If Harvey Weinstein wasn't involved in finding neverland

If Harvey Weinstein wasn't involved in finding neverland do you think it would have been better received by critics and tony voters?

Disagree We found it very enjoyable. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and we will not always agree.

That's a difficult question to answer because Weinstein's involvement includes the firing the entire creative team from the original tryout in Leicester. And that greatly contributed to the bad mojo that the show began to build up among those who supported the respected professionals who were casually jettisoned by Weinstein along the way. By the time it made it to to Broadway, I'm sure there were a lot of people who wanted Weinstein to fail, but when you look at it objectively, category by category, any Tony nods would have been a surprise for this show. It wasn't so much that it was that terrible. It was just that there were others that were clearly better in almost every category. Weinstein's bull in a china shop approach to producing simply meant he wasn't going to get a break from the nominating committee when there was a close call. Under the best of circumstances, without the Weinstein bad mojo, the show might have pulled in three or four nominations, but no wins. It just wasn't a good year for them to compete. Had it come up the same year that Memphis won, things might have been quite different.

HogansHero said: "That's like asking if I would be cuter if I had different parents. Without Harvey, there would never have been Finding Neverland on Broadway.



"

Is that true, though? I feel like there were reports of the musicalized version of this story becoming a thing long before Harvey was attached. But maybe I'm wrong?

I'm also curious to hear what others think would have differed from the show if Harvey weren't attached. It's not like he wrote the thing, so curious as to how you'd think the production itself would differ. To answer my own question, I think it would have stayed a bit more true to the movie. Darker, less family-friendly. But again, that's just my opinion.

GreasedLightning said: "Is that true, though? I feel like there were reports of the musicalized version of this story becoming a thing long before Harvey was attached. But maybe I'm wrong? "

There is a chick-and-egg aspect to this but, as noted by someone else, no version existed without Harvey's imprimatur. So when he took charge, the other (almost entirely jettisoned) version was dead in the water. But my specific point is that no version would have come to Broadway without his involvement, not just because you'd have to get the rights from him, but also because no one else of substance was interested in doing it. He finally got the Weissler's to agree to exec produce it, which is a euphemism for "we are not interested but we will help you if you pay us."

Regardless of the producer, the deck was stacked against this show from the outset. The qualities it possesses --- tenderness, heart, caring, melodic music --- all of these are anathema to our present-day arbiters of, ahem, "culture."