Mandy Patinkin to join THE GREAT COMET as Pierre for 3 week run!- Page 14

[LarryD2]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 11:38am

"Stop using POC for your own agenda, then tossing them aside when they don't work for you" (some paraphrasing on that last bit cuz I don't remember precisely how it ended. 

I think this kind of thought is what's at play here. I don't think this situation was racially motivated at all, but the optics are bad. A lot of people are seeing an actor of color pushed out early in favor of a more famous white actor, and that's case closed for them, whether it's true or not. They've built a narrative, and taken out of context, the optics don't help.

That said, I think the producers probably feel they made a mistake hiring Oak to begin with. They really thought they were going to anoint a new star, and that he was going to give some incredible star-is-born performance. But that hasn't been the case--far from it. Hell, he wasn't even ready to start on time despite a 6-month lead-in. And then they jumped at the chance to bring in a bigger name, but didn't stop to think how the situation might look from the outside.

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 11:38 AM

[irishgator1]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 11:48am

It's a real shame for Oak and the show's reputation/cast/crew. I'm a POC and would be quite sad to have a very diverse cast pay the price.  I was at the matinee the day this was announced and at the stage door, he got a big cheer when he came out (though I don't know how many people there had heard the news).

As a casual theatre-goer who knows nothing of how shows are produced and financed, this is probably a stupid question...but would Oak's remaining three weeks really have put the show into that big of a financial hole? 

[Jish]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 11:48am

phantomcrazy14 said: "Walked by The Imperial today and saw some people had left some chalk notes on the sidewalk outside the front doors of the theatre. 

Among them were "Make room for Oak", "Pierre is sad", "Nobody should have to step aside for someone more famous" and then "Stop using POC for your own agenda, then tossing them aside when they don't work for you" (some paraphrasing on that last bit cuz I don't remember precisely how it ended. "

This seems very unfair. Great Comet is the most diverse new musical on Broadway this season with a star turn by a leading african american woman in a role that is not "traditionally" for a black actress.

I feel like the people making these comments haven't even seen the show with its diverse cast and ensemble.

Remember this anybody:

http://www.theatermania.com/washington-dc-theater/news/dear-evan-hansen-celebrates-opening-night_73733.html

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 11:48 AM

[LarryD2]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:02pm

As a casual theatre-goer who knows nothing of how shows are produced and financed, this is probably a stupid question...but would Oak's remaining three weeks really have put the show into that big of a financial hole? 

No, and keep in mind that the producers are also responsible for paying out the remainder of his contract. They're just making a gamble that they'll do better with Mandy, and that the switch-up will pay dividends in the end. But that remains to be seen.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:05pm

Jish said: "Remember this anybody:

http://www.theatermania.com/washington-dc-theater/news/dear-evan-hansen-celebrates-opening-night_73733.html"

As well as I remember this:

http://brettryback.com/2015/08/03/race-and-the-new-generation-of-musical-theatre-writers/

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:07pm

All of this is bringing me back to the Conan O'Brien-Jay Leno debacle.

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 12:07 PM

[Kad]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:07pm

The idea that this was a decision based on race really seems primed to backfire. This is a show that represents the ideal of how casting should be, and that's been a guiding principle of Malloy and Chavkin from the start (and permeates most of their creative work as a whole). Great Comet gives performers of all backgrounds an equal opportunity- and now, with Patinkin, it seems this vision expands into age as well as race, and hopefully we will see it expand further and include trans or genderqueer performers. It stands alone amongst other shows right now for this commitment to inclusion (even Hamilton is written to be race-specific in its casting). For people of color, whose opportunities are often limited to roles specifically based on their race (and, for black performers, often end up as essentially characterless singers of popular music in shows like Beautiful or Motown), Great Comet is an unfortunate rarity on Broadway.

But at the end of the day, the show has to make money. Broadway is not something done for the art alone. The percentage of ticketbuyers who made their purchase based on Oak alone is small. He is not, even by Broadway standards, a name. And Great Comet needs a name to make money right now.

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 12:07 PM

[bdn223]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:20pm

Dancingthrulife2 said: "Jarethan said: "froote said: "

Per some other posts, but adapting them, this is nothing new.  Even with two much more well known Tony winning actors actors still in the cast, i.e., Brian Stokers Mitchell and Billy Porter, Scott Rudin closed Shuffle Along because he discovered that Shuffle Along had somehow become solely the Audra MacDonald show and people weren't going to buy tickets without her.  And he is a pretty smart guy (although I do think he needs to start focusing the marketing more on Hello Dolly and less on Bette Midler or he is going to end up with a show that will run shorter than it should.

 

 

"

Rudin didn't "discover" that Shuffle Along was the Audra McDonald show. He practically marketed it AS one even knowing that Audra would be gone for a lengthy period of time before her pregnancy.

 

"

Shuffle Along was massive show for the Music Box. It should be noted that only 9 musicals (2 of which were revues) have ever played at the Music Box. Of those 9 arguable only 4 were "hits"; Of Thee I Sing (1931), Lost in the Stars (1949), Blood Brothers (1993), Pippin (2013), and now Dear Evan Hansen (2016). Just from a financial standpoint, its extremely difficult to make a musical financially viable in a house with barely 1,000 seats, let alone a show with a cast of 34, and not to mention a Broadway legend, and 2 Broadway A-Listers. Thus the show was one a financial tightrope to begin with.

On top of that it must not only mentioned, but emphasized that Rudin took out 2 "key man" insurance policies on Audra McDonald. This implies that he and the rest of his producing team were aware that the show was overly reliant on Ms McDonald to sell tickets.

Shuffle Along Timeline

September 2015 -Producers announced exactly 6 months before the show started previews that Audra would miss 3 months of performances (June 21-September 27)(https://www.playbill.com/article/audra-mcdonald-will-miss-three-months-of-shuffle-along-performances-com-362398).

March 2016- Shuffle Along begins Previews playing to SRO, but discounted crowds

April 28, 2016-Shuffle Along Opens to glowing reviews making some think it could actually take the Tony from Hamilton, continues to sell out, but with discounts

May 3, 2016- Shuffle Along gets 10 Tony Nominations second to Hamilton- continues to sell out, but with discounts

May 10, 2016- Audra supersizes everyone and announces shes pregnant, but also announces she will stay with Shuffle Along for an Additional Month through July 24th instead of June 21st

https://www.playbill.com/article/london-production-of-lady-day-at-emersons-bar-amp-grill-starring-audra-mcdonald-postponed

May 11th- Shuffle ALong producers announce grammy award winner Rhiannon Giddens, will fill in for Audra while she in on Maternity leave

https://www.playbill.com/article/grammy-winner-will-succeed-audra-mcdonald-in-shuffle-along-savion-glover-joining-the-cast

June 1st - Producers announce Tony Award winning choreographer and world renown tap dance Savion Glover. will shoe horn himself into the production while Audra is on Maternity leave

https://www.playbill.com/article/savion-glover-sets-the-date-to-join-cast-of-shuffle-along

June 12th- Shuffle Along goes 0 for 10 at the Tony Awards

June 23rd- Rudin announces Shuffle Along to Close when Audra was set to go on maternity leave

https://www.broadwayworld.com//article/SHUFFLE-ALONG-Sets-Sudden-Broadway-Closing-After-Audra-McDonald-Departs-20160623

Rudin gave the Shuffle Along 9 months to sell tickets to performances during Audra's initial leave, and still saw a massive drop off during that 3 month period. Then when Audra announces her pregnancy she extends for a month, and Rudin announce 2 attempts to "stunt cast" to keep the show afloat while she is out. The show doesn't see a post Tony bump in sails, especially once Audra's scheduled departure. Since Rudin continued to see the show's advance plummet once Audra left, and he could argue that Audra's unexpected pregnancy at 42 would then producers to file a claim against the key man insurance policies they took out on Audra.  Thus Rudin could risk keeping the show open and risk likely having to close it before Audra was able to return due to poor ticket sales, or make all of his money back by cashing in the key man insurance policies he and his fellow producers took out on Audra. 

Based on :https://www.forbes.com/sites/marchershberg/2016/11/14/audra-mcdonald-stars-in-new-lawsuit/#5c133abe54c2 it seems like there might have been some disagreement whether or not to due this, but clearly in the end a majority of producers would rather get their $14 million back, then likely loose it all when they looked at their advance once Audra left. 

So anyone complaining that the producers didn't give Shuffle Along time to sell tickets without Audra, Rudin gave the show over 7.5 months to sell the show on the concept alone without her, then 1.5 months to have Rhiannon Giddens build an advance, then Savion Glover a month to build up some sort of advance before finally admitting the show just wouldn't sell without Audra. By doing so the producers could arguably (Its still in court) get their entire investment back. It was a purely business decision, but one still cannot argue that Rudin didn't attempt to let the show live on its own artist merits. 

[Dancingthrulife2]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:23pm

Jarethan said: "Dancingthrulife2 said: "Jarethan said: "froote said: "

Per some other posts, but adapting them, this is nothing new.  Even with two much more well known Tony winning actors actors still in the cast, i.e., Brian Stokers Mitchell and Billy Porter, Scott Rudin closed Shuffle Along because he discovered that Shuffle Along had somehow become solely the Audra MacDonald show and people weren't going to buy tickets without her.  And he is a pretty smart guy (although I do think he needs to start focusing the marketing more on Hello Dolly and less on Bette Midler or he is going to end up with a show that will run shorter than it should.

Rudin didn't "discover" that Shuffle Along was the Audra McDonald show. He practically marketed it AS one even knowing that Audra would be gone for a lengthy period of time before her pregnancy.
 

I don't think that was true, although I certainly could be wrong.  

I remember that he was marketing it as a show with 4 Tony winners.  He was clear that she was going to be gone due to Lady Day in London, but he still had three Tony award winners in the cast besides her.  I think the issue was that he didn't expect demand to disappear (vs. go down) when she was gone.  I was personally shocked at the time that he didn't feel they could figure out a way to minimize losses in a small theatre like the Music Box while she was gone (during the busy summer season), but I guess he concluded that no one wanted to see a show with a future Broadway legend without the legend.  

That is the danger with casting a big star in what you hope to be an open-ended engagement.  What happens when they leave? 


 

 

"

 

I see where you are coming from, but I think they marketed the show as an Audra show even though they didn't intend it to be. Before the show started previews, they were very upfront about the the fact that Audra wouldn't be performing for several months. Now, I'm not saying that producers shouldn't be frank about when a performer is performing or not, but if you think about it, this put the show in a difficult situation. For one, people wanted to see the full star-studded cast, and since no can can replace Audra, tickets sales would slump for performances without her. But more importantly, the focus of show shifted from the amazing ensemble to Audra alone not only because she was the biggest name in the show, but also because people are again and again reminded of her absence, especially when it comes to purchasing tickets. I'm sure that none of this is intended, but bad timing and bad decision destroyed this amazing show that should've been a major Broadway event for what it is worth.

[JPeterman]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:29pm

Whenever Mandy Patinkin found out about how the Kagans got rid of Oak to make room for him to be in the show, the honorable thing for him to do would have been to immediately bow out and let Oak finish his run.  This has been embarrassing for Oak, but it is even more embarrassing for Mandy Patinkin,  It makes him look like an entiltled, spoiled brat - perhaps at no fault of his own. If I were him, I would have called Kagan and told him to honor his commitments, like a man.

 

And this is most embarrassing for the Kagans, who after their bullying of Ars Nova, have followed that up with another classless act.

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 12:29 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:37pm

I think it's utterly ridiculous to place any blame on Mandy. All he did was accept work. 

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 12:37pm

I think it's utterly ridiculous to place any blame on Mandy. All he did was accept work. 

[Mr. Musical]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:05pm

JPeterman said: "Whenever Mandy Patinkin found out about how the Kagans got rid of Oak to make room for him to be in the show, the honorable thing for him to do would have been to immediately bow out and let Oak finish his run.  This has been embarrassing for Oak, but it is even more embarrassing for Mandy Patinkin,  It makes him look like an entiltled, spoiled brat - perhaps at no fault of his own. If I were him, I would have called Kagan and told him to honor his commitments, like a man."

Just like the production had to buy Oak out, if Mandy dropped out, he'd have to buy himself out. Which I guarantee would be a lot more expensive than Oak's buyout.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:07pm

Trying to decipher Oak's hashtags in his farewell message on IG that he would be leaving August 13th after all. I can't decide if "upwords" is an intentional misspelling. But also, why #KatyPerry? Is this like a "swish swish bish" thing? 

I always try to speak from my heart with love after listening. I have listened. I'm more than grateful for all the love and support the community and fans have shown me.  It makes what we do and deal with as artists easier when you know many people do indeed have your back and that you are valued for your work. In spite of everything, I am grateful to have had the time to bring this character to life with a remarkable cast that truly make the Imperial Theater a sacred place every night.  My pops would always tell me to be aware of the company you keep.  I'm fully aware of the remarkable talents this cast holds, with Denee at the helm.  My work is just a reflection of what they bring, have brought and will continue to bring, be it me, Mandy, whomever is co-pilot to Denee. AUGUST 13th WILL BE MY LAST SHOW! I will not be returning. So make room in your schedule between now and Aug 13th. Come through, have a drink, and let's celebrate the time we have because as always, that's all we are guaranteed.  We make the most of the gifts we are given and I'm driven to deliver a defining moment in time, with every line I let loose on stage. #MynameisOak #TheHomiesRollDEEP #TheFansMadeRoom#WeAreTheChange #IPierredAndProspered #MyPierreWillPerish #August13th#OnwardsAndUpwords #KatyPerry #SkateyPierre?

 

[JSquared2]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:13pm

JPeterman said: "Whenever Mandy Patinkin found out about how the Kagans got rid of Oak to make room for him to be in the show, the honorable thing for him to do would have been to immediately bow out and let Oak finish his run.  This has been embarrassing for Oak, but it is even more embarrassing for Mandy Patinkin,  It makes him look like an entiltled, spoiled brat - perhaps at no fault of his own. If I were him, I would have called Kagan and told him to honor his commitments, like a man.

You're being RIDICULOUS!  Think of it this way --- by your own reasoning, anyone who goes on any job interview (whether it be at Starbucks or Google or starring on Broadway) should ask their prospective employer if someone else is being fired in order for them to be hired for this position --- and if the answer is yes, then they should withdraw their name from consideration??  Wouldn't you be EMBARRASSED to start a new job knowing someone else used to sit at that desk?

[Sunny11]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:16pm

We are talking about a role orginated by Josh Groban , a white guy, where the third actor will also be a white guy but the second is black. It's a bit over the top that a POC has a role stolen since it wasn't POC to begin with.

[froote]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:19pm

Oak uses the Katy Perry hashtag in every Instagram post, some kind of inside joke I guess.

[BroadwayMan5]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:37pm

JSquared2 said: "JPeterman said: "Whenever Mandy Patinkin found out about how the Kagans got rid of Oak to make room for him to be in the show, the honorable thing for him to do would have been to immediately bow out and let Oak finish his run.  This has been embarrassing for Oak, but it is even more embarrassing for Mandy Patinkin,  It makes him look like an entiltled, spoiled brat - perhaps at no fault of his own. If I were him, I would have called Kagan and told him to honor his commitments, like a man.

You're being RIDICULOUS!  Think of it this way --- by your own reasoning, anyone who goes on any job interview (whether it be at Starbucks or Google or starring on Broadway) should ask their prospective employer if someone else is being fired in order for them to be hired for this position --- and if the answer is yes, then they should withdraw their name from consideration??  Wouldn't you be EMBARRASSED to start a new job knowing someone else used to sit at that desk?

 

"

Haha, that is perfectly put and I 100% agree. 

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:50pm

I guess I'm not understanding many of the folks who are all "It's a job" when referencing taking a sick day or leaving people alone at the stage door... but who are up in arms about this. Oak got paid. If I ever got paid to not work the rest of my contracted job, I'd take a nice vacation and not think twice about it.

It's either a job or it's something else. If it's just a job, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. 

[Kad]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 1:53pm

If Oak were terminated- which can only happen, per union contract, with just cause- this would be an issue.

But an employer has a right to give their employee the work directive to not come in.

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 2:12pm

It certainly can't be denied that racism is not just a thing of the past.  And it does continue to rear its ugly head even in this day and age.

What I fear though is that people become immune to it when the accusations get hurled around, even when and where there is no evidence of it.  And it only serves to harm those who truly are victims of it.     

And again, this minimizes the issue to the point that when it really is the issue at hand, people are skeptical.

It looks to me like this is a situation where a famous ACTOR was given the nod over a not so famous ACTOR.   The latter just happened to be an ACTOR of color.   

I'm not sure which poster it was but someone laid out a list of numerous other situations like this that have happened and it was a white actor passed over for another white actor.  It happens.   Sometimes it's because one actor was preferred over another because of ability.  Sometimes it happens because the powers that be think there's a better fit.  At other times it's because the NAME trumps all else.   Again, it happens.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 2:13pm

I understand the reaction from other POC on Broadway, racism is everywhere, but I don't see the argument in this case (as many other posters have stated).

Also, once COMET has Mandy other Stars may more easily check out this show for a part time gig. This casting is opening the door for others, including POC Actors.

[Margo319]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 2:18pm

 "Frankly, I hope it ruins Oak's career."

Despicable.  Disgusting. Horrible.  You don't belong on a Broadway message board when you wish to see a Broadway actors' career end.  

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 2:55pm

I was personally shocked at the time that he didn't feel they could figure out a way to minimize losses in a small theatre like the Music Box while she was gone

The smaller the theatre, the smaller the potential gross.  As a result, even if the running costs are a bit lower than something like Lion King or Wicked, even if you sold out every night, it would take much much longer to ever recoup, much less turn a profit.  Therefore, advance has to be pretty big if you need to hit 70% of the potential gross (or more) just to hit your weekly nut.

"Nobody should have to step aside for someone more famous"

Okay, that is just HILARIOUSLY naive.

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 02:55 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/28/17 at 2:57pm

Margo.  Get a life.

People who get their friend to start a twitter war against the show they're in shouldn't get to keep their jobs.