Hate against "Replacing"
Hate against "Replacing"
#1Hate against "Replacing"
Posted: 5/22/13 at 9:00pm
Something I have always been a little curious about is why there is such hate against people being a replacement in a show.. it seems that once someone else is OBC, the character loses dignity and it seems to be a downgrade for people to take over.
My biggest example is Patti Lupone. I don't think any of us would ever even imagine Patti replacing in a show, especially now. However, there are so many already-created roles that we all know she could dominate if she played. One example of a role I think she would BLOW away is Madame Morrible. (now I am saying NOTHING about the quality of the show, I know most on here hate it, but I don't think any of us can deny that Patti would rock the living **** out of it) If it was ever announced that she was taking this role, or any other role like this on Broadway, she would be "downgrading herself", like she was above it. Why is this?
To me, if you are at a point in your career where you are successful, you should be doing roles that you enjoy! If an actor truly thought they would enjoy doing a role, and would be good at it, why should they not take it? I understand that creating the role and working with the director and creative staff is an incredible experience, but I guess I just want to understand why replacing in a show is deemed as being less.
Im also sorry how poorly this is written, I couldn't think of any way to bring up this topic without someone getting upset or not understanding my intention of it... so, it is what it is.
Updated On: 5/22/13 at 09:00 PM
#2Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 9:15pmI've never understood this either. I've seen some brilliant replacements in my time, some that have even outshined their predecessors. There does seem to be a weird stigma about replacements, which I think is extremely odd. If the role is good, the show is good, and the creative team is good, then why not? There's no shame in being the 2,000th Roxie Hart, Billy Flynn, or Velma Kelly. It's a great show with great roles.
#2Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 9:19pm
If you were Mick Jagger, would you want to cover a Billy Joel song?
ETA: A show like Wicked is already set. A new performer can come in and make the character his or her own in context with a character already defined in the play by somebody else. If Wicked were closed for 8 years and a reimagined revival was to be put into place Iam sure someone like Patti Lapone would consider it and probably do very well in redifining the character.
Those Blocked: SueStorm. N2N Nate. Good riddence to stupid! Rad-Z, shill begone!
Updated On: 5/22/13 at 09:19 PM
shobizpro
Chorus Member Joined: 5/1/13
#3Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 9:24pm
"If you were Mick Jagger, would you want to cover a Billy Joel song?"
OTOH, Ronnie Wood replaced Brian Jones/Mick Taylor and has kicked ass ever since.
I agree, the stigma attached to replacements is bull****.
"A new performer can come in and make the character his or her own in context with a character already defined in the play by somebody else."
In my experience, the writers and the directors "define" the characters, not the original actors. Maybe when you get to a point in your career when people write for you, it's different, but I've never experienced that.
Updated On: 5/22/13 at 09:24 PM
snarkmachine
Understudy Joined: 4/13/13
#4Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 9:59pmBeing involved in the creative process and getting to create a character is a big deal for a lot of actors. When you're coming in as a replacement you're more or less just copying what the original did.
wicked4l
Broadway Star Joined: 5/19/06
#5Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:00pmOther than stunt casting, I can't stand when people downgrade an actor for being replacements in shows. I know whenever new joins Wicked, there are posters are on here bashing them for being the 10th/11th replacement. As if being the leading role in one of the biggest shows on Broadway is awful. Also that it's soooooo easy to just originate a role. That's the business, nothing simple about it. and I just used Wicked as an example because I feel it gets the most hate on this topic.
Broadway Star Joined: 12/31/69
#6Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:01pmOh Please. Wicked wouldn't look twice at a has-been like Patti.
#7Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:06pm
Funny that...I wouldn't look twice at an offer to see Wicked again.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#8Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:09pmProbably couldn't get a ticket- the show has been consistently selling out for 9 1/2 years. So it's good you refer Patti. You can ALWAYS get a ticket to one of her shows!
#9Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:19pm
Funny thing...saw Wicked twice (discounted first and comped the second...both OBC). And whenever I want to see Patti at 54 Below, I have to pay full price.
Such is life...
#10Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:20pm
When a replacement is put into an already-running show, they get 2 weeks of rehearsals with the dance captains, stage managers, and understudies. They will not normally get to work with the regular cast until they have a put-in rehearsal (a full show run with only the new person in costume)- and unless it's for a major role, the put-in leads will probably be understudies as well.
I have seen incredibly talented actors beaten down by stage managers/resident directors who want them to copy the original's exact performance- obviously, 'names' will have a bit more leeway, but for most there isn't much chance to put your own mark on a role. The SM & dance captain's jobs are to maintain the show as it was when it opened- and not to change things. That is why many actors are leery of replacing.
"What- and quit show business?" - the guy shoveling elephant shit at the circus.
#11Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 10:59pm
Has LuPone ever stated she had no interest in replacing? I'm asking seriously...I honestly don't remember her ever saying one way or the other, but for whatever reason, people seem to assume she'd never replace.
I don't think she would ever play Madame Morrible because its a tiny role in a big musical with no song for her to sing. She clearly doesn't mind not playing the "lead"...see Women on the Verge, but I'm assuming it's safe to say she would want a solo or two.
I think if someone she respected and admired (like Sondheim, for example) called her up and asked her to be a replacement, she'd consider it.
dramamama611
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/4/07
#12Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 11:11pm
It also has a lot to do with status. Many actors themselves are the ones that draw the line in the sand: I want to create roles. They feel they have paid their dues, and can afford to hold out.
Are there many actors just happy to be replacements? Sure, and they do.
Personally, I could care less. I just want a great performance -- whether I am seeing the OBC or the replacements 3 years later.
HOWEVER, there is little leeway for massive changes within a production for replacements. There are expectations....as well as how well it fits in with: the rest of the cast, the intent of the director (they aren't going to change what they created) and the audience's perception.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#13Hate against
Posted: 5/22/13 at 11:15pmI get into this argument with friends all the time. I am a fan of Ashley Spencer but a few of my friends do not care for her. They say that she is unsuccessful because she has not originated many roles like Laura Osnes has. Well I think that is okay because she at least is able to get jobs and people want to hire her. I see nothing wrong with her career choices so far even though she has been mostly replacements.
#14Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 12:00am
Didn't Patti LuPone REPLACE Zoe Caldwell in Master Class back 1996?
#15Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 12:28am
I don't remember a lot of hate for Bernadette Peters and Elaine Stritch as replacements in A Little Night Music nor anyone regarding them as a downgrade.
And personally, I regarded Butty Buckley in Sunset Boulevard as an upgrade and the peak of the production.
Would Patti make a great Madame Morrible. Probably. But the problem is, it's just not a great role. As a casting director, I wouldn't want to offer her the role.
Didn't Patti LuPone REPLACE Zoe Caldwell in Master Class back 1996?
She did and she was perfection. I saw her twice during her run.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
#16Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 12:30am
Yes, Pattil did replace Zoe Caldwell, and if I remember correctly she wanted to be the replacement for the Night Music revival, but Bernadette got it instead. Didn't she say in an interview that she "called Trevor" but he never called back? Or was that in reference to when the revival was getting off the ground, before Zeta-Jones was cast?
For arts and culture commentary, along with other assorted opinions, visit WEEPING ON WHEELS at http://weepingonwheels.tumblr.com/
Updated On: 5/23/13 at 12:30 AM
AwesomeDanny
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/30/09
#17Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 12:35amReplacements aren't eligible for awards. I'm sure that has a huge impact on the decisions of performers who are fortunate enough to be more selective about their roles.
Visceral_Fella
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/18/12
#18Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 12:37am
I feel like I remember something about Sierra Boggess turning down Glinda a few times.
The thing about Wicked is that a lot of those actors end up doing it several times, and for whatever reason, I don't see them finding much work outside of Wicked as frequently as leads from other shows do.
broadwaybabe1234
Stand-by Joined: 5/3/09
Visceral_Fella
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/18/12
#20Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 1:42am
Yes, I am aware.
I think it can be reasonably inferred that she has a special relationship with that show. The few times that Sierra has replaced have had seemingly more meaning than going into Wicked just because.
AEA AGMA SM
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/13/09
#21Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 7:27amSierra also originated the role in the Vegas production, which probably also influences her decision to return to it now and then.
#22Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 7:53amWho would be some fabulously talented replacements for Madame Morrible? Mary Testa?
"Noel [Coward] and I were in Paris once. Adjoining rooms, of course. One night, I felt mischievous, so I knocked on Noel's door, and he asked, 'Who is it?' I lowered my voice and said 'Hotel detective. Have you got a gentleman in your room?' He answered, 'Just a minute, I'll ask him.'" (Beatrice Lillie)
#23Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 9:33amI also feel like it's worth mentioning that someone like Patti could make the same if not more doing her concerts than she might doing a role the size of Madame Morrible. So if it's not a great part (regardless of size), she might not think it's even worth it.
When I see the phrase "the ____ estate", I imagine a vast mansion in the country full of monocled men and high-collared women receiving letters about productions across the country and doing spit-takes at whatever they contain.
-Kad
#24Hate against
Posted: 5/23/13 at 9:41am
Y'all got two different conversations going on here. When a star replaces someone in a show, it's an entirely different thing than when an unknown goes in as a replacement.
The star generally gets to reinterpret the role and make it their own; the unknown is more or less asked to mostly duplicate the performance of their predecessor (as much as they can). It's a well-paying job, but much harder to demonstrate your unique talents (if you have any).
If you want to be a star, you need to originate a role somewhere (stage, film, tv); but if you're content to be a lesser-known but working actor, it's a different ballgame.
Videos