This is all reminiscent of the opposite syndrome: when Glenn took her vacation from "Sunset..." the first time around, and Karen Mason went on, the production tried to pretend it was the same show, with or without Glenn, truly the opposite of the branding here of Midler-as-Dolly-as-Event. Does everyone recall how Close herself -- on her return to the Minskoff -- had to issue a statement to the press, reminding everyone of her box office vs. Karen Mason's? It was unprecedented, but it's fascinating in counterpoint to this very different analysis of star vs. replacement.
From the NY Times, April 5, 1995:
A Show Biz Effort To Make a Molehill Out of a Mountain
It was nearly silent on "Sunset Boulevard" yesterday.
The day after her enraged threat to leave the hit musical was splashed all over the tabloids, Glenn Close, the show's star, and Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber, its creator, were still smoothing things over by press release.
Though neither Ms. Close nor Sir Andrew returned requests for comment, Sir Andrew's public relations firm issued -- and then yesterday curiously modified -- a joint statement that "expressed mutual dismay" that Ms. Close's "very private communication" had been obtained by theater and gossip columnists.
"Andrew and Glenn have talked, remain the best of friends, and will of course continue their working relationship long into the future," the statement continued.
It further quoted Ms. Close as saying, "Like any close family, and any group of people who care deeply about what they do, there are bound to be differences of opinion and mutual hurt feelings from time to time."
Those were a far cry from the sentiments Ms. Close expressed late last week in a two-page, single-spaced letter addressed to Sir Andrew.
In that letter, which followed the disclosure that Sir Andrew's production company, the Really Useful Group, had exaggerated attendance figures during Ms. Close's vacation last month, the star said she was "furious and insulted" and that "if I could leave 'Sunset' tomorrow, I would."
"If I could leave it in May, when my contract says I can, believe me, I would," her letter went on. "At this point, what is making me stay is my sense of obligation to all the people who are holding tickets until July 2."
"I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that my performance turned 'Sunset Boulevard' around," she continued. "I made it a hit."
The letter described her feelings on learning that Edgar Dobie, Really Useful's chief of North American operations, had told Variety that "Sunset" sold $724,780 worth of tickets during the two weeks Ms. Close was replaced by her understudy, Karen Mason, when in reality the show had sold only $569,720 worth: a drop of $222,876 from Ms. Close's last week in the show.
"A representative of your company went out of their way and lied to try to make the public believe that my contribution to this show is nothing, that Karen's performance is equal to mine, and that my absence had absolutely no effect whatsoever on all the thousands of dollars that supposedly kept pouring into the box office," Ms. Close's letter continued. "It sickens me to be treated with such disregard."
Late Monday -- after Ms. Close and Sir Andrew spoke on the telephone for the first time about the blowup -- the joint statement was issued, expressing dismay that "a very private communication between them found its way into public hands, especially since the matter has since been completely resolved between them."
A modification to the statement yesterday blamed the time difference between New York and London for the fact that no one could have resolved all this quietly, over the phone.
In a statement released to the British press, Sir Andrew added: "It is unfortunate that the time difference between the United States and London meant that our now resolved misunderstandings had to be communicated by letter."
London is only five hours ahead of New York, and Sir Andrew has certainly been known to call reporters unexpectedly from his home telephone.
A spokesman for Sir Andrew, asked why a telephone conversation could not have been arranged earlier so that some of the public bitterness could have been avoided, said he could not comment beyond the letter.
Ms. Close did not return a telephone message left backstage for her, and two of her press representatives would not go beyond quoting the letters.
The handling of this feud might be attributed simply to bad spin control, except that this kind of thing keeps happening to "Sunset Boulevard." Nearly every actress to touch the role of Norma Desmond, the self-obsessed silent-movie queen, ends up in a public dispute with Sir Andrew, who has paid both Patti Lupone and Faye Dunaway hundreds of thousands of dollars in out-of-court settlements to keep them out of the musical.
"It can't hurt the show," Arthur Cantor, a long-time Broadway producer, said yesterday. "The next thing is for Betty Buckley to get enraged with him."
Ms. Buckley is currently in the London production and is scheduled to take over for Ms. Close when she leaves the show, presumably on July 2.
Sir Andrew is widely known as a man with a temper, and he has a history of disputes that explode publicly, helping to raise the show's profile. When he dismissed Ms. Dunaway a few days before she was to replace Ms. Close in the Los Angeles production of "Sunset," he said she couldn't sing well enough to do the show; she responded with suits for defamation and breach of contract that he later settled for an undisclosed amount. In 1993 he denied for weeks rumors that he would jettison Ms. Lupone, who had opened the show in London, from the Broadway production. In the end he did just that, settling with her for amounts reported at over $1 million.
Throughout both those battles, Ms. Close remained silent, reportedly reluctant to give any hint that she enjoyed benefiting from another actress's misfortune.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
Updated On: 7/9/17 at 07:30 AM
