Jeff Loeffelholz suicide news coverage- Page 6

[BroadwayRox3588]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:13am

Lay off MosaicOwl, guys. Clearly they're going through a very rough time right now, and to me it feels like they're trying to raise awareness so that their cousin didn't die in vain. Sometimes if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. And please don't call for this thread to get deleted. The less people are talking about it, the less awareness of the events leading up to the tragedy is being raised. If you don't like the thread, skip it and move on. Just my two cents.

[SweetLips22]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:30am

Jordan Catalano said: "Some of he people here just guessing about Jeff’s mental state make me sick. You didn’t know him. You have NOTHING to gain or lose from simply either offering your condolences or just not saying anything at all. He deserves better than that bullsh*t from strangers. And yes, as I’ve said before I DID know him."

Jordan, is there anyone you DON'T know?

 

[John Adams]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:27am

BroadwayRox3588 said: "The less people are talking about it, the less awareness of the events leading up to the tragedy is being raised."

The more people are talking about it, the less awareness of the events leading up to the tragedy is being demonstrated.

There. I fixed that for 'ya.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:32am

I doubt the cast is being told to keep quiet because this is extremely unlikely to be turned into some kind of murder case against the people involved with the musical Chicago. There is still a disconnect in the story right now between the details of this rehearsal and a motive for this man’s tragic suicide, which for all we know right now was perhaps partly accidental.

[broadwayboy223]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 3:54am

Did we ever get clarification about why he hadn't been on since February? Did the actual person not miss a show or? All in all this is super tragic and if the account of rehearsal is true... just horrible. Even if he wasn't doing his job that's no way to treat another human being.

[MosaicOwl]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 4:26am

QueenAlice said: "I doubt the cast is being told to keep quiet because this is extremely unlikely to be turned into some kind of murder case against the people involved with the musical Chicago. There is still a disconnect in the story right now between the details of this rehearsal and a motive for this man’s tragic suicide, which for all we know right now was perhaps partly accidental."

Of course it would never turn into a criminal charge and trial. But I do think that the investigation is still extremely serious and official, after all it could lead to the director and MD losing their jobs. The producers' investigation is being conducted by a high-profile lawyer and I bet Equity's will be conducted by their own lawyers. Statements obtained by either investigation will be on-record and subject to subpoena I'm sure. Any cast member, if they were smart, would at least consult their own lawyer or union rep about what they should or shouldn't do or say. And any competent lawyer would advise them not to go on-record with their names anywhere else until the investigations are complete, otherwise I think we would see people coming out about it on either side. With all of the press out there about this, I doubt it's the case that nobody has anything to say. They'd be outraged one way or another, with Jeff's family that Bobbie and Stifelman were being out of line, or that Bobbie and Stifelman weren't. It's not like it was a bad rehearsal and somebody was upset about it. A man took his own life and his loved ones think maybe the rehearsal had something to do with it. Enough so that the producers and the union are having it investigated in the first place.

Updated On: 7/9/18 at 04:26 AM

[bk]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 4:40am

The director can't lose his job - his job was basically finished when he - directed the show twenty-two years ago.  He retains a royalty position of course and that has made him a very wealthy man.  

In other news, a performer I know did one of the tours of Chicago and apparently Mr. Bobbie was very abusive to her in front of the entire company and she seems willing to talk about it and doesn't really care about this anonymity stuff.  People remaining anonymous or off the record is not going to help change anything.

[MosaicOwl]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 6:09am

bk said: "The director can't lose his job - his job was basically finished when he - directed the show twenty-two years ago. He retains a royalty position of course and that has made him a very wealthy man.

In other news, a performer I know did one of the tours of Chicago and apparently Mr. Bobbie was very abusive to her in front of the entire company and she seems willing to talk about it and doesn't really care about this anonymity stuff. People remaining anonymous or off the record is not going to help change anything."

First of all, as far as him being a very wealthy man, duh. And it's irrelevant. Nobody wants to take away his already earned money for work he already accomplished. Second of all, he was called in to oversee the rehearsal, which implies employment to me. Anybody who would like to clarify this? Point me in a direction where I can read about how this is not considered employment. Third of all, if the performer you know doesn't seem care about anonymity, why not include her name? Especially when your point is that anonymity doesn't matter, including her name would have been quite prudent to your point. If she is talking to you directly and either you or she isn't willing to share her name, I'm sorry but that's the definition of anonymity, my friend.

[oknazevad]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 8:21am

SeanD2 said: "mariel9 said: "The thing about "they couldn't have known he was suicidal/depressed/vulnerable" is that, no, you don't always know what someone is dealing with. Treating people with decency costs nothing. If you can't do your job without bullying or abuse, you are not good at your job. Someone who bullies or abuses a vulnerable person (even unknowingly) is partly responsible for the outcome, morally if not legally."

This is why unions need to lose their power. Actors are employees and should be able to be fired at will by their employers. Had Bobbie been able to fire this standby the “bullying” instance would never have taken place."

Oh, bull****. Trying to excuse abusing employees, and then blaming unions, which exist in part to prevent abuse, is so ass backwards it's pathetic and intellectual dishonest. Hell, using the word "intellectual" is laughably ironic, considering how utterly devoid of anything resembling intelligence this steaming pile of crap is. The producers signed the contract. They have the legal and moral obligation to fulfill it. Employers are not gods with unlimited power. This country tried that. It resulted in horrible, dehumanizing abuse of workers. That's what the organized labor movement was created in reaction to. Read a damn history book, you uneducated dolt!

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 10:42am

MosaicOwl -

I’m not sure exactly how it works for long-running Broadway shows, but in professional regional theatre, once the show opens, the director’s job is done. It could run for ten days or for ten months, it doesn’t matter. Once the show opens he is no longer an “employee,” and the stage management team takes over.

I do know that with Broadway shows, an associate director (basically, an assistant) is retained sometimes to coach replacement actors or to oversee a touring production. The original director will sometimes be involved in (re)casting or directing new principal actors, but I believe it’s up to them to decide how involved they want to be.

Financially, the director’s union, SDC, probably negotiated on Bobbie’s behalf for him to get a “cut” of profits in this situation. However, that is probably it, and he likely just checks up on the show when he feels like it, but is not actually required to. That’s my assumption.

[MosaicOwl]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 11:30am

The Distinctive Baritone said: "MosaicOwl -

I’m not sure exactly how it works for long-running Broadway shows, but in professional regional theatre, once the show opens, the director’s job is done. It could run for ten days or for ten months, it doesn’t matter. Once the show opens he is no longer an “employee,” and the stage management team takes over.

I do know that with Broadway shows, an associate director (basically, an assistant) is retained sometimes to coach replacement actors or to oversee a touring production. The original director will sometimes be involved in (re)casting or directing new principal actors, but I believe it’s up to them to decide how involved they want to be.

Financially, the director’s union, SDC, probably negotiated on Bobbie’s behalf for him to get a “cut” of profits in this situation. However, that is probably it, and he likely just checks up on the show when he feels like it, but is not actually required to. That’s my assumption."

Thank you, TDB. That was very helpful. I guess my big question then is why would Bobbie either want to or be asked to come in for this particular rehearsal? Especially if the show's standby hadn't even performed in four months? If the performance quality had become a problem, why wait so long? 

 

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:20pm

I don't know how regularly Walter Bobbie historically has dropped in to check on a performance of CHICAGO, but he was just appearing as an actor on Broadway in ST. JOAN, which likely occupied most of his schedule over the past several months.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:34pm

That is the question everyone is asking.

Bobbie is quoted as saying, “You make more money than I do from this thing” - and that may have been unusually close to the truth. I am not claiming to know anything, but I can see how Bobbie could have potentially found the idea of a standby who rarely goes on making almost as much as he does to be infuriating, especially since from what I read, Mr. Loeffellholz was not even hired by him. If Bobbie was indeed trying to get rid of him - and let’s be honest, I don’t know how else you could interpret the incident based on what was reported - my guess would be that he and the MD were acting based merely on principal and ego.

BTW, as at least one theater critic has observed, Tony Award or not, Mr. Bobbie - like many directors - gets a lot of credit for simply riding on the coatails of others. When you have great performers doing great material with the original Bob Fosse choreography, with smart lighting and costume design, of course it’s a good show. What did Bobbie actually contribute directly to its success? The idea of the band being onstage the whole show? Oh wait, the production was originally a concert, so I guess even that wasn’t his idea.

Updated On: 7/9/18 at 12:34 PM

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:39pm

I know an understudy/swing/ensemble member of Book of Mormon who left the B'way production to do the tour full-time. She said that Casey Nicolaw still comes in regularly to check on the show.

And Julie Andrews said that Moss Hart continued to check on both MFL and Camelot and fret about things in Camelot that he wanted to fix long after the opening of the show.

So it depends on the director. I can see however how if someone who hadn't been at the show in a long time (Walter Bobbie) swoops in and starts reaming out a longtime cast member how it might be a shock. 

[ACL2006]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:44pm

Michael Bennett frequently checked on A Chorus Line, usually not telling anyone he was showing up. He would also fire cast members on the spot if he didn't like their performance.

[ThirstyThersites]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 12:56pm

Updated On: 7/9/18 at 12:56 PM

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:02pm

What does Walter Bobbie's talent or 'riding the coattails of others' have to do with this issue? And I don't see what the man's ego would have to do with this either. The most he and the musical director can be accused of is not handling a situation professionally in which they felt an actor needed to be terminated. Perhaps the word you looking to potentially describe Bobby as is 'pompous' -- but I don't think the firing of a swing falls in line with someone having an ego trip.

[DAME]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:20pm

If you are interested; you might want to check out Randy Slovacek's Facebook page and blog.  Lots of ex Chicago company members expressing their grief and sharing stories.  Randy has been long associated with Chicago and recreates the original revival production all over the world.  Interesting to read David Sabella's comments there as well.   Actors Equity has their work cutout for them with this investigation. 

Updated On: 7/9/18 at 01:20 PM

[saxpower]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:26pm

First, and most importantly, condolences to MosaicOwl and Jeff's family. 

Could the reason "they" wanted him out was so they could hire an ensemble member who could cover the part? The idea being the part would be covered without having to pay a standby.  To be clear I am in NO WAY saying the decision to do so, and especially how it was handled was acceptable. And obviously, I'm speculating.  What doesn't make sense is the sudden need to save money... for the week ending 7/1 it was selling 85% capacity.  Given the show has probably recouped several times over, and I assume has a lower running cost than an average show (no sets, fairly basic costumes, etc) I'd find it hard to believe the show is struggling fiinancially. 

I actually saw Jeff perform the part when I saw the show in NYC- he was excellent and everyone was raving about him.  Let me note that the performance I saw (a) was at the Shubert (b) had Bebe playing Velma) and (c) was a few days after Bill Clinton admitted to having a "relationship" with Monica.  Obviously more than a little while ago, and I still remember it.  That says something of the talent that has been lost in this tragedy.  

[MosaicOwl]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:31pm

DAME said: "If you are interested; you might want to check outRandySlovacek'sFacebook page and blog. Lots of ex Chicago company members expressing their grief and sharing stories. Randy has been long associated with Chicago and recreates the original revival production all over the world. Interesting to read David Labella's comments there as well. Actors Equity has their work cutout for them with this investigation."

Oh my goodness, thank you so much for this info. Between when I hear from friends or family, I've been tirelessly searching the internet about once an hour for any new info or opinions. A Facebook page wouldn't have shown up in a search engine, so once again, thank you. I will promptly visit the page.

[DAME]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:34pm

MosaicOwl;  Randy is a true gentleman.  I would thru his FB contact him directly.  He knows everybody

[SomethingPeculiar]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:39pm

The Distinctive Baritone said: "BTW, as at least one theater critic has observed, Tony Award or not, Mr. Bobbie - like many directors - gets a lot of credit for simply riding on the coatails of others. When you have great performers doing great material with the original Bob Fosse choreography, with smart lighting and costume design, of course it’s a good show. What did Bobbie actually contribute directly to its success? The idea of the band being onstage the whole show? Oh wait, the production was originally a concert, so I guess even that wasn’t his idea. His obituary should read, “Was the original Roger in Grease and then <<removed by moderator>>” Seriously."


To say nothing of Walter Bobbie's involvement in this tragedy:

Walter Bobbie was the artistic director of ENCORES when he produced/directed it there. He loved the show and programmed it in the season, and it was his idea to do the minimalist black-costume concept with the band in a juror's box. ENCORES was only 3 years old at the time; the novelty of a staged concert version was not as common in 1996 as it is now. So, though the Weisslers deserve the credit for actually moving it to Broadway, marketing, re-casting, and keeping it running, the revival of Chicago would not exist without Walter Bobbie. His work on it might not be as splashy as, say, Michael Arden's Once On This Island, but made Chicago the way that we know it now.

He most likely gets a weekly royalty % from the Broadway production and spinoff productions, in addition to the salary he received up front. Maybe he also gets paid to come in for periodical rehearsals? (Though by all accounts, he doesn't maintain Chicago as much as Hal Prince maintains Phantom.) Regardless, the production has surely made him a very comfortable living.

Updated On: 7/9/18 at 01:39 PM

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 1:55pm

Yes, I know. And as both an actor and a director, I can tell you that in the theater, unless we’re talking Julie Taymir or Mary Zimmerman type directors, if the people a director hires are good at what they do, their main job is often saying “Good idea!” and then taking credit for it if it’s good and disowning it if it’s bad. Bobbie did a great job telling everyone where to stand though.

I’m just saying he’s a one-hit wonder who was in no position to act the way he did. He should say his prayers to Kander, Ebb, and Fosse every night.

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 2:10pm

The incident 100% has to do with finances. There’s no possible way that it wasn’t.

The production has had less-than-great word of mouth (in circles similar to this board) for a while now...how stale it is, how bored the company members are, etc. I went a few months ago to see Kandi Burress and I was hoping to be proved wrong, but you can tell most of the cast has been there for too long and there should be some sort of update to freshen things up, production-wise.

If Walter Bobbie had a problem with Jeff’s performance (who was a STANDBY), then he should have gone down the line and pointed out other performances that need work. The rest of the cast was there, anyways.

It just seems ridiculous to imply that this could be about performance when obviously that is not of any concern over at Chicago.

[Tag]

Posted: 7/9/18 at 2:25pm

BTW, as at least one theater critic has observed, Tony Award or not, Mr. Bobbie - like many directors - gets a lot of credit for simply riding on the coatails of others. When you have great performers doing great material with the original Bob Fosse choreography, with smart lighting and costume design, of course it’s a good show. What did Bobbie actually contribute directly to its success? The idea of the band being onstage the whole show? Oh wait, the production was originally a concert, so I guess even that wasn’t his idea. His obituary should read, “Was the original Roger in Grease <<removed by moderator>>.” Seriously.

I'm not sure you know what a director does?  None of those elements would be there without him.  This revival is impeccably crafted and directed.