HONEYMOON IN VEGAS struggling on Broadway — Page 10

Agreed. I don't think they're selling a bad product. I think it's a fine show. It's not great. It's not imaginative, and it's not the best production the show will have, but it's worth a listen/watch. I think it just has no presence. I still don't get why they aren't on the View or Today Show singing the title song.

I'd argue too against the claim that 41st Street gets no foot traffic. It's true that the Nederlander had a huge problem in the 70s, 80s and part of the 90s, when it was surrounded by porn stores, SRO hotels, 42nd Street was a war zone and it was the only Broadway theatre below 44th Street. At that time, it was a theatre of last resort, the place you went if you could get no other better booking.

Now that it shares the block with The New York Times and the Times Center, a New York Sports Club, a Wolfgang Puck restaurant, the Hilton Times Square, and half of the audience of Aladdin emptying out onto 41st Street and the revitalized Times Square subway hub, it's nowhere near as isolated as it once was. The street is swarming too at 5:00 PM every night with people making their way to the Port Authority. It has more foot traffic than the streets with theatres in the upper 40s and lower 50s, or any of the east of Broadway theatres.

That theatre now has more people passing it than at any point in its recent history. So, to blame Honeymoon's struggles on the Nederlander seems misguided to me.

---

Updated On: 2/7/15 at 01:07 PM

Misogynistic- Seriously?
It's entertainment, at least that's why I go.
Great songs, great music, a few laughs- I'm good.
& what a wonderful orchestra.
Like goldenboy said >>>If you haven't gone I urge you to go because this is one darn shame that its not selling.

---

He also seems to think that the characters in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf and Streetcar are presented as role models.

Homogenize the characters into what? NO one has advocated getting rid of archetype or tropes. Or interesting chatacyees. It's about realizing, "hey, maybe we should stop relying on tropes that belittle numerous groups of people, espouse outdated and bad ideas, and are somehow the prevailing way of depicting people."

Hell, you can even ENJOY Honeymoon or whatever else, however problematic people may find the material. But your enjoyment of something doesn't diminish or eliminate the problematic elements.

"This is the way it's been done for so long and I like it that way," ain't a good reason to keep doing something. Neither is, "well it doesn't bother me so it shouldn't bother you." There's a ****ty stenotype for you: the person who finds it inconvenient to acknowledge someone's offense as being legitimate. Urksome indeed.

---

Updated On: 2/8/15 at 11:44 PM

If the offenses were legitimate--I would be right behind you. Finding Honeymoon in Vegas racist or sexist is ridiculous. Honeymoon is great fun and a great musical.
Hope it finds its audience.

There's an enormous difference (that yet seems to be invisible to some) between using inflammatory humor in an intelligent (ironic) way, and using it in a lowbrow, unironic and thoughtless way.

To me, Mormon is an excellent example of the former, while Honeymoon typifies the latter.

Bitches be humorless, amirite

People who continue to find offense in humor deserve to have the term politically correct thrown at their feet.

---

I miss blackface too, LYLS3637.

---

Wow Pootie. You can't be serious.

Intent and context matter. When Ann Coulter made a "joke" and called Al Gore a "fag," that's malicious. Blackface in the early 20th Century was malicious, but really wasn't when All in the Family did it in 1975. The fact that you even brought it up during a discussion of this show in particular is making Voltaire roll over in his grave.

---

Updated On: 2/9/15 at 11:53 AM

^Agree with Kad.

Will add on to say that my comment that other people and I had commented in the other thread on not liking the show because of its egregious misogyny was in response to the comments here to the effect of not being able to imagine any possible reason why people were not flocking to this show. The information was offered as an insight in response to the comments of not being able to imagine why others don't like the show. It was then met with a command from the same person who couldn't understand why others don't like the show to stop talking about the reasons why. It all comes across very much like trying to have a conversation with a child who asks a question and then jams their fingers in their ears and sings 'la la la i'm not listening' while someone is answering their question.

There is also a big distinction to be made between shows that have sexist characters and lines and are set in a different time when sexist practices were more common, but that don't have a sexist underlying message, vs. a show set in the present day that acts like bartering a person as chattel is completely normal and the chattel-person so bartered should of course go back to the barterer as if nothing egregious had just happened. Some people have no problem with that and can enjoy the putative 'entertainment' (although that too, as others have pointed out, was severely lacking). Others find it disgusting enough to prevent them from going back to see it again or from recommending it to their friends planning Broadway trips who ask for recommendations on which shows to see, and instead recommend the excellent shows that they have seen and suggesting skipping Honeymoon. Goldenboy, feel free to repeat your comment that you simply can't imagine why people don't like it if you find it difficult to imagine that others may have different opinions than your own. Your random commands issued to strangers to stop answering your questions will continue to be ignored.

Updated On: 2/9/15 at 12:28 PM

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
you sure know how to put someone to sleep.