Is James Barbour ever going to be back on Broadway — Page 3

"I think this whole James Barbour thing is unfortunate, and as much as I would like to see him back on Broadway - I highly doubt that the producers are going to risk millions of dollars on him. I would be VERY surprised if he actually came to New York."

It is absolutely unfortunate. Just last night I was surfing the site that shall not be named and came across a vid of him singing "Let Her Be a Child". I was practically in tears because of how beautiful it is. He's such a talent and it's a shame he had to throw so much away.

This is a great show and I truly hate to see such a dark cloud hanging over it. I've actually been considering emailing the producers and saying that I think he ought to be recast. As great as he was in the show I think they might be better off without him. But if they recast James they may recast Derek and I enjoyed his performance. And I'd hate to see any innocent people pay the penalty for Barbour's idiocy. But I'm afraid that'll happen no matter what decision the producers make.

But here's a question . . . if not James then who? Who in the Broadway community do you guys think could carry the show as well as (or better than) Barbour did?

---

Updated On: 3/30/08 at 11:55 AM

It would suck for him, yes, but the producers would almost be foolish to come to Broadway with him. It's just a disaster waiting to happen.

---

Yeah, it sucks, and as much as I wish it didn't happen, it's his fault. He put himself in this situation, put his career on the line, and risked his good name. While I have varying thoughts on the actual crime and the actual labeling of him as a sex offender, there's no one to blame but himself.

---

I don't see how this would be a foolish move on the producers of A Tail of Two Cities. Pretty much because they had said outright that they were going to support him and he would still be with the show if ( and of course it did) it got to Broadway. They knew when they were saying that that they were saying something pretty big. My guess is that they assumed the worst when they said that.

And keep in mind one major thing. I think that we are making the story bigger then it actually is. This isn't major news anywhere else but here. Sure, it may have been in papers in small articles or online but no one really got that into it. Or in some cases new about it. Then the people here on BBW got talking about it and started to treat the news of the event as if it was a big deal everywhere. I am not trying to downplay what Barobur did as good or acceptable. It's not. But, what I am trying to say is that maybe the story in and of itself isn't as big as we are making it out to be. Keep in mind that it feels like everyone who follows Broadway so closely posts here and it is a story relating to a Broadway actor so it might get more people here talking.

That is just my two cents on the whole thing.

---

i think they're betting that any media's good media, but they are wrong and the show will suffer for it. they need the kids to make this go and parents and group sales are going to avoid it like the plague.

but i'm sure enough underage girls will still want to see it to keep mr. barbour's dressing room warm.

---

If he's ever allowed back, this sign will be posted at the backstage door.

---

Personally, I think the registry is corrupt and needs some major spring cleaning.

---

A TALE OF TWO CITIES is a book that it read widely in high school. You can bet that there will be school trips to that show. But with Barbour? No high school would DARE go on a field trip to the show.

Not that they're afraid of him, but could you imagine how that permission slip would read? "Dear Parent/Legal Guardian: We would like to take your child on a trip to New York City to see the new Broadway musical A TALE OF TWO CITIES. It must be pointed out that the star of the show as confessed to and was imprisoned for having sex with a minor. We understand any hesitation in granting permission."

DUMB, DUMB, DUMB.

---

In Reidel's column last Friday it said the director of the show has been let go, and the original support to stand behind Barbout is now also waning.
Hmmmm.

I don't know. I think it would depend on the project. He's a great talent, which is why this is such a shame, but I can't imagine a producer ever being comfortable with putting up millions of dollars around such a person. I'm not saying that he won't make a comeback, and I'm not saying that I don't want him to, but the risk is so high that it won't be an easy road for him.

---

"In Reidel's column last Friday it said the director of the show has been let go, and the original support to stand behind Barbout is now also waning."

Funny, I'd read that they hadn't named a Broadway director but it was looking like they would go with either Edwards or Warren Carlyle.

"I don't know. I think it would depend on the project. He's a great talent, which is why this is such a shame, but I can't imagine a producer ever being comfortable with putting up millions of dollars around such a person. I'm not saying that he won't make a comeback, and I'm not saying that I don't want him to, but the risk is so high that it won't be an easy road for him."

I think that if he's going to work in the near future it'll be on the concert circuit. Small, one man shows that will only draw his fans who'll see him even if he were a double ax murderer.

---

"But here's a question . . . if not James then who?"

Robert Cuccioli.