LA CAGE LEADS THE PACK WITH 14 NOMINATIONS!

[Albin]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 9:01am

Sorry, just wanted to see how it looked!

Seriously, congrats on 4 nominations:
Revival
Lead Actor
Costume Design
Choreography
Updated On: 5/10/05 at 09:01 AM

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 9:03am

The funny thing is....had he not been sacked, Davis would probably had been nominated.

And most people I know thought he was one of the best things about it!

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 9:04am

He was still eligible for a nomination though and he would have been seen by the voters earlier in his run.

[umgeoboy]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 11:38am

actually many of the out of town voters do not come in that often. And usually only come in right before they have to vote. Therefore they may have never seen Daniel Davis.

Congrats to LaCage's 4 nominations! Go Jerry Mitchel for choreography!!!

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 11:41am

Was Davis Sacked?????? I thought he personally left the show......anyways, for that, I'm glad he didn't get nominated

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 11:45am

The entire voting block doesn't choose the nominees, only the committee. And they most assuredly had seen Davis in La Cage already.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 11:48am

MTVMANN, not only was Davis sacked, but it was announced by the producers of La Cage that he had been sacked and why he had been sacked.

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 12:00pm

well, I do remember reading something about that, but always thought he was fed up with the show and left......I was wrong

[justthefacts2]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 10:17pm

No, what we heard was why the producers wanted the public to believe he was sacked. We will never know the real reason he was fired. He was certainly making Gary Beach look not-so-good in comparison, according to most of the reviews, so that can't have been happy for the Beach coterie. And Davis had never been the "big name" the producers had wanted to star with Beach, and Goulet, obviously, was available by March. But those brilliant reviews Davis got - now that could tricky. What better way to neatralize his good press and smooth the way for his replacement than by smearing Davis? Then the public would be talking about his so-called "behavior" (without asking about the source of the stories) instead of his performance (which HAD actually been witnessed by said public and was verifiable.) And guess what? It worked! It's called spin.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 9:42am

He was a ****to work with, that's why he got fired. There are past threads on this.

[juanatoke]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 10:30am

Do people really believe there is some hidden, complex, "must be another unknown secret," reason that Davis was fired? I think the reason is obvious and much more simple than that.

I also don't get the notion that the "REAL" reason they fired Davis for a box office boost. He's been known for his attitude problem for years. He may be talented, but I really believe it's all his own fault.

[Glebb]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 10:36am

Another revival that is fabulous!

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 11:13am

hey, justthefacts, here's some facts for you. If what you were saying had even a grain of truth to it, Davis could sue the producers for all they are worth and win without so much as breaking a sweat. Whether Davis was so good he made Beach look bad is open to debate (I saw them both and wasn't impressed by either), but the reason he was fired was his backstage behaviour, NOT his onstage performance.

[UptownGirl]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 11:16am

When I saw it (back in December), I thought BOTH of them were good... I really didn't notice one overshadowed the other. But I hope Jerry Mitchell wins for choreography, it was amazing!

[bonna]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 11:20am

"I also don't get the notion that the "REAL" reason they fired Davis for a box office boost."

Oh, come on. I'm not saying Davis didn't do things that contributed to his dismissal, but if the show had been making money and had a healthy advance, there's no way he gets fired. Look at La Cage's weekly gross since he left? Pitiful. But they took a gamble that Goulet would help ticket sales.

Interesting, in the Broadway.com feature on Tony nominees, Gary Beach says that most of what was written about the backstage problems at La Cage wasn't true.

[umgeoboy]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 11:25am

If you talk with the cast of The frogs, they do not have the same feed back about Daniel Davis. That cast actually enjoyed working wiht him a lot!

Also, Gavin Creel disagreed with the press about Daniel Davis from the beginning. He was verbally sticking up for him throughout the whole ordeal.

In my opinion it looked more like 2 bitchy queens at each other. And Daniel Davis got the blame for all of it!

[grizzabella]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 12:00pm

Hi Folks! I just joined the board. I feel like I know some of you already and it's great to be here. In my humble opinion, from what I've read, since I've never met either Davis or Beach, I have to agree with Allthefacts and others who feel Davis unfairly got the blame for all the mess. Also, look at Michael Benjamin Washington's kind comments about Davis in the interview published on this board - was it last week or the week before? He had nothing but nice things to say.
Regardless, looking at the grosses since he left, it won't matter much if the show keeps hemoragging money the way it's doing now. Last week the attendance was in the 58% area. Not good. Maybe this is the public opinion of the show now that really counts!

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 12:05pm

The Box Office will go up this week by quite a few digits...the reviews, the Tony nominations...things will now start to look up for LA CAGE!

[Tommycanuhearme]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 12:26pm

I think the dismissal of Daniel Davis is best summed up by Harvey's declaration given prior to every "La Cage" performance. "What happens at La Cage stays at La Cage". I think it is ridiculous to think that any cast member, Beach, Washington, or Creel etc... is going to air anything in public. The statements about possible problems were vague at best, and the statements now declaring that no one had a problem with Davis are just as vague. No one is mentioning specifics, either pro or con. I'm sure that no one wants to burn any bridges and all involved would like to continuing working in the Broadway community.

Perhaps things were blown out of proportion in order to hasten the Davis exit, but there is no proof of that. If we remember, there were lots of problems in finding someone to fill the role of Georges long before the prodution even started rehearsals. With all the names being tossed about, I never recall Davis being mentioned, yet he was cast. Was that out of desperation in order to keep the show on schedule? Who knows? Only the producers of the show, and their not talking either.


Updated On: 5/11/05 at 12:26 PM

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 12:34pm

but if the show had been making money and had a healthy advance, there's no way he gets fired.

Why not? If he was even one tenth as impossible to deal with as the stories I heard filtering out from the Marquis, then it's no surprise he was fired. Maybe if he was the sole reason to see the show and the show was built around his name, then he could do what he liked and not get fired for it. But La Cage is not built around any one performer, which Davis found out, to his cost.

[Thenardier]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 1:05pm

Maybe I am the only one here who loved Gary Beach, but whatever. I thought Davis was really good - I had no idea he could sing.

I was surprised that he had such horrible backstage behavior. He was so nice at the stage door. Looking back at it, the whole cast didn't seem to have much of a bond.

[bonna]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 1:49pm

"If what you were saying had even a grain of truth to it, Davis could sue the producers for all they are worth and win without so much as breaking a sweat."

Not true at all. The producers never said anything on the record about the reason for Davis' firing and, if it's true that they're paying out the remainder of his contract, he'd have no reason to sue. The Post stoires were entirely attributed to anonymous "production sources."

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 2:01pm

The statement issued by the producers said why he has being fired and anyone who is let go from a contract for any reason has to be paid out for its remainder, that's standard practice.

[bonna]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 2:13pm

Here's the official statement. Show me where it says why Davis was fired, or even that he was fired.

https://www.broadwayworld.com/viewcolumn.cfm?colid=2650

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 2:14pm

Well, you know something? Playbill reported he'd been let go, and speculated it was Davis's behaviour that led to his dismissal. While the producers made their wishy washy statement about the arrival of Goulet, they also did absolutely nothing NOTHING to quash the rumours.

Updated On: 5/11/05 at 02:14 PM