Mary Poppins Arrives on Broadway Oct 2006, Lion King Moves to Minskoff June 2006 — Page 3

I think they mean its going to open in June, one week after it leaves the New Amsterdam. FIDDLER is closing in a month or so, and unless they have a VERY brief engagement of something else, the Minskoff will probably be dark until LION KING opens which gives them five months for improvements/refurbishment.

Updated On: 11/10/05 at 10:08 PM

Yeah, Sutton would be good.

Sorry, isn't the Minksoff rather close to the New Amsterdam? I'm not from NYC, just trying to go on memory here.

The Producers won?! Wow, sorry - I know i'm a little late, but wow, I don't get what ppl see in that show. Its good but not THAT GOOD.

I'm saddened Laura Michelle Kelly won't be coming over here with Mary Poppins. I read so many wonderful things about her. However, may I suggest ERIN DILLY? Every time I see Chitty, I think to myself how delightful she would be in this.

Didn't someone on this board say that the number where the toys come alive and attack the children will be gone?

As for the price tag....people and families are still paying $100 (or is it $110 now?) for Lion King. By all accounts, they are paying $100 for Tarzan. The New Amsterdam, however, is structured such that they can have a few price ranges. The balcony seats are definitely affordable.

Oo, Erin Dilly is a great idea. She's amazing in Chitty.

"I have read in several different places that Laura Michelle Kelly signed a contract that stated she would open in the role if the show did indeed come Stateside."

Yes that was reported here -- incorrectly. Cameron McIntosh doesn't have the power to offer any performer an International Contract because he doesn't have jurisdiction over American Actors Equity. Kelly would have to be petitioned and very possibly could be declined permission. Thus no producer can put a guarantee like that into a contract.

"Mary Poppins IS a name itself. This show does not need a "name" to sell and I will be truly sad if genuine talent and a perfect match for this particular role are sacrificed for a "name."

See my quote earlier. It's apparently not so big a name to keep the London production from grossing only about 85 percent capacity less then one year into the run. Poppins doesn't have the spectacle of LION KING or TARZAN and has a substantially higher budget then BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. Plus there is the problem (for most tourists anyway) that this is NOT the film on stage, but a very different animal. Disney sees all this as a potential liability and want to protect their show. I can't blame them after CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG.

But even though they are apparently on the wish list, I'd frankly be surprised if they got a name as big as Winslet or Driver or even Knightly because Disney is notoriously cheap. It's a difficult role to cast because there isn't a major star who is particularly "right" for it.

I'm only reporting what I've heard. My guess is that Poppins will go to a solid performer with some known track record, but that could be as simple as a Sutton Foster or an Idina Menzel (no I'm not suggesting her, merely using an example).

I'd actually suggest Kristin Chenoweth, but they would never find two people shorter then her to play the children.

Updated On: 11/11/05 at 02:17 AM

Cameron Mackintosh doesn't have the power to offer an international contract? If he doesn't then who on earth does? He's one of the biggest producers around. Is it possible that her return to Broadway in Poppins was sorted out while she was here for Fiddler? She had already been cast in the London production when she accepted the role in Fiddler, after all.

I'd actually suggest Kristin Chenoweth, but they would never find two people shorter then her to play the children.

Now THAT was funny.

---