'Memphis' predictions that were fantastical-ly wrong- Page 4

[tazber]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 2:05pm

And you know that this vanilla goodness loves you back, Marq!

[Marquise]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 2:06pm

I will never deny or turn away your vanilla goodness baby!

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 2:32pm

People keep saying that the reason for its success is the crap season it was placed in. Well, the reviews came out before any other show opened so you can't use that excuse there. Broadway relies on tourists who see more than just the current seasons shows. That means Memphis was able take their business competing against pretty much NY staple shows Wicked, Mamma Mia, Jersey Boys, Phantom, etc.

[newintown]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 2:37pm

The only review for any show that counts is the Times (and sometimes not even that), which was a definite pan.

"This slick but formulaic entertainment barely generates enough heat to warp a vinyl record... the crucial ingredient — authentic soul — is missing in action."

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 2:39pm

The only review for any show that counts is the Times (and sometimes not even that)

Not anymore. It's not the 80s anymore.

[Marquise]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 2:54pm

or the '50s for that matter...

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 3:01pm

I think everyone is taking themselves all a bit too seriously.

This message board is all about prognosticating, whether the show in question has actually been seen by the poster or not. Sometimes we're right, sometimes we're wrong. Either way everyone here shares in the snark.

If we don't want or words tossed back in our faces, for whatever the reason, then don't post on a message board.

[Marquise]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 3:16pm

Yeah....so what is every one going to watch now that glee has finished it's first season?

[newintown]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 3:21pm

"It's not the 80s anymore."

"or the '50s for that matter... "

Point?

Q: Is there anyone who pretends that reviews from the Daily News, the Post, Newsday, the New Yorker, New York, Variety, Bloomberg, or any other review-publishing entity has any significant effect on a show's success?

A: Not in the real world.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 3:31pm

No newspaper hold a shows fate in their hands so don't act like the NY Times does.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 3:39pm

I don't think anyone is trying to 'call' or gleefully predict the demise of the musical, but in truth you don't have to have the financials from the producers themselves to be able to tell if a show with the approximate cast, crew, musicians is likely meeting or exceeding its nut or not.

What's actually more interesting to me is how many here seem to equate a closing notice with failure. Plenty of shows have lost money on Broadway only to recoup through touring and regional afterlife, just as plenty of movies that 'bombed' eventually turned profit in the home video market.

Do I think MEMPHIS will be a financial success on Broadway? No. Do I believe the Shuberts are eyeing potential other tenants for their theatre? Yes. Does that mean MEMPHIS won't eventually turn a profit down the road? No.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 4:40pm

That's why I've always detested the generally-accepted
BWW definition of 'flop' being 'not turning a profit in its Broadway run.' It's too flippant and, really, doesn't show the whole picture.

Nuance this board does not have

[blaxx]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 5:41pm

Blaxx: 'I see this fading into oblivion.' (10/19)

I stand by it! This is the Will Rogers Follies of our decade.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 6/15/10 at 6:58pm

That's why I've always detested the generally-accepted
BWW definition of 'flop' being 'not turning a profit in its Broadway run.'

That's not a BWW definition, that's an industry standard: whether or not a show has earned back its initial investment. Most of the time, if a show closes on Broadway without recouping, it's not going to. On this board, generally the shows talked about are the ones currently on Broadway, so if a show has finally earned back its money after six years of touring, the board has moved on.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 12:13pm

Also, only a very few shows have paid off with post-Broadway income, and in each case the show had recovered most of its investment by closing.

[leefowler]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 12:53pm

This is a really satisfying thread, actually. Mostly because if all these predictors and prognosticators had been correct about Memphis, they would be first on this board saying, "I told you so"!

Why is it so hard to admit you're wrong about something? And frankly, did ANYONE predict a best musical win for Memphis when it was in previews? If anyone wants to search the archives, that would be interesting

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 12:55pm

Q: Is there anyone who pretends that reviews from the Daily News, the Post, Newsday, the New Yorker, New York, Variety, Bloomberg, or any other review-publishing entity has any significant effect on a show's success?

A: Not in the real world.

Neither does the Times, actually. Have you seen the numbers for The Addams Family?

[newintown]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 3:16pm

Possibly quite true - although the Shrek story may sway some to an opposing point of view...

I think the Times can still kill a show that is lacking either a) nationally known stars, or b) built-in title appeal. Shrek had the title, but to think the tourists care about Brian Darcy James or (maybe more so) Sutton Foster is naive.

The Times was also, I believe, instrumental in the demise of High Fidelity, The Wedding Singer, The Times They Are A-Changing', Lennon, etc.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 3:32pm

Yeah, but it's not. It's ONE review. Most tourists don't READ reviews.

[newintown]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 3:42pm

True - the tourists go to:

1) A show they've heard of, that their friends have seen and recommend, or has been playing for years, and/or
2) A show with nationally known stars and/or title recognition

But, if a show doesn't fall into one of those categories, I think the Times can still kill it - and as far as reviewers are concerned, the Times is still the only paper producers care about.

[GatorNY]

Posted: 6/16/10 at 4:36pm

Back to the OP....I've always thought there was a lot more grace in taking the high road, and not trying to make people eat their words.