How long has this been going on . . . The Last 14 Years of the Musical

So I am reading my new favorite book, Broadway Musicals: The 101 Greatest Shows of All Time and in the back they list the shows by year and categorized by decades. And I drooped my head when I came to see the number of musicals included from the last 14 years. Three. Three musicals. That is 2.9% of the 101 greatest shows according to the authors. And what is more, I completely agree with them! Also, NONE of the shows of the last 14 years that were featured were financial blockbusters, which says something about the taste of musical theatre fans.

Broadway used to be a place where artistry was more important than industry. A hit was a hit because it had a wonderful book and score and performances and now hits are hits because they sport the songs of ABBA. Plus producers are now basically CPAs who don't give two craps about the quality of a show as long as it is putting dough into their pockets. Shows don't go to Philly, Boston, or Baltimo' anymore, but instead open cold or go to regional theatres where the audiences and critics really tell them nothing new about the show. Plus producers and directors are so focused on demographic that they're really reluctant to go with their gut and we get these saturated messes like Mamma Mia! and sentimental mish-mashes like Les Mis. Where is the fire? The artistry? The David Merricks?? The Hal Princes???? The Michael Bennetts????

Ticket prices are about $25-$30 too high and theatre is gradually becoming less and less accessable and soon only the ery wealthy will be able to afford tickets to a Broadway show. And it is sad that when you get tickets from a discount place like TKTS the deal is something like $25. Now, no student can really afford to do that a lot. Ticket prices should make Broadway available for everyone and I do not mean that the top price should be really low, but the cheap seats should be a lot cheaper so that real people could afford the see Broadway shows with some frequency.

And the worst part about all this . . . the Broadway I treasured and studied and loved as a kid disappeared before I was ever born. And it's really only been the last 14 years. Grand Hotel and Dreamgirls and La Cage aux Folles and Sunday in the Park with George are all great musicals.

And then something died. Broadway went somewhere like most fields of American culture that suddenly made it unoriginal. Something has gone stale and something is not the same. Will we ever be able to regain some of that glory, even a little, maybe. But right now I say this because we are really in an armpit of a musical season. And junk like All Shook Up and Good Vibrations are NOT musicals!!! I am talking about an amalgam of original music and lyrics and story. And the only new musical of the entire fall was Brooklyn, which did musical theatre more of a disservice than a favor.

What happened? Disney happened. Rock operas happened. Cats happened. And here we are, looking into a blackhole. I just can't believe it and still there is no place on earth I would rather be than in a Broadway theater as the lights dim, but there is something lost. Something we just have to find again. I can only hope that we will.

While I 100% agree with you, I'm really not even sure if there is a solution to your problem posted. I've thought about this before: it's basically a downward spiral! Can someone give me an explanation of hope?

Is it fair to make a comparison that how Chicago the movie revived musical that maybe in the near future watching an original and creative movie musical could be translated to stage with success? Is this the future?

well, at least we have that coffee table book to remember it all by! sure hope my copy arrives from amazon before xmas ...

---

Interesting take. Can't wait to get the book for Xmas

---

I completely agree with everything said above except for something

I think that in some ways Broadway is making a comeback, the shows are definetly exactly "good" but they are so disgustingly commercial souped up hits that more people are going like I have lots of friends who 5 years ago wouldnt see a show but now they are gradually going, I hope that with this comeback broadway may come back and have a new golden age, as in bway gets more popular, the commercial shows bring popularity and then people start listening to more bway music, which promotes more um, good shows, and then perhaps we can have a new golden age, does that make any sense?

---

I agree that the theater is almost restricitve when each ticket costs so much. However, I don't understand how it could be helped. WHose fault is it? unions? producers? labor costs? taxes? How could this all work together to lower the prices and make the theater as acdcessible as it once was and lure locals back to the hteaters on a regular basis?

---

I think we can blame some of the mega-Broadway hits for the raising of the cost of tickets to the musicals, especially those of the late eighties and nineties.
Just because their shows were successful, I believe they saw it as their right to increase the prices. And they were within their rights...but then the next show set this as the benchmark for their show, and when it was successful, the producers saw it as their right to increase the prices...
A vicious circle it is...
Didn't a ticket to Oklahoma! cost $1?

AND I WOULD GIVE ANYTHING TO SEE THAT PRODUCTION...I'D PAY $1000 FOR A TICKET TO THAT...
I wouldn't to anything that is available now...not even to the shows I adore...
They aren't in the same calibre, yet the cost so much more.

I think you are very biased when you express your opinion. It is not based on fact and reason, but personal feelings. Because of this, it hurts your opinion deeply. You did not realize it.

I hate you because you said Les Miz a "sentimental mish-mashes". It is not true. When you sang high about the glorious "A chorus line" or "sweeney todd" and despise the British musical, your opinion is so unfair that it is not believable.

Do you read Frank Rich? I read him a lot. I knew he was hated by a lot of ppl and I don't think I would like him personally either. But I believe his opinion. I read a lot of his reviews, most of them I never watched. But I believe him because I think he is a fair person, a reasonable person in dealing with theatre.

Frank Rich love and is always proud of American musical. I believe he is one of the Sondheim fan and his review about the historical A chorus line performance is the most touching, beautiful review I ever read. Yet he admit that British sometimes beat American in his own game. He did not like Webber but he admit the great scene design of Cats and Phantom. He praized highly about Les Miz, its infinitive humanity theme, its highly sophisticated technology yet down-to-earth scene design, its powerful beautiful music, its touching smart lyrics. That is called fair. When you love something, you still admit its disadvantage. When you hate something, you still admit its advantage.

When you only praize the glorious old time and despise anything else. That is not fair. When you only admit the goodness of American musical and ignore all the efforts of other nation, that is biased.

Is musical the exclusive American art? What if British talked only about Gilbert& Sullivan and Shakespear? Please,if talked about history glory, British got a lot to say. What makes you feel about?

gherbert, this is a common argument, but an essentially incorrect one.

Broadway is currently in a better financial state than it ever has been. People can bemoan the Disney Corporation all they want, but it's gotten butts in the seats. I don't particularly care for any of the shows they have produced, but I think that the argument that they are bringing new audiences to the theatre far outweighs my artistic quibbles with AIDA.

Musical theatre has long been the fabulous invalid. But let's look at the facts: Very few of the major musicals that we historically consider brilliant were big, fat hits at their time. GYPSY wasn't. WEST SIDE STORY wasn't.

I disgree with your statement that "Broadway used to be a place where artistry was more important than industry." It's a business, first and foremost. It always has been. Granted, a business that has been the sprouting ground for some truly terrific art. But art and commerce are strange bedfellows. And Broadway has always been about the money. OH, CALCUTTA far outgrossed FOLLIES, even though they opened around the same time. No one could argue that OH, CALCUTTA is a better show than FOLLIES, and yet there you have it.

This isn't a new development. Broadway has always been this way. However, Broadway is still producing some great artistic achievements. Look at a few of the offerings from last season: CAROLINE, OR CHANGE, WICKED, and AVENUE Q. All terrific musicals, and artistically speaking, a much better season than, for instance, 1985/86, when QUILTERS, LEADER OF THE PACK and BIG RIVER were the top Tony contenders.

I agree, veuve. That still doesn't change the problem of Broadway pricing itself out of its market. This is the age where the review makes or breaks the Broadway musical. If something is "experimental" or really unique in its format or storyline and it is REMOTELY reviewed negatively, the audiences will simply not come.

---

I think he draw a doomed pic of broadway simply because a lot of shows don't meet his personal taste. Especially when he praised American musical so high while despise Les Miz so low. Les Miz can compete with any great American musical, period. The only problem for our friend is that it did not come from U.S.

Don't agree with me? Then what is the difference between A chorus line and Les Miz on both the success of commercial and artistic point? If you praise one and despise one, I call it unfair.

You cannot compare A Chorus Line and Les Mis. A chorus Line was a cultural EVENT and a catalyst for the musical theatre. We would have never had Les Mis if we had not had A Chorus Line before it. Show some goddamn respect for its predecessors. I think Les Mis is a great musical. Yes, great. I love it. But it CANNOT be compared to A Chorus Line. No way, no how. This has nothing to do with British vs. American musicals. It has to do with history. One changed Broadway forever. The other was an incredible influence on an entire generation of theatre-goers. Both very important. But one decidedly more important than the other.

---