HONEYMOON IN VEGAS struggling on Broadway — Page 9

Honestly, how often are abbreviations used for Broadway shows outside of Broadway discussion websites or on character-limited social media? It's not like the posters for this are saying "HiV: on Broadway!" I would never have even thought of that until some others brought it up here.

---

The 90s How to Succeed revival used H2$, didn't it? Regardless, abbreviations are informal and social media-friendly. Except when they're HiV.

---

Just to point out that the H2$ was used in the artwork for the 95 revival, but as message boards were virtually non-existant and social media wasn't even dreamed up yet it was not meant to be used as a true abbreviation for the show.

^

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.php?thread=1079718&mobile=on

---

>>>>For people who have seen this show what is really wrong with it
I loved it. Rob McClure is excellent. It was thoroughly entertaining.

---

Rob is great. But I just don't think this is the right cast for the show. O'Malley's voice is all wrong for the part. You can hear it on the recording. Her acting is too stiff. I didn't get why they were fighting over her. Danza is a bore. McClure is a highlight, but doesn't have a singing voice I want to hear all the time. And the design is bad. The actual script/music I think is pretty good. I was engaged in the story at least.

There doesn't seem to be room on Broadway anymore for warm and fuzzy but sub-classic musicals. Would Bells are Ringing or Pajama Game have made it on this Broadway? How about the first run of On the Town? Apparently not.

I wonder if the jukebox musicals have squeezed out the old second tier musicals. These new musicals come pre-equipped with songs the audience cannot only hum, but can actually sing. The audience is almost sure to leave them with a good feeling, even if what they attended was more revue than theater.

Or maybe it's just the cost of dinner and a Broadway show. For the money, the theatergoer doesn't want to risk going to a show that he or she won't like, or at least a show that everyone is talking about even if many don't like it. Adjusting for inflation, are Broadway shows more expensive now than in the 60s?

I kind of wish that they would reserve Broadway theaters for theater and leave the revues to Radio City or similar.

Once, Newsies, and Aladdin have all succeeded, but they have all come with songs that the audience knows or may know beforehand as OlBlueEyes said.And it seems to be very true. There are only 7 musicals currently on Broadway that are completely original scores. Six of them are based on a book or movie. Only the Book of Mormon is completely original (book and score). But of course BoM has the names of Trey Parer and Matt Stone attached.

Not disagreeing with Honeymoon just being bad and not what people are looking for. But more Broadway shows are from pre existing scores or revivals.

There are in fact 12 musicals with original music, of which five are revivals. There are three juke box musicals and 2 Disney musicals. Not being an original story has never been a criteria: most of the masterworks of musical theatre are based on pre-existing stories. My problem with this sort of quantitative analysis is that it essentially ignores the problem, which is that a lot of the new original work that makes it to Broadway is crap-unimaginative, lazy exploitation. And it also glosses over the reason we see so much based on familiar music: the music being written in new original musicals does not resonate with the public. Honeymoon is a perfect example of this: although there are of course people here who like the music, it falls flat in terms of attracting attention beyond the limited circle of musical theatre fans who follow Jason Robert Brown.

I find it inadvisable to use Honeymoon as a representative of all musical comedies, or all musicals with original scores, or all of anything.

Honeymoon is only a representative of (specifically) musicals featuring clumsy books written by old screenwriters with no musical theatre writing experience, and third-tier scores with busy-yet-generic music and unfunny/bland lyrics.

If we got rid of sexism and misogyny altogether, there would be no theatre.

Imagine a potically correct "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf." a politically correct
Taming of the Shrew. Hell let's rewrite Arthur Millers "All My Sons" so not to offend
manufacturers.

I don't look forward to a theatre where we have to be so careful not to offend anyone. We are so quick to label things as "sexist" and "misogynist". By this standard, all of Shakespeare's plays would have bombed. I remember an awful revival of How to Succeed with Matthew Broderick where they were so worried about the political correctness of dumb blondes that Hedy LaRue
was made smart and it was so dull.

Bring back the dumb blondes!

Nederlander Theatre, other than Newsies (which had the Disney Machine behind it), Rent (which had all that off Broadway hooplah not to mention the death of it's composer) and The Lena Horne Solo show, has been a
bad house for musicals in terms of attendance.

As for Newsies and Alladin being new upbeat musicals, they well may be but they have the Disney Machine behind it.

Next you are going to tell me that Blanche DuBois denigrates woman and we have to clean her up. Give this sexist labeling a rest.

"How so? It's just one block south of 42nd. I never considered it out of the way in any regard. "

Agreed! I've never understood this. I understand the marque is not visible but that is a small thing. The right show will bring a crowd anywhere.

Audra I think you hit the nail on the head. The marketing should have started prior to the first preview... especially since there were 8 weeks of it. They waited until the opening. And yes there is no billboard in Times Square.

Some big producing mistakes in my opinion.