Michael Ball Not to Return to The Woman in White Before Closing

https://www.broadwayworld.com/l.cfm?id=102502 Hopefully it will not be another long wait to see Michael Ball return to the Broadway stage. It is unfortunate that so many of us had tickets to the show and now will not see it, however I'm sure that he is just as disappointed as we are..he looked forward to playing a very different kind of role in a great play, and according to reviews in London, he did a great job taking over for Michael Crawford over there. He is truly a versatile actor (Patience was a great success for him - again playing a role that was so different than what he has done in the past), and needless to say his beautiful musical voice is utterly unique. He needs to become known here - he's been away far too long.

I bet you anything it's going to be a *very* long time before Michael Ball comes back to Broadway. That is, if he ever does, again.

---

Lori, I couldn't agree more. The producers screwd this show up. The choice of theatre was WRONG, the complete lack of publicity was disgraceful and to blame illness is just insulting to a team of actors who still managed 8 shows a week. I will miss this show. Although I said it before, no-one really thought it would survive a year.
Michael Ball was a delight as Fosco but so was Norman Large who I managed to see twice. The show never suffered due to illness.
Here's to the cast of WIW finding better work and smarter producers.

I feel like his talented was poorly used in WIW. I'm surprised that of all the shows he picked to come back to New York with, it was this one. I saw the show twice, and really liked it a lot. I didn't love it, and I didn't hate it.

And yes, Michael was FABULOUS in Patience. I saw it twice and he just sparkled on stage in that production. Maybe he will do more stuff with the NYC Opera.

---

I think the Lead Producer in London was Sonia - I'm pretty sure it's that Brian Boyett guy who is the lead producer here (who, to set the record straight - was the guy who actually blamed the illness factor, not ALW. ALW wasn't quick to dismiss Boyett's claim, but rather agreed with it. This week Boyett claimed in the NY Post that it was because the audience had dwindled that the show closed -- thereby throwing ALW under the bus...)

I do agree though, I think there's more to the story here. My great fear is that Friedman might not have been able to return after her announced medical leave and that Kuhn could only have done the show for the 6 weeks she committed to. God I hope I'm wrong on that, but the amazing 180 they did on this one really has a lot of people scratching their heads....

As for Michael Ball, as much as I enjoyed the show Tuesday night, he was missed in my book. He really added an incredible dimension to the cast, and to the character of Count Fosco.

Maybe Crawford should have returned the favor and filled in for Ball?????? (JUST KIDDING - DON'T FLAME ME!!!)
Jim

Who's playing Fosco in the meantime? Are they rotating the understudies?

---

Saw Norman Large in the role & he was great. Wanted to see Ball but feel Large was just as good as Ball would have been

---

"Maybe Crawford should have returned the favor and filled in for Ball?????? (JUST KIDDING - DON'T FLAME ME!!!)"

Actually, I would have LOVED to see that happen, but obviously it wasn't going to. One of the reasons why MC turned down the role, according to him, was he feared getting ill again. Can't say I blame him. I really enjoyed MC's performance of Fosco, but, from what I have heard, I would have also enjoyed MB's as well. Just never got a chance to see it.