Mandy Patinkin to join THE GREAT COMET as Pierre for 3 week run!- Page 9

[asimplegal2]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 9:55pm

leighmiserables said: "Mr. Nowack said: "I think the only disgrace is all these people bashing a show that has taken greater strides towards diversity than pretty much any other this season."

My thoughts exactly. While the number of people who are "boycotting" the show are likely minuscule to the amount of people who just bought tickets to see Mandy, imagine the irony if they contributed to one of the most diverse shows on Broadway's closing? 

I also cannot believe the amount of people who are tweeting at Rachel and Dave (who likely had little to no say in the matter) and attacking them. As well as everyone who's referring to Mandy as "some old white guy that nobody cares about." Like wth??? 

 

"

The same people who are "boycotting" the show probably think Dear Evan Hansen is the pinnacle of diversity and representation. 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 10:00pm

chernjam said: "OK - I've not seen Great Comet and wasn't planning on it during Grobans run, when Oak took over -and certainly not with Patinkin (had I really wanted to, I would've seen it with Groban)

Some thoughts or questions:

1 - I wonder how close/far away is GC from recouping?  I'm assuming that during Grobans run they did good business (particularly at the start and end of his run) to cover the weekly nut and chipping away at the investment. If they are close to recouping, then this probably was good sense as it will help increase business till Patinkin takes over as Oak fans run to his defense, will bring a new audience who will rush to see Patinkin (which if that happens, and BO increases, he probably will be persuaded to extend his run).  If they're not - then this was really, really stupid.  They will have the costs of marketing, rehearsing, etc to add to the already existing debt and weekly costs.  And how many people can they keep bringing in to make this new model work of limited actor-driven runs?

2 - I wonder if Oak has a few "sick days" coming up?  If he was fired - and he's not talking... taking a day or two off for a whole host of mysterious illnesses will only add to the intrigue and be a way of saying how un happy he was with this situation

3 - Yeah this will generate some buzz and ticket sales, but it's not like Hugh Jackman or Jake Gyllenhall is coming in.  Patinkin is known on Broadway - and yes TV - but I doubt he's going to be a substantial draw.  Particularly since this seems like a bit of a niche type of show.  It's fans adore it - and it has generated some buzz.  But at least among my friends who saw it - most went for Groban and were happy to see him, but were somewhat mixed about the show in general.

 

No way of knowing until the stories come out after it closes, but I will bet that the show is nowhere near returning its investment.  There are a few famous shows that lost significant portions of their investments because the producers didn't focus on determining how long the shows would have to run, non-discounted, to return their investment, given their extremely high operating costs.  Ragtime has often been criticized as Drabinsky's folly because (this was before premium pricing), the combination of initial investment, weekly operating cost,and weekly potential gross could not be turned into a workable formula without lengthy sellout periods.  I seem to remember that it would have had to sell-out for 2 years to have a shot; and, while it had a respectable run, it did not sell-out for two years, and the weekly nut was just too high to sustain a non-sell-out run involving lots of discounted tickets.  That was also true of Follies.  Follies should have run longer -- I remember reading shocked traditional news stories 45 years ago when the producers announced its closing, because that info was even less available than it is today.  it was simply too expensive to run with non-sell-out audiences paying for too many discounted tickets.  There was no margin for error.

I suspect that may be the case with TGC, although I have no facts.  I know what I saw when I attended a performance.  It was over the top...and that HAS to be expensive.  On top of that, they were working at the Imperial Theatre, but not really.  So many seats were removed that the gross potential was dramatically reduced.  I was really surprised the first time I saw what their potential gross was, until I saw the number of seats being sold.  Fast forward...it never reached the level in which it sold lots of really high-priced premium seats  up until Josh was getting ready to leave, and was selling a lot of discounted tickets as well.  With what I guess are extremely high operating costs -- again, don't know but it certainly feels that way -- I have to believe that it is going to be incredibly hard to reach break-even, given the size of the investment and weekly nut.

So, unless they are focused on trying to figure out how to really re-energize the box office (and Patinkin is not the answer for an extended run), I am betting that their most realistic assessment is figure out how they can keep it energized enough to reduce investment loss and extend its life (and along with it, employment to a decent number of very hard-working people).

 

[Notreallysilent 2]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 10:23pm

The more I think about it, the more angry I get about everything. As Cynthia pointed out, it really does suck for both actors because Mandy won't enter in a good foot, and oak will be forced to leave. While I highly doubt there was a racial reasoning behind the casting, as it seems clear the show just wanted to get more ticket sales. I get Mandy probably only could go for these few weeks, but the fact that it sucks that this is in the cost of losing representation. But not only that, but the entire situation is sketchy. I really doubt oak had much of a choice to step down. Let's be real if he said no, do you think the producers would have said no to Mandy. And I imagine even if they did let oak say no he would feel guilty for saying no. He was put in a very tight spot. I know I don't personally know what happened, but it's just hard to believe someone would "graciously say yes" to stepping down from a lead in a broadway show, even if he still gets paid since as others have noted an actor wants to be an actor. They want to be able to perform and do what they wanted. While the producers of the show did this for the reason to keep the show open, what exactly would three weeks do? It's not like they were going to close on September 4th. I get all the scheduling issues with Mandy, but three weeks won't keep it open past Labor Day. It's also just plain rude in my view to kick someone out for someone else. Someone who rehearsed for weeks and learned two instruments just for this show deserves better. I loved oak in the show, and I would love for him to return, but at the same time I hope he doesn't return to a show who disrespected him like that. People might say it was only for money, which seems right, but imagine if you were in his shoes and you got kicked out of a show. This is at least my view on all of this. 

[schubox]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 10:30pm

leighmiserables said: "Now people are...hashtagging? https://twitter.com/GreatCometBway/status/890377872254304260 (read the replies) 

 

"

I wish I hadn't read the comments 

[schubox]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 10:34pm

In reference to the seating, they only removed 200 seats and there are probably nearly that many in stage 

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 10:39pm

I had little to no interest in seeing the show again. I didn't know, or care, that an ex-Hamilton ensemble member was playing Pierre. I bought a ticket the instant I heard Mandy was playing the role. Oak is a nobody. Mandy is a legend.

[Glittergrrl]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 10:48pm

I was never interested in the show until I read one of drama mama's posts where she mentioned "Dust and Ashes". I decided to check out the song and have been listening to it incessantly for the last few weeks. I really regret missing Josh Groban. I was looking at tickets for today's matinee on Monday and a majority of the mezzanine was available. I was pretty shocked.  Only 2 days before the show and there were lots of seats... even some stage seating. I didn't end up going... (and now I don't know who I should see),  but I guess my point is that I question how well the show's been selling since Groban left. I think the producers saw an opportunity to make money and they took it.  

Updated On: 7/28/17 at 10:48 PM

[seaweedjstubbs]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 11:09pm

As a very small member of the black NYC theatre community, I have to defend the people who are vocally upset about this decision. While I don't think it's completely fair to call anyone racist in this situation, it still hurts to see a talented black actor have to give up a role to anyone, even a legend like Mandy Patinkin. None of us besides Oak and the producers know exactly how this situation was handled, but from the outside looking in, it doesn't look good at all. It just adds to a growing list of situations similar to this, namely the way that the closings of SHUFFLE ALONG, MOTOWN (the 2016 return), and AFTER MIDNIGHT were handled. Each of those shows received abrupt closing notices under shady circumstances and were thoroughly discussed on this board and elsewhere. As a black actor, it just begins to feel like producers have very little faith in black performers unless they're in a show that's a hit right out of the gate like HAMILTON. I think this outcry is a culmination of those feelings. The anger and hurt people are expressing is not all stemming from this one decision. It's just hard not to take these decisions personally when they feel like they keep happening over and over again. Hope that this makes sense and explains why people are "bringing race into it" as you're all so fond of saying.

[asoftplacetoland]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 11:11pm

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890330830043742208

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890331582673932288

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890332121247739905

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890332692956499968

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890333121090113538

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890336407671144448

I'm going to have to agree with her. 

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 11:16pm

Broadway Legend/Pop Culture Icon vs. that guy who was in Hamilton

A good business decision. 

[asoftplacetoland]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 11:17pm

Also Oak liked this tweet: https://twitter.com/rtheatrenerd/status/890290809580511233

[schubox]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 11:22pm

asoftplacetoland said: "https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890330830043742208

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890331582673932288

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890332121247739905

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890332692956499968

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890333121090113538

https://twitter.com/cynthiaerivo/status/890336407671144448

I'm going to have to agree with her. 

 

"

Yeah hard not to agree with all of that. A ****ty situation all around 

[Robbie2]

Posted: 7/26/17 at 11:26pm

Sally Durant Plummer said: "I had little to no interest in seeing the show again. I didn't know, or care, that an ex-Hamilton ensemble member was playing Pierre. I bought a ticket the instant I heard Mandy was playing the role. Oak is a nobody. Mandy is a legend.

 

"Not sure what the big deal is...that's show biz. My Mom wanted to see Comet with Josh not this Oak dude but now she wants to see it hearing Mandy's in it so I'll see it again as I had no interest seeing it with Oak!

 

[PaulWom]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 12:02am

Here's something no one is saying out loud, but plenty of people have mentioned in conversation w me: where was your support for Oak yesterday? A week ago? Hell, MONTHS ago. He's been announced in this role for quite a while (not "two weeks"- that's ridiculous and you all know it).

 

The week he was not in the show compared to the week he WAS only had a difference of 100K in grosses. It is not unreasonable to assume that Ingrid/the show is bringing in the current numbers. It is valid to question whether Oak without Ingrid would bring in those same numbers.  I also find it absolutely shocking that up until yesterday, the amount of interest of Oak in the role from this "outraged" community was close to nothing. Look at his press coverage: one Broadway.com interview, a BroadwayBlack article with Denee. Am I missing anything? This was a musical set in Russia featuring two dark skinned actors, and the lack of interest in that is kind of shocking.

Youre also missing the larger picture. Comet employs Muslim, South Asian, black, Chinese (etc etc etc) actors, including an unknown (Denee Benton) as a RUSSIAN COUNTESS. If they need to bring in a name to maintain that, so be it. It's called show business

Updated On: 7/27/17 at 12:02 AM

[binau]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 12:12am

A new mantra for those that want to resist this absurd emotional reaction: Oak doesn't pay the bills or fill the tills. 

#fillthetills

#paythebills

This is capitalism. Move along oak. If those complaining have an issue you need to fight capitalism. That is the root cause of this issue, not racism. 

If by god's chance they got Kanye West to play the role we should all start chanting move along Mandy. It is $$$$. 

[Someone, Somewhere]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 12:34am

Here are my two cents about this... 

The Twitterverse is insane. It's really just a business move and I understand some people don't have the knowledge we share on the boards. With that being said... I feel terrible for the show and those involved because those uneducated people will try anything (and really anything) to ruin it's name now. (Sort of surprised theatre "celebrities" are hopping on board.)

Look, the same thing happens all the time. (I believe the Jimmy Nail/Sting example was brought up.) When "The Last Ship" pulled this stunt, no one noticed... because well... Who was Jimmy Nail? Sure he had a niche market, but Sting was seen as an improvement and was tapping a new, still not large enough audience. But the way people asked who is Jimmy Nail... also ask that about Oak. No one outside of the theatre circuit knows the name. (They may know "Hamilton", but not Oak. Or Phillipa Soo.) 

Those who want to see Oak will rush the show for $39. If they don't get tickets that day, they'll do it next day, etc. 
But, Mandy will tap an audience who may not have been interested to the show prior. Oh and most importantly... will buy full price. 

What makes me laugh most though are the people claiming that the show uses diversity as a marketing tool. Let's be honest, the show has not once made a deal about that. (Most shows don't.) Audiences DO. Fan sites and news sites write articles detailing how great the casting was. The show never once did. They want to put on the best show and implement color blind casting, which is great for the show and all actors. When Mandy comes in, the show will still be (and has always been) diverse and you can just tell by looking at the cast list. A show is or isn't diverse... there is no in between. This show IS incredibly diverse. 

While I do sympathize with Oak (it must be hard, I cannot deny that), I also wish the producers all the luck in the world with this unnecessary, ridiculous backlash. 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 1:36am

schubox said: "In reference to the seating, they only removed 200 seats and there are probably nearly that many in stage 

 

"That is not what is shown on the weekly grossers list, both number of seats and gross potential.

 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 1:50am

qolbinau said: "A new mantra for those that want to resist this absurd emotional reaction: Oak doesn't pay the bills or fill the tills. 

#fillthetills

#paythebills

This is capitalism. Move along oak. If those complaining have an issue you need to fight capitalism. That is the root cause of this issue, not racism. 

If by god's chance they got Kanye West to play the role we should all start chanting move along Mandy. It is $$$$. 

 

I am pretty sure that I figured out that Oak was Hercules Mulligan and he was absolutely terrific in that role, if i am correct.  It was the 8th or 9th largest role in the show.  It is unfortunate that he lost his job, as he is an extremely talented person; I believe that, had he been lily white, with his same public profile, it still would have happened.

The question that has to be asked is what the hell the producers were expecting when they hired him?  I don't have a playbill handy and am too lazy to try start searching to find out, but I am hoping that they are inexperienced.  At the time, I really thought that they stupidly believed that his affiliation with Hamilton was going to incent people to purchase tickets for a person who is essentially still an unknown.

I think your last comment was right-on.  It is not about color and people shouldn't make it about color.  It is about the producers not thinking through how they were going to replace a big star (the second biggest on Broadway this season(?)) in a show that the big star couldn't sell-out, even after some number of seats were discounted.  Clearly, Josh sold a huge number of tickets, but not all of them.  An unknown replacement in a show that a lot of people love and a lot of people don't get (let's be honest) is not the solution.

 

Updated On: 7/27/17 at 01:50 AM

[bear88]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 1:52am

The whole situation is very unfortunate, and I sympathize both with people who think Oak got a raw deal and with those who find the criticism unfair to a show that really is a model of diverse, color-blind casting - but also has to make as much money as possible. 

There is a bit of cumulative frustration here. I noticed the mention of Shuffle Along, which was abruptly closed after Audra McDonald announced her pregnancy. Adrienne Warren, who was wonderful in that show, was one of the actors expressing anger on Twitter this morning. Scott Rudin never gave that show a chance to succeed of fail without McDonald, even though it was an ensemble piece and everyone knew she would be out for a while anyway. 

And I certainly agree that Oak got a rotten deal. He spent months learning the piano, learning the accordion for crying out loud, to prepare for the role. His Twitter feed was filled with anticipation for playing Pierre, and a recent photo included Josh Groban posing with him and Ingrid Michaelson after attending the show the other day. Most of the reviews I've read of his performance have been quite favorable. So his situation sucks.

That said, I went to Great Comet and saw firsthand its diverse collection of performers, and not just black and white. A look at the program only reminds me. And let's be honest. A "safer" choice for Natasha in a Broadway show would have been anyone but Denee Benton, an unknown black actress playing a Russian countess and apparently confusing some tourists and Groban fans in the audience. (I've seen threads on this board recounting this.) Nobody would have raised a fuss if a more famous, white actress had been chosen, nor would there be any fuss if Oak hadn't been picked as the temporary replacement Pierre. And if Patinkin's schedule had been different, maybe there wouldn't have been a conflict at all. The show's commitment to color-blind casting is working against it.

It seems like an unfortunate set of circumstances, with a show that - without major awards and with its only major star gone - needs all the help it can get to survive. And since I'm very fond of the musical, I hope it can succeed in spite of everything.

Updated On: 7/27/17 at 01:52 AM

[SweetLips]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 3:35am

Look what's happened to Kinky Boots. I don't call that stunt casting, I call that clever casting.

'We', the outsiders, will probably never know the truth, though a fun discussion. One in one out for whatever reason.

I shared a dressing room with a guy whose feet STANK and he was let go[after many helpful suggestions to correct the problem]--so who knows??

Mandy should be great, so will the next guy and the next and hopefully they will all sell tickets and work will continue for many-----ain't that what this is all about?

[binau]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 3:45am

I have to agree Jarethan it does seem like bad producing. What were they thinking casting Oak? (hopefully this incident has still boosted his career, even if it didn't go perfectly). It would have been very easy for the producers to do a bit of market research and conclude that Josh Groban was a major draw and the show wouldn't survive without him - or that the general public do not know who Oak is (if it wasn't already obvious). Even now, it is hard to see casting Mandy is anything but a temporary band-aid. It feels like they are really scrambling and I suppose we should give kudos that they are trying to keep the show going by whatever means necessary, but this is a mess.

Who could they possibly get to sustain a run in this show now with such short notice?

I know this is all easy to say in hindsight. 

 

[10086Sundays]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 4:19am

They cast Oak so long ago, I'm sure at the time they were hoping that some Tony wins and good word of mouth would carry them after Josh left, but clearly that didn't happen.  I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they didn't cast Oak thinking he would bring in anywhere near the amount of fans Josh did.  

I just looked at Telecharge for this Friday, Saturday Eve and Sunday and they're only about 70% sold on average.  Sunday, especially, is closer to 50%.  Plus, most of the tickets for all 3 shows are eligible for a discount.

qolbinau said: "Who could they possibly get to sustain a run in this show now with such short notice?"

I think that might be the real issue, they haven't been able to get someone big to come in after Labor Day, for any of the roles, so they're panicking.

Updated On: 7/27/17 at 04:19 AM

[Margo319]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 4:27am

It's all about making money for them, and they clearly were not making enough with Oak.  It's interesting people thinking just because people are in Hamilton that makes them bankable or somehow "known around the whole planet and therefore a huge star".  Didn't work with Phillipa, did not work here.  This sucks for him. Ouch. 

[Skimbleshanks2]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 5:34am

10086Sundays said: "They cast Oak so long ago, I'm sure at the time they were hoping that some Tony wins and good word of mouth would carry them after Josh left, but clearly that didn't happen.  I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they didn't cast Oak thinking he would bring in anywhere near the amount of fans Josh did.  

"

I think COMET producers thought they could stick the words HAMILTON on some ads and it would guarantee sales... But as I've said time and time again, people want to see the show HAMILTON and not the STARS FROM HAMILTON (except LIN...). Look at AMELIE... 

This was always a weak casting decision that was never going to result in strong ticket sales or buzz...

I don't mean that as a slight to OAK; I feel bad for him and the cast, because now they're all in a very awkward situation... But I'm also realistic and think others should be too...

Then again, I'm also someone who booked tickets to the COMET the second I heard MANDY PATINKIN was joining the cast... Before that, I was waiting until they announced OAK's replacement to consider whether I'd go back for a (I think fifth?) time!

Just my two cents :)

[chyares]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 6:11am

This whole situation is such a mess and should have been handled way better, really unfair to Oak given how his run started late and now is getting cut early :/

Interesting thought but for the long run, I think Ramin Karimloo could potentially be fantastic as Pierre. Thoughts?