Posted: 5/12/24 at 4:25pm
The show is even smaller than Chicago, it has to be cheap to run. They can stunt cast like Chicago to sustain them through the tough months. I bet it runs even longer than the first roundabout revival.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 4:27pm
Are you seriously asking if a show that opened a month ago is going to run longer than a show that is still running that in the span of its run has now seen 3 different revivals of Cabaret? Sure.....
Posted: 5/12/24 at 4:28pm
There is no planet on which this new production of Cabaret is "cheap to run".
Posted: 5/12/24 at 4:38pm
The renovation of the theatre is what made it expensive. Their weekly running costs can’t be high especially when you take out the star salary.
Updated On: 5/12/24 at 04:38 PM
Posted: 5/12/24 at 4:39pm
This thread is madness. We already know the show is very expensive to run. Also, we've had not one but two previous revivals of Cabaret recently that were cheaper to run and (especially the second time around) didn't last - despite also in my opinion being a bit more sexy, fun with a bit more charisma (while also keeping the subtextual darkness of course).
Not only is this revival of Cabaret not the next Chicago, I think the producers can probably slowly see a train wreck in the far distance unless they can find a suitable name to replace Eddie Redmayne.
Updated On: 5/12/24 at 04:39 PM
Posted: 5/12/24 at 4:46pm
Bless your heart, Broadway Flash. Never change.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 5:04pm
I don't think any show with a weekly running cost of 1.2 million is cheap
Posted: 5/12/24 at 5:15pm
well they better hope Adriana Matrix or whoever she is wants to go into it next.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 5:22pm
Broadway Flash said: "The renovation of the theatre is what made it expensive. Their weekly running costs can’t be high especially when you take out the star salary."
Do you think their weekly running costs do not also include paying off that massive theatre renovation? Please be serious, you're really embarassing yourself. Weekly running costs include all costs incured in putting the show up, NOT purely what what it takes to keep the lights on. They have investors that need to be paid back from their revenue EVERY SINGLE WEEK. That is an operating cost!
Posted: 5/12/24 at 5:41pm
The last revival had Emma Stone and Michelle Williams. If they get A List stars, maybe it’ll turn a profit. But I don’t think anyone’s paying $300+ to see Jake Shears.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 5:44pm
I'll pay something to see Mason Park if they're able to get them back...
Posted: 5/12/24 at 5:57pm
It will be lucky to run as long as the original Chicago. It's not coming anywhere close to the run length of the current Chicago or the 98 Cabaret.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 6:01pm
The current revival of CHICAGO has been playing almost 30 years on Broadway. This new revival of CABARET will barely get anywhere close to a 2 year run. The 1998 Broadway revival of CABARET ran almost 6 years AND held its “event theater” buzz going for most of that run. This new revival sadly doesn’t have that insane buzz going on as the 1998 revival did. If the 1998 revival couldn’t sustain itself, this one won’t even crack a dent.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 6:29pm
I think people are perhaps underestimating the staying power of this CABARET … I don’t think it will be around forever, but I think it has legs to run for at least another several years. Especially if they are smart with the stunt casting.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 6:36pm
I guess next year when Lisa Vanderpump is Fraulein Schneider, we’ll see if they can still get $600 a ticket.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 6:39pm
The thing that makes this production expensive is that it's effectively two productions- the preshow and Cabaret proper. The renovation cost is added to that, but in theory would be paid off eventually. The preshow is an ongoing expense- it has a separate cast, it has food and beverage costs, it has added staff. VIP experiences and expensive cocktails will likely only go so far.
Without the constant presence of an A-list name, I don't see how this is sustainable longterm.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 7:09pm
Let's look back at the prior Cabaret production in 2014/2015. Very rare instances did that ever reach above $1M a week. There was also never such a financial barrier of entry to that production versus this production. So yes, you have the affluent people spending their money now but they'll run dry. It's not likely to win many (if any) Tonys next month. Revival will go to Merrily and in the chance that he wins actor, Eddie Redmayne won't stay beyond his contract anyway so it's moot. When referring to this being the next Chicago... that is so completely foolish and dumbfounding. Chicago has found its niche because it's cheap the run, you can always get tickets day of, and the plot is... kind of irrelevant for those tourists with a small grasp of the English language. It's the perfect storm of a show. It has that Cats factor.
Cabaret on its face, asks a lot more of the audience. It's not a show you pop into on a whim on your day in the city (nor are they marketing it that way). You take away the pre show and you're left with... nothing special? Can you run it for a while? I'm sure you can, but not as it is. You would need to continue scaling it back. It's out within 18 months.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 7:27pm
And as I’ve said before, only time will tell if this (like the other productions) has repeat attendance or if the price point will make that prohibitive this time.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 7:27pm
The pre show is only five people. Even with them, it’s still a smaller cast than Chicago. I imagine their next emcee will be a big star as well
Posted: 5/12/24 at 7:29pm
Broadway Flash said: "The show is even smaller than Chicago, it has to be cheap to run.They can stunt cast like Chicago to sustain them through the tough months. I bet it runs even longer than the first roundabout revival."
SMALLER???????? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! The fact that the theatre had to be completely re-converted is one thing. Just because the stage is "smaller" than most doesn't mean it will have low running costs. The second you enter is when the running costs begin! Once again, you are completely delusional! Please, for the love of god! GO AWAY!
Posted: 5/12/24 at 7:36pm
bwayphreak234 said: "There is no planet on which this new production of Cabaret is "cheap to run"."
But you have to remember that anything Flash posts is essentially an ‘alternative fact’, i.e., ‘if I even imagine it, it is true.’
i am willing to agree that it will run at least twice as long as that monster hit ‘The Great Gatsby’.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 7:39pm
TaffyDavenport said: ""Adriana Matrix"
LOL, I'm dying..."
I’m calling dibs on this drag name…
Posted: 5/12/24 at 8:03pm
Two other points:
Posted: 5/12/24 at 8:09pm
Broadway Flash said: "The pre show is only five people. Even with them, it’s still a smaller cast than Chicago. I imagine their next emcee will be a big star as well"
It's much more than 5 people. It's 5 performers, plus 3 swings for them, plus four musicians. So right there is 12 additional people on top of the 22 performers for Cabaret itself not counting the orchestra. And then there are bartenders and other front of house staff who have to be there for additional time, plus any food prep staff, plus the dedicated photographer they have for the preshow crowd, plus I'm sure more.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
