#51
Posted: 1/14/26 at 12:29pm
Thinking about the stage door for this show is already increasing my blood pressure.
Jonathan Bailey and Ariana Grande in SITPWG? — Page 3
#52
Posted: 1/14/26 at 12:30pm
This is going to set a new standard for Broadway casting choices and ticket prices, for better or worse.
“I am furious, but I am sailing.”
#53
Posted: 1/14/26 at 12:30pm
Is this the same Sunday in the Park Andrew Garfield was supposedly attached to for a while? I seem to recall Elliott also being attached to direct. I’m excited for Bailey, nonetheless. Elliott is also one of the best working directors out there.
My father (AIDS)
My sister (AIDS)
My uncle and my cousin and her best friend (AIDS, AIDS, AIDS)
The gays and the straights
And the white and the spades
#54
Posted: 1/14/26 at 12:57pm
What? But..but...Jaimie Lloyd. Imagine them both in boxer briefs covered in paint at the end. THAT would be a spectacle.
ColorTheHours048 said: "As exciting as the prospect of the Bailey and Grande pairing is, Marianne Elliott (so many double letters in her name, I have to confirm it every time) is the most enticing bit about this for me. One of the only directors working today balancing spectacle, intimacy, and genuinely-felt performances in nearly equal ability. If nothing else, the physical production is sure to be a treat to watch."
...
#55
Posted: 1/14/26 at 1:05pm
EDSOSLO858 said: "This is going to set a new standard for Broadway casting choices and ticket prices, for better or worse.
"
The Ariana fans are already screaming about this coming to Broadway shortly after the London run.
A Chorus Line revival played its final Broadway performance on August 17, 2008. The tour played its final performance on August 21, 2011. A new non-equity tour started in October 2012 played its final performance on March 23, 2013. Another non-equity tour launched on January 20, 2018. The tour ended its US run in Kansas City and then toured throughout Japan August & September 2018.
#56
Posted: 1/14/26 at 1:11pm
Miserent said: "Thinking about the stage door for this show is already increasing my blood pressure."
There won't ever be a stage door for this production. They can't guarantee anyone's safety on the street and most people will be there as professional autograph hounds. Way too much hassle.
#57
Posted: 1/14/26 at 1:42pm
I still remain skeptical about this casting, but there is no way I’m missing this (…and probably seeing it twice). Would suggest signing up for friends of the Barbican, this is gone sell hotter than Cate Blanchett two (?) season ago.
#58
Posted: 1/14/26 at 1:42pm
If ever a production was likely to get filmed it is this one, this could have a five year run with her in it and it still wouldnt be enough to satisfy ticket demand
i imagine it will break west end ticket pricing records
#59
Posted: 1/14/26 at 2:06pm
Technically not West End, but I’m sure it’ll break London theater pricing.
A little more information from Variety here, including May for sales.
#60
Posted: 1/14/26 at 2:23pm
Crazy idea, and no idea if there's any precedent in the West End, but would they potentially do Yondr pouches for this? I can only imagine the cell phone & video use will be out of control on this one.
#61
Posted: 1/14/26 at 2:30pm
Play Esq. said: "I still remain skeptical about this casting, but there is no way I’m missing this (…and probably seeing it twice). Would suggest signing up for friends of the Barbican, this is gone sell hotter than Cate Blanchett two (?) season ago."
Any suggestion which membership is best?
#62
Posted: 1/14/26 at 2:46pm
supersam1026 said: "Crazy idea, and no idea if there's any precedent in the West End, but would they potentially do Yondr pouches for this? I can only imagine the cell phone & video use will be out of control on this one."
I think it will be the tightest security for a show London has seen in a long time. No phones, extra security, etc.
#63
Posted: 1/14/26 at 3:05pm
Wouldn’t she want to play a more substantial role? Why is she always playing second fiddle? Especially to lesser famous people?
#64
Posted: 1/14/26 at 3:28pm
Merkin2 said: "Wouldn’t she want to play a more substantial role? Why is she always playing second fiddle? Especially to lesser famous people?"
Dot/Marie isn’t substantial enough for you? Get out of here!
My father (AIDS)
My sister (AIDS)
My uncle and my cousin and her best friend (AIDS, AIDS, AIDS)
The gays and the straights
And the white and the spades
#65
Posted: 1/14/26 at 3:30pm
Merkin2 said: "Wouldn’t she want to play a more substantial role? Why is she always playing second fiddle? Especially to lesser famous people?"
Don't take the bait from BroadwayFlash, who clearly doesn't even know the show. There are few finer roles for women in the entire canon.
#66
Posted: 1/14/26 at 3:51pm
Glinda and Dot being supporting roles doesn’t make them small. In general, I find people primarily famous outside of acting are better served working their way towards leading roles. The reason so many flounder is because overnight they are meant to be carrying the weight of a film/production/television show on their shoulders and the expectations that come with that do not set them up for success. If you’re decent in a supporting role you’re “showing promise.” If you’re anything less than perfect in a leading role the vultures cannot wait to descend.
#67
Posted: 1/14/26 at 3:56pm
In what world is Dot a supporting role?? Have I hit my head and done real damage?
#68
Posted: 1/14/26 at 4:01pm
Separately, Elliott is the part of this I’m least excited about. Company was beautifully staged (even if Jesse Green disagreed) but textually, I hate it more every time I think about it. So many strange choices to twist the story into shapes it didn’t wanna take instead of just casting a woman and doing the show. Joanne offering to have her husband turn Bobbie into a kept woman because you’re too afraid to touch lesbianism but keeping “i’m the next bride” so you can get a laugh line out of how funny it is for a man to call himself a bride? You haven’t earned gay jokes. Turning tick-tock into a dream ballet about her biological clock? Would’ve been tired in 1985 and was certainly tired in 2021. Just really embarrassing stuff all around.
Katrina Lenk innocent!!!!!
#69
Posted: 1/14/26 at 4:03pm
SonofRobbieJ said: "In what world is Dot a supporting role?? Have I hit my head and done real damage?"
I said supporting because the person above clearly feels that Dot, by not being George, is a secondary character in the narrative. I don’t know that I agree but that is what their comment is meant to imply.
#70
Posted: 1/14/26 at 4:44pm
Gotcha...thanks for clarifying. I also don't think Glinda is a supporting role but a co-lead...particularly with how Wicked: For Good shifted the focus for that role.
#71
Posted: 1/14/26 at 4:53pm
Ke3 said: "Separately, Elliott is the part of this I’m least excited about. Company was beautifully staged (even if Jesse Green disagreed) but textually, I hate it more every time I think about it. So many strange choices to twist the story into shapes it didn’t wanna take instead of just casting a woman and doing the show. Joanne offering to have her husband turn Bobbie into a kept woman because you’re too afraid to touchlesbianism but keeping “i’m the next bride” so you can get a laugh line out of how funny it is for a man to call himself a bride? You haven’t earned gay jokes. Turning tick-tock into a dream ballet about her biological clock? Would’ve been tired in 1985 and was certainly tired in 2021. Just really embarrassing stuff all around.
Katrina Lenk innocent!!!!!"
It worked a lot better in London, in my opinion. Katrina Lenk's Bobbi didn't seem like she'd want anything to do with any of the people they cast as her friends, as fantastic as they all were. She was slinky, sexy, and chic and all her "friends" were totally uncool, dorky squares. It didn't make sense to me. Rosalie Craig had more of a girl next door vibe, a real people pleasing nice girl who was trying to figure things out.
#72
Posted: 1/14/26 at 4:57pm
Having to buy tickets a year+ out is sort of annoying.
#73
Posted: 1/14/26 at 5:03pm
TotallyEffed said: "
It worked a lot better in London, in my opinion. Katrina Lenk's Bobbi didn't seem like she'd want anything to do with any of the people they castas her friends, as fantastic as they all were. She was slinky, sexy, and chic and all her "friends" were totally uncool, dorkysquares. It didn't make sense to me. Rosalie Craig had more of a girl next door vibe, a real people pleasing nice girl who was trying to figure things out."
I think that's kind of baked into the show regardless of the gender of Bobby- the character is cool, vaguely successful, goes between different scenes, dates and screws around, while all of their friends are neurotic and settling or already settled down (Joanne being the exception, which is why they're close). The fact that Bobby and their social group are in largely different places in their lives is oddly unexplored.
(the fact that most of the friends are so thinly written and poorly defined doesn’t help- quite a few exist solely as so-and-so’s spouse).
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
Updated On: 1/14/26 at 05:03 PM
#74
Posted: 1/14/26 at 5:08pm
Agreed. That’s why Rosalie worked better for me, she looked more “real,” had a kind warmth and her quips came off more friendly and less icy. I could buy that she’d be friends with different types. Her performance seemed very inspired by the earlier seasons of Sex and the City.
I saw Katrina do it three times and I loved the production but I just couldn’t figure out what this woman was doing with two middle aged dweebs in tracksuits talking about their diets in New Jersey. 😂
#75
Posted: 1/14/26 at 5:18pm
Just in case it doesn't go without saying. Barbican membership (of any level) won't guarantee getting a ticket (it's spelled out in there T&C) and London shows are more prone to hold back a decent percentage of seats for staggered released to the general public. Whether or not that occurs with this production remains to be seen, but I would be a bit surprised if it didn't.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71