How to Succeed should be bowing to Radcliffe

I did not see Radcliff but I did enjoy Jonas' performance. Was not familiar with any previous version of the show so I think I can be about as unbiased as anyone attending this show for the first time. Great that Radcliff was able to generate sales! Really happy that he is able to break out of just being Harry Potter.

I haven't seen Jonas but from the preview clips I've seen and everything I've heard, he seems far better than Radcliffe. Radcliffe looked confused, nervous, and could hardly sing. Sort of sad that some people who really deserve the recognition/attention come up short, but that's the name of the game.

---

Strange that this conversation is focusing on Radcliffe and Jonas. If you actually look at the grosses, percent occupancy and average ticket price; except for holiday weeks of Thanksgiving and Christmas thru New Years, Darren Criss outdrew Radcliffe.

Even though Radcliffe outdrew and outsold what Jonas is doing, Criss consistently outdrew and outsold Radcliffe's run. Taking into account he "only" did it for 3 weeks, it remains to be seen if he could have sustained that. But if you compare his 3 weeks to any 3 weeks of Radcliffe (outside of the holiday weeks), his numbers were better.

And think of this, Criss did it after the show was up for about 9 months. So, his stint brought new life into a 9 month old production in January - 3 weeks after the holiday season when NO ONE has money and ticket sales drop (although I was there in NYC on vacation).

I am not denigrating either Radcliffe or Jonas, but Criss really delivered both on stage and in the box office. Where's the love for what Criss did and how the producers capitalized on someone hot - even if for a limited run?

Updated On: 3/7/12 at 06:21 PM

SFFrontRow, I don't think for a second that Darren Criss could sustain a run like Daniel Radcliffe can. Daniel Radcliffe is an international superstar. Yes, it WAS only 3 weeks. To even suggest that it is possible he could sustain those sales for much longer is funny to me. I can only imagine what would hav happened if Daniel Radcliffe was the 3-week replacement.

---

It's not a matter of talent. Anyone could do the role.

I saw H2$ back in November and Radcliffe and Larroquette both commanded the stage. Each had great rapport with the audience and with each other. And I enjoyed Daniel's dancing and singing. For being a newcomer to musical theatre, I thought he was quite impressive and deserved a Tony nomination. Many others have been less impressive and won the thing. Anyway, it's a bit unfair to compare the drawing power of an international movie star of 10 years who did the show for 8 or 9 months to a TV newcomer who was on stage for 3 weeks.

I've seen all three of the Finches, and each brought something different to the table.

I loved Daniel, I thought he really worked every angle of the role despite not being the best vocally, he acted and danced the sh*t out of the role. He certainly deserves more credit, because he took a great chance doing a musical and it worked out in his benefit, because he really came out of that proving he can do musical theater and do it pretty damn well.

Darren was a mix bag of things - he could dance it, his vocals weren't the strongest, and depending on which week you saw him - his acting was meh, fairly decent, to clownish. He had his good moments, but he began to really give his idiotic, ridiculous fans what they paid for - a clownish Darren-esque Finch that really didn't fit the role. He sold so well mostly due to his rabid fan base consisting of Glee and Starkid fans, who knew they had a limited window of time to see him, so they put up the cash and traveled to see him. I heard people in rush line mention that his street team even rented an apartment and split the cost so several people could see him over those three weeks.

I really enjoy Nick and what he brings to the role. I think he's vocally the best, and I really enjoy his acting choices, but I think Dan's acting was the best out of three for certain. If you could take half of Darren's energy, Dan's acting and dancing and mix with Nick's vocals - you'd have the perfect Finch.

I'd kill for Daniel to return, but the rumors are that Darren might return, but I certainly am not prepared to put up with his idiotic fan girls again, but I guess business is what matters. I've also sort of heard inklings that if Darren doesn't return, July 1st could mark the closing, but I haven't heard much beyond those inklings and rumors.

---

Updated On: 3/8/12 at 09:22 PM

I haven't seen any of these three actors so I won't critique their performances, but it seems to me that Radcliffe made the show possible with his clout, Criss jolted the boxoffice and Jonas is keeping it alive for the entire production staff.

What I admire about all three of them is that they even chose to do theater. Eight shows a week is like "taking the veil" as Merman said. It's hard work, and these would-be teen idols could have done easier, more lucrative work elsewhere. Instead, they chose this. And they showed up for performances where other "Hollywood" folks called out (Jeremy Piven anyone).

I love that a younger generation of "celebrities" is willing to do legit work in the hardscrabble, disciplined world of New York theater and every one of these actors has earned my respect. I wish each of them success and I sincerely hope every one of them returns to Broadway in their future careers.

Weren't there fewer discounts available for Darren's run?

---

Whoa... what? You prefer Beau over John? That's a first that I've heard.

I've seen Beau twice (once with Dareen and once with Nick) and it was so cringe-worthy... and not in a good way. I believe that John was definitely funnier than Beau.

Bwaydevil - I actually found Radcliffe to be a pleasure - sang quite well and really seemed comfortable.