HONEYMOON IN VEGAS struggling on Broadway — Page 15

^ They don't deserve to play to empty houses. How would you feel if you were on that stage nightly and see that the show you are performing has practically no audience? Yes, they are paid nicely but come on!

---

"A friend of mine saw it Tuesday night and said the mezzanine looked as if it only had a little over 100 people and those few in the rear mezzanine moved down to front 5 rows."

Now that's interesting. I wonder how strict the ushers are about enforcing assigned seating if there are so many empty seats.

If the house is that empty then the ushers will sometimes be told to move people forward. It's called dressing the house and is done because it's often better for the actors to have a small audience concentrated into one area rather than scattered throughout. Audience reactions can sometime be contagious (like yawning), so you're more likely to get that smaller audience to be more engaged with the show if they are sitting in one area. If you are sitting in a row all by yourself it becomes even easier to check out, get bored, get restless, etc, than you will if you have more people around you.

Broadway61004, that's really insulting. Most theater actors are in it because they have a passion and calling for it, not to make money. If that was their pursuit, they'd be on Wall Street or in real estate or in Hollywood. Their salaries don't make up for the fact that they are heartbroken that their show isn't catching on. Cashing the check is not the most important part of the process.

That's so funny. It reminds me of an hilarious interview where Geraldine Page said she HATED A Chorus Line because the message was, "We love it! Don't pay us!".

---

So what she was saying was that it is unrealistic and devalues the work of the artist. Cassie… "Don't pay us, we love it!"

---

WIlmington that is true and wrong. We all want to get paid. And we all want to make a steady paycheck. I'm sure they're all happy to be doing the show, but if they were all offered Wicked they'd jump ship knowing they could at least play out their contracts.

The same way the New York Times review from Brantley was going to give them an increase in business?

Though I don't think Honeymoon will catch on, I think the idea is that once people are not off-put by wandering around the city in snow, they'll be more willing to see broadway shows in general. Except all of the shows I assume will increase in ticket sales (same goes for museums, sports events, etc) and Honeymoon will still be at the bottom of the list.

Updated On: 2/26/15 at 01:17 AM

Phillypinto, please sit down with a calculator and try to understand how preposterous what you are suggesting is. Figure out what it would take to break even and then what it would take to pay back the priority loans so that they can pay one penny to the investors. Make a list of all the shows opening in the spring and calculate what percentage of all April visitors to the city it would take to make Honeymoon solvent by the 4th of july. On the back side of the sheet, plot out a marketing plan to differentiate this show no one has ever show the slightest interest in -even over Christmas-from the competition. In order words, get yourself tethered to reality instead of defending people that every single person in the business (including many who are involved in Honeymoon) think are insane. If you will do all of this, you will see that you have hitched your wagon to the wrong horse, and staying in your wagon makes about as much sense as following that horse over Niagra Falls. Your enthusiasm for the show is admirable , but we have all had shows we wished had succeeded but didn't. And when the numbers don't add up, we don't act crazy like the people keeping this and On the Town open. When you say things like what you said, you jump from being naive to nuts. Why would you want to do that?

"When it was 30 and snowing, I had absolutely no interest whatsoever in seeing it. But now that the weather is warmer, it all of a sudden feels... right."

idk about you, but i sure as hell wouldn't go into the city when its snowing and freezing

---

I lived in Manhattan for 24 years. If anything, people enjoy going more when it's cold because you fight cabin fever. Have to get out. I had friends who felt the same way: stop off at the TKTS booth on blustery night at 7:25. In you go to a show you might not otherwise bother with. The spring/summer tourists want to see the same 5 shows, and generally are not talked into much of anything. Branding is B'way, and it's one reason why a "Jersey Boys," "Mama Mia" and now "Beautiful" can do so well. The Branson effect works.

But here's the only nod to strategy I can give these deep-pocketed producers. If this show can stick around until the title itself "sounds like" a B'way (hit) brand, and though they may speak of it differently, it's the same syndrome, the show has a shot as a slight uptick by summer. No one in town the last six months will suddenly take interest, that much is probably true. But if people who can't get into "Beautiful" won't be lured back to "Les Miz" or a third "Wicked Lion," they might try it. Or that other show we argue about, the desperately unneeded "Gigi," already competing with "On the Town" "American in Paris" for those take-me-back-to-the-50's-please dollars. Still, what a horror of a financial journey to get to that point, the last week of June.

---

Updated On: 2/26/15 at 06:46 AM

Hey Sweets, I like your positive attitiude. You should be more than excited to see this show. It is really a true American Broadway Musical Comedy. There are so many other shows out there which I consider an American Horror Story but this one makes you feel alive and You will be Wowed, and when intermission comes make sure your in your seat on time cause the beginning of the second act is a trip. Wheather or not the show lasts nobody knows for sure but you will be able to know that you saw a quality show that you will never forget. PS get the CD after the show its awesome