HONEYMOON IN VEGAS struggling on Broadway- Page 2

[Fantod]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 12:05pm

Ah yes, the 1990's, when butter was churned and water had to pulled up from the ground with a pump. Both my mother and sister were burned at the stake for witchcraft.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 12:11pm

My thoughts and prayers are with you, Goody Fantod.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 12:28pm

The length of the preview period is just another scapegoat offered to avoid the truth that this is not a show people have any interest in. "Fun, old fashioned musical" may be something you like but it is a suicidal description if you are trying to sell tickets. Seeing Tony Danza tap dance is not something people think of when they are describing what interests them.

[philly03]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 12:39pm

I agree - Especially musicals have a tendency to stick anyone who may have once been a "celebrity" in star casting. Tony Danza would've been a big draw a decade ago coming off his own talk show, other TV projects, etc. This could've been cast with anyone and it would've had the same effect on the box office.

I'm actually curious about Vanessa Hudgens in Gigi on Broadway (will be seeing at the Kennedy Center soon) -- how "famous" is she post the High School musical phase?

[haterobics]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 12:50pm

I think a star can help a good show, but if they are the only thing propping it up, then it isn't going to play out well...

I enjoyed this show when I saw it, but it lacks that extra oomph that makes it a show you're telling everyone to see. But at the same time, I wouldn't dissuade anyone from seeing it, and would tell them they'd have a good time.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 1:38pm

I don't think ticket prices are a problem, people pay way more to see the big shows that have been running for years. I don't think a song about cancer is the reason it's failing either, although there is zero humor in that as far as Im concerned. It's good, not great and that's simply isn't enough to keep a show going these days.

[Kad]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 1:41pm

Could it be that it's based on a thoroughly forgettable film from over twenty years ago that made very little impression even when it was released? I mean, who now would list it as one of their favorite movies, let alone one screaming out for a musical adaptation?

Could it be that maybe people don't want to go to NYC and see a show about Vegas?

Maybe Tony Danza isn't actually a draw aside from a very limited audience?

I thought it was a musical that in its best moments was merely adequate- I wouldn't recommend it to friends or casual theatregoers who would be spending money on it.

[Hackasaurus_Rex]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 2:59pm

I agree with Kad. I can't comment on the quality of the show. I haven't seen it yet. But I do think a problem with ticket sales is the simple fact that the show is based on a brand nobody cares about. An original musical can create interest in a brand an audience is not aware of because a huge part of selling art to a crowd is generating a "sense of discovery" for the audience. The idea that you are one of the first to discover something is a huge incentive to go see a show. For adaptations or jukeboxes, the draw can be a sense of nostalgia that drives people to buy tickets. "I loved that movie" or "I love those songs." The producers of this show are sadly selling a resurrected product nobody was all that excited about the first time they were introduced to it as a film. The movie was not a huge success nor was it a cult hit (something that can cultivate interest like Hairspray did or even the upcoming American Psycho has the possibility of doing). HIV was just one of those forgettable movies that was nice enough when it came out but certainly nothing that would cause people to be excited about any kind of reinvention. That puts this musical behind the eight ball when it comes to selling it to the masses. The show may be amazing and I wish it all the success in the world but when the average person comes to town with one entertainment dollar to spend I think it is a really hard sell to get them to spend it on something they vaguely remember not caring about several years ago.... even if Brantley has endorsed it.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 3:09pm

the last several posts do a good job of summarizing the actual situation. There are precious few "stars" whose light shines bright enough to guarantee a box office success but there are a few. Had NPH been cast in this (would he have done it? No...) it would have sold out. Ditto Nathan Lane. But this show has nothing with which to sell itself absent something like that.

[newintown]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 5:29pm

Changing press horses midstream is exactly what will save this mediocrity.

[Princeton Returns]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 6:21pm

Although a more hard core theatre fan than the average tourist, I will technically be one in a couple of months and even I can't get interested in this show. There might have been a time when I would see everything but now I'd rather do something else in nyc than go to the theatre for the sake of it

* nobody in it I know of or I'd want to see
* the production shots make the show look cheap
* I don't know the film but 'vegas' brings to mind certain kitsch and tackyness
* the composer is not someone I'd associate with a fun upbeat show (much like alw with the upcoming school of rock)

I rarely listen to reviews, Hedwig gets raves and nothing appeals about that show

[Baileyboo]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 6:31pm

Sometimes its simply "when they dont want ya, they dont want ya".
Same went for Side Show. On The Town is trying to avoid that label.

[Bwaydide92]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 6:34pm

I sell tickets for broadway shows and not once have I ever been asked about Honeymoon in Vegas. I've suggested it to a few customers and they have a deadpan look whenever I bring it up. I just don't think people know it even exist really. Nobody wants to see it because no one knows about it.

And to the poster that says Broadway just appeals to teens and young people who like shows like Wicked, Spring Awakening, and Book of Mormon. Sorry but you're wrong. I mostly sell tickets to adults, they usually don't have kids. They still ask about shows like Lion King, Wicked, and Aladdin. Tourists want to see big spectacles. It's sad, but it's the truth. I wish more people were interested in shows like Disgraced and Curious Incident, but that's no the reality.

[Fantod]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 6:37pm

Curious Incident is selling incredibly well.

And I still have no idea why the producers went ahead with this musical. It's a B-level score written by a B-level composer based on a B-level movie. Who's surprised nobody wants to see it?

[haterobics]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 7:29pm

Well, it is a B-level movie, not sure about the rest... I doubt anyone is avoiding the show based on JRB. After Bridges, I actually bought my ticket to this because of him... if anything, I think JRB would sell tickets, but to a small group. He's certainly not deciding factor re: the fate of the show.

[philly03]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 7:42pm

Jason Robert Brown has never sold tickets... Bridges & "13" are his only shows to play "over" 100 performances, out of 4 Broadway openings (you can add "Songs" and "Last 5 Years," which ran only about 2 months I believe originally (Honeymoon is #5; not counting this year's You Can Take It With You). Bridges ran 100 and I think 13 ran like 102 perfs.

I have no idea how many records he sells, but his base in NY is clearly small and has barely made an imprint on the international scale of musical theatre.

[haterobics]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 7:53pm

The commercial they run, and the one on the front of their website, makes no reference to JRB. So, they aren't trying to use him to sell the show...

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 7:58pm

"Jason Robert Brown has never sold tickets"

The Last Five Years was very successful at Second Stage Theater in 2013.

[JaglinSays]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 9:45pm

Apparently it will close on 2/15.

[After Eight]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 9:52pm

^"Apart from the measurable impact his work has had on contemporary writers."

More bad news.

[Robbie2]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 9:58pm

^ At this point, what can save the show from the misery is just closing. It has been running 3 months now including previews and still playing to pretty much a theater that is 1/2 full nightly and its 2for1 Broadway week! Changing press reps at this stage of the game will do nothing to bring in the tourist trade or find an audience since any interest in the show is not there!

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 10:36pm

Calling it HIV isn't helping.

[haterobics]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 10:53pm

Well, it is retro, they just can't seem to make it viral...

[ethan231h]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 10:57pm

I totally see why you are saying that it closes on the 15th but how do you know?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 1/31/15 at 11:13pm

Calling it HIV isn't helping

Ha! I wish we could go back to a time when a title was shortened to a word, not initials. Wasn't Carrie Bradshaw in this movie? I don't know cause I never saw it. Maybe she would do the show. Maybe she remembers being in the movie.