Is Passing Strange losing money??- Page 2

[Leo_Yikes]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 12:54pm

I think both shows have alot of potential, but sadly a wide enough audiences hasnt been found for either one of them. And also that the theater is extremely small and their still not selling enough tickets.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 2:17pm

I love that people who obviously don't know about what else I post and what I think about other shows just take liberties of making assumptions by looking at my name...especially people who have been on this board for about a month.

I'm entitled to my opinion. Deal with it.

[chris d]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 3:19pm

why oh why did I click on this thread. yuck.

[Brave Sir Robin2]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 3:36pm

The O'Neill, Belasco, and Gershwin have overrated shows. There I said it.

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 4:54pm

someone mentioned xanadu... that is why i usually look at percentage rather than the actual grosses.

Also overrated doesnt just mean critics. It was word of mouth of the people who saw it and loved it that made me think it was overrated. Everyone i spoke to said how revoulutionary, unique, orginally, and ground breaking it was and how its the best thing on broadway and going to change the face of theater... in my mind it was just okay.

[winter_sky]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 8:55pm

Mealz,

I understand if it's not your cup of tea, but I don't see how anyone could say it was not unique for Broadway. People went on and on about how Spring Awakening was so fresh and revolutionary but compared to PS, it's pretty well worn territory. In my opinion it's one of the first rock musicals (besides Hair) that has a legit rock score. Additionally, Passing Strange's story as well as it's manner of execution is like nothing playing right now. It might not have been as unique or original in another setting but it's definitely one of a kind in it's current medium.

Even the people I know who did not love it called it "an experience". I don't know if it's going to change theatre immediately because in all honesty I think it's ahead of it's time.

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 6/7/08 at 10:11pm

YES! perfectly said, winter_sky

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 2:06am

I also don't think Spring Awakening is revolutionary. I think we breifly discussed this, but for me it takes a LOT to call something revolutionary.

Hair
A Chorus Line
Angels in America
Rent

Those are a few. But idk, i just don't see how PS is going to change the face of broadway. Either way the point I was making was that because everyone said its soooooooo different I thought it was OVERrated. Again that doesn't mean it wasn't good. it was. I liked it. I don't want to see it again but I did enjoy it, I cried, so clearly it touched me, just not as much as it was hyped up to.

I just don't think the music in it was that special and unique, the story has been done before, musicians have been on stage before, there have been narrators before, I guess I just don't get all the hype.

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 2:15am

Umm... the music was beyond unique and special. probably the BEST part, other than Daniel Breaker's brilliant performance

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 2:17am

Oh I thought there was a LOT of talent there, don't get me wrong. What I want to know is why rebecca wasn't nominated!

[joe5]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 10:54am

Buddarich, I can look back at all your posts. And I know you HATE the show. You have used that word, at least a dozen times in your previous posts. I have gotten the point over and over, ENOUGH! If something bothers you that much, STAY AWAY. Why do you continue to post about the this show? I don't spew the H word towards any other show here. I wish the best for all of them. And in ending, I hope that your ready to throw your TV set out the window ( Like you stated in previous posts ). This coming Sunday , June 15h Tony night. Please post it on these boards for all to see. Cause I have been offened by the spewing of your HATRED. joe


Updated On: 6/8/08 at 10:54 AM

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 11:02am

that is why i usually look at percentage rather than the actual grosses.

This can be a trap. Most of the weekly expenses are not based on ticket sales. (Theatre rental can someties be negotiated down depending on sales.)

Percentage-wise, most shows berak even at 70% attendance, BUT that is assuming that 70% is paid and not papered.

PASSING STRANGE has not likely had many weeks where it has shown a profit.

[joe5]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 11:10am

Now about the show losing money. I had read some time ago on ATC. That the show could run for several years. At the nut of 300k a week. But again, I don't think thats what the orginal poster meant. Another way to vent there venom in a round about way.
Updated On: 6/9/08 at 11:10 AM

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 11:41am

I don't think Passing Strange is "insanely overrated." It's not like everyone is constantly raving about. I read as many negative things about it as I read positive things. I would say Xanadu is more overrated (and I liked Xanadu).

[winter_sky]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 2:25pm

As much as I adore RENT, I don't think the actual show is that revolutionary. Yes, it brought theatre to the younger masses and put a spotlight on world issues but so did Hair and Angels in America which you also listed.

In regards to Passing Strange, personal preference may turn that hype into "overhype" but I don't think it's fair to negate it's importance because of the buzz. Clearly the people who raved about this show to you were genuinely affected by the show and honestly felt that it was different and unique.

In the Heights was insanely hyped, as many people I know are extremely obsessed with the show but I didn't go in to the show expecting it to be the 2nd coming of Christ. It was a good show with a weak book and in my opinion, equal in quality to Passing Strange. They are both moving and actually somewhat similar in their overall message (losing a loved one makes you realize where home is) but in terms of execution, In The Heights feels very nostalgic for me whereas Passing Strange feels very fresh and I personally walked out in a very "wow" kind of trance.

Updated On: 6/8/08 at 02:25 PM

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 2:50pm

Good for you (and that wasn't sarcastic, I promise) i'm glad that you and others were so affected by it. I just wasn't and I expected to be (hence the over-ration)

I mean I don't think you can call anything revolutionary until after the fact. Hair was a product of its time and rent was a product of its own. It brought young people BACK to theater. And Lin for exacmple, tributes his success to both the phantom of the opera (as he says "it was a show about an ugly songwriter who can't get a girl and i just though 'hey, that's me!'") and Rent, because he said rent let him know that theater can be about today, and you can write about your life and the people you know.

I just don't see people attributing their success to Passing Strange, I don't think it opened any ground that wasn't open for anyone before.

People don't get that there is a difference between something being unique and original, even a bit shocking AND ground breaking and revolutionary. They are not the same. Spring Awakening. I don't think it is revolutionary at all? Sex on stage? Please, that is nothing compared to Hair, which ends complete full frontal nudity. I mean I guess there is a time gap, but the subject matter etc. I think could not have been taken the way it was without shows like Hair and Rent. I don't think anyone will be like "oh now i can do this because of spring awkaeng (or PS)" But maybe they will, who knows? We'll bring this thread back up in 10 years and see. (Of course Rent could never have happened without Hair and probably a chorus line for the openness in regards to homosexuality. Or maybe it could, I don't know)

In The Heights, on the other hand, I PERSONALLY, in MY OPINION, believe that it will inspire and that it will bring a new generation of young people to the theater, I find it incredibly inspiring, I think it will make some changes to the broadway stage. But maybe it won't. We have to wait and see.

(also why does everyone compare PS and ITH? They really have nothing to do with eachother)

[winter_sky]

Posted: 6/8/08 at 3:56pm

You said it yourself, you can't know if something is truly groundbreaking immediately. I don't understand how you can then predict that ItH will be a revolutionary piece of theatre but deny those who think the same of PS.

Also just because someone is influenced or inspired by a show does not mean that show is inherently groundbreaking or unique. As you said, Lin was influenced by RENT but RENT traces back to Hair, Angels in America and ACL. It's definitely a result of being born in a specific generation. There are teenagers now who think that SA is made for them just as young people felt that way when RENT came out or Hair. It's like the teenagers now who think they're the first to like punk or rock and roll, etc. It kind of reminds me of teenagers now who think their parents do not understand them even though they went through the same emotions/experiences their children are going through. There will always be rebellions against previous generations...that doesn't mean it's unique to a specific time.

Passing Strange is definitely unique to Broadway right now. I can't think of another show recently that was similar. Whether or not it pushes others to follow it's example is up to the next generation. I hope that others are influenced by it, at least in the respect of pushing boundaries, breaking the 4th wall and kind of breaking down traditional theatre.

As lovely and positive as I think ItH is, it is doing something very similar to PS...it is bringing different types of music that young people can relate too (rap/latin styles for ItH and indie/art rock for PS). I feel that is ItH's main strength and why I agree I can see young people wanting to come see the show. I have nothing but love for ItH but I sincerely hope PS is able to find an audience as well.


People compare them because they are both new musicals this seasons that are competing for many of the same awards and have similar creation stories as well as overall message.

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 1:42am

"You said it yourself, you can't know if something is truly groundbreaking immediately. I don't understand how you can then predict that ItH will be a revolutionary piece of theatre but deny those who think the same of PS."

Sorry, I don't mean to do that. I can't predict either one of them. In my opinion that is the more likely scenario but as i mentioned multiple times it is merely an opinion and only time will tell.

"As lovely and positive as I think ItH is, it is doing something very similar to PS...it is bringing different types of music that young people can relate too (rap/latin styles for ItH and indie/art rock for PS). I feel that is ItH's main strength and why I agree I can see young people wanting to come see the show. I have nothing but love for ItH but I sincerely hope PS is able to find an audience as well."

I gues to me i just didnt feel like the music for PS was that unique or special. maybe I wasn't listening carefully though or maybe i was making stuff up in my head. I'm not saying it wasn't unique or special at all, just not as much as the people who i heard from made it out to be. Maybe i just happen to surround myself with people who were very touched by PS and maybe that's why i think it was overrated. Who knows?

[StateOfJade]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 1:49am

You can't state that something isn't 'groundbreaking' or 'revolutionary'. It's a personal expirience when you are that moved by a piece of theatre (or ANYTHING, for that matter). For instance, some think RENT is revolutionary, and some don't. And that's perfectly fine. But people shouldn't try to convince each other whether or not something is unique and wonderful. It's a matter of taste, and clearly on this board, they differ greatly.

P.S (no pun intended) it's funny that people claim that Passing Strange is so overrated when in fact it is the little broadway show that could...and the grosses prove it. It's an incredibly unusual kind of show for broadway and I think it's hard to advertise it so that it appeals to audiences. I think if it was overated that would be the show that people run to see, like In the Heights.

Updated On: 6/9/08 at 01:49 AM

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 9:07am

"You can't state that something isn't 'groundbreaking' or 'revolutionary'. It's a personal expirience when you are that moved by a piece of theatre."

Being moved by a piece of theatre is NOT the same as being groundbreaking by any stretch. Something not being groundbreaking or revolutionary doesn't mean it's not good, it doesn't mean it's not phenomenal. It doesn't mean that it isn't valid to be moved by it. Every show should move or inspire at least someone or it's not doing its job as a piece of art. But not everything can be revolutionary. If EVERYTHING was revolutionary then nothing COULD be revolutionary because being "revolutionary" would become common place and by definition that doesn't make sense.

"For instance, some think RENT is revolutionary, and some don't. And that's perfectly fine. But people shouldn't try to convince each other whether or not something is unique and wonderful. It's a matter of taste, and clearly on this board, they differ greatly."

It's not though. Something being WONDERFUL is a matter of taste, something being unique or revolutionary (which are not the same thing) is a fact, not an opinion. People may have different perspectives on whether something is revolutionary or not but it is something that can be argued, unlike an opinion, there is a definite answer, though people may not agree on it, it does exist.

"I think if it was overated that would be the show that people run to see, like In the Heights."

Not neccesarily. Overrated just means that it has higher acclaim than it deserves. For instance critics could say that a show is "boring but fairly enjoyable" and even though that's not a good review, if the show was unbareable and the worst thing you've ever seen then it would still be overrated.

I posted this on another board but no one responded:

Okay, please no one take this as an attack, because it's not in any way. So I saw the show a while ago, and I thought it was pretty good, I enjoyed it, I thought the actors were very talented, I even cried but that's all it was for me. I mean maybe that was partially because everyone and their mom said it was the most amazing thing ever so I was expecting a lot. But I just don't get why everyone is saying how inovative, genius, and revolutionary it is. Again this is NOT an attack, it's just the psycho-analytical side of me kicking in, I just want to know WHAT about it makes it that way according to people who love it so much. I'm not trying to start an argument, I mean if anything I'd like to be convinced. Thanks

See I'm not trying to dismiss the show or anyones love for it or ANYTHING like that. You guys forget that I did like this show (unlike my dad who hated it, and he loves the kind of music it claims to possess) Like I'm not saying it was bad. I don't understand why people get offended if someone claims something is not revolutionary (or who predicts that it won't be at any rate) that ISN'T A BAD THING it's just a thing. I guess I just don't see the show the same way as you guys do, and that's okay too.

But I still think it is overrated.

Updated On: 6/9/08 at 09:07 AM

[evic]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 9:36am

Does Barbie have a plastic ****?- Doomed to close after the Tony's

[winter_sky]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 1:49pm

"I think if it was overated that would be the show that people run to see, like In the Heights."

Not neccesarily. Overrated just means that it has higher acclaim than it deserves.

There are some who feel that In the Heights has been acclaimed higher than it deserves. It seems to be the "it" show this season and there is much more hype (talk of Tony-locks and touring) for it than Passing Strange which seems to be divisive. If you believe that PS was overrated to you, then sure, but while acknowledging personal opinion, you seem to think (and repeatedly post) it is on a broader scale "overrated".

But I just don't get why everyone is saying how inovative, genius, and revolutionary it is. Again this is NOT an attack, it's just the psycho-analytical side of me kicking in, I just want to know WHAT about it makes it that way according to people who love it so much.

I feel that myself as well as others on this thread (as well as other PS threads) have expressed why we felt it was "innovative, genius, and revolutionary". Many opinions have been stated regarding the music choice, the performance art aspect, the breaking down of the 4th wall, as well as personal reactions to the piece being something many have not felt recently. You don't have to agree or understand but it's definitely been expressed. You can only go in a circle of "this is why I think it's groundbreaking" ---> "but why?" for so long.

Both shows have the potential to benefit theatre but for different reasons. ItH is very nostalgic and (in my opinion) more commercial. It is easy to digest. The musical style appeals to American youth and will likely cause the tour to do very well around the country. Anything that causes people to appreciate art is cool with me.

PS on the other hand is not something that goes down smooth immediately. For me personally on my first viewing I was very confused. I had no idea what to expect. By the end I was in awe at how they managed to mix avant garde performance art, which can be kind of cold with so much heart. Also as someone who really enjoys indie/art rock as well as Broadway, it felt very unique to me to see both styles blended together.

As I said, I truly hope both shows find an audience and influence the next generation. Honestly, to fight about two amazing shows when there are much greater theatrical enemies out there? Seems silly.


Updated On: 6/9/08 at 01:49 PM

[joe5]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 1:59pm

lalalala It's culture!!!!!




Updated On: 6/9/08 at 01:59 PM

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 2:47pm

hey. okay that was rude. I don't have any hate towards Passing Strange as I have mentioned many many times. Maybe my definition of revolutionary is different or maybe I had a different view of the show. It's fine, I'm just trying to understand. Maybe I'm missing something. Perhaps I will see it again at some point and try to understand.

Also Winter Sky is a good friend of mine, and this is purely a discussion, I think we've both agreed to disagree. But moving on. I am not being NEGATIVE and I am trying to rational. If you disagree fine, then explain why, I'd love to hear everyone's opinions.

And why the hell would i feel superior for being a fan of another show, that's such bullsh*t. If you actually read what I wrote instead of skimming and jumping to ridiculous conclusions then you would see that is not my intention, and I am not the kind of person to think someone is better than someone else based on an opinion.

[joe5]

Posted: 6/9/08 at 2:51pm

LaLaLaLa It's Culture

Updated On: 6/9/08 at 02:51 PM