interesting to see how well it fairs the next 10-15 weeks.

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 1:10pm

Best12, sorry about that...I just consider sitdowns to be an engagemtent longer than two months.

[peapod36]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 1:34pm

For those people who think this show has been around long enough, I would only say that I saw it in St. Louis and thought it was the funniest show I've ever seen, and I liked the movie though mostly because of Roger Bart and Gary Beach. I still think it's funny.
As for shows who were on Broadway too long, I can only say one word: CATS. I never wanted to see this show and I don't understand why people loved watching actors pretending to be singing dancing cats. "Memory" is the only song I like from it.
No offense to those who did like it or were in it,I just don't get it.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 1:39pm

Well, I know that ticket sales were "disappointing" from the get go in Los Angeles, even when Alexander and Short were announced: the Panatages thought there would be a frenzy like in the early days of the New York run, and it didn't happen. I think the hope was that word of mouth would catch on and the show would be able to play an open ended engagement at the Pantages and so they just kept announcing extensions, but there ultimately wasn't enough interest.

Whatever happened, I know it was a real surprise and one of the reasons WICKED initially played it so safe when announcing their roll out/touring schedule. There was legitimate concern, that like the PRODUCERS, WICKED wouldn't sell as well outside of NYC.

Of course those fears weren't warrented and WICKED is now the only show to come close to achieving PHANTOM OF THE OPERAS global hysteria.

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 1:52pm

How bad were the losses outside of NY?

Depending on how badly the losses were that they've been paying for, I find it unlikely they'll have enough to cover losses over a long period of time if/when such a thing begins to happen...

Will the London production be closing at a loss?

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 3:42pm

i would imagine so
hasn't been open for all that long, as far as i know...

[west end artist1]

Posted: 9/17/06 at 10:14pm

The London production will close in jan/feb next year and kick off a national tour at the manchester palace theatre.
The london home of the producers has already been booked out to another show and its ticket sales are quite low at the moment so they would be no point moving it to another theatre.

I thought the show was great fun ,i saw it in New york with Lane/Brodreck and in london with Lane and Evans but i don't think it lived up tp the hype.

I think it's ready to leave London and New York

[winston89]

Posted: 9/18/06 at 5:45am

I saw this show twice. Once with Lane and Brodrick and a couple of years ago. I must say, that the second time I saw it I was not laughing at all. It felt that the material was written only for Lane and Brodrick and was not funny if anyone else tried to do it. I really think that this show is starting to get overrated and should close soon. The ticket sales are only doing fairly decent when there is a tourist rush in the city and when there isn't one it's doing very poor.