Missing Michael Riedel

Reading Harvey Fierstein's autobiography, I was reminded of all the fun chats he had with Michael on Theatre Talk. I actually do miss him. I appreciated that he really did love theatre, even as he reveled in the gossip. When he left, he took the last reporting that wasn't afraid to be critical. Yes, he went too far when he a delicious bit he could run with (Bernadette's attendance record in Gypsy) but more often than not, I found him to be accurate in the end, which is why I'm sure people still spoke to him, on and off the record.

Don’t worry, he’ll probably get a Kennedy center honor for his ‘journalism’ this year

I miss him in "Theatre Talk". He is a great interviewer and guests seemed to love being on the show.

everythingtaboo said: "more often than not, I found him to be accurate in the end, which is why I'm sure people still spoke to him, on and off the record."

I seriously doubt that he was right 51% of the time, unless you count half-truths at 50%.

People spoke to him because he was more than willing to be their unquestioning conduit in exchange for either a promise of future info on shows (whether accurate or not) and/or a few drinks at Joe Allen's.

Been there/done that/no thanks.

Of course he was a complete arrogant arsehole, that’s what made him irresistible.

He did say on the Broadway tradition of when someone dies is to dim the marquees, he said when he dies that Broadway operators will brighten the marquees.

Updated On: 2/14/25 at 05:55 PM

George in DC said: "^ Sorry to disagree but I found his interviews very insightful and interesting. I can't think of anyone who interviews people from the theatre community as well as he did - certainly not the person who interviews for this site."

I assume you are talking about his work on Theatre Talk, not his gossip column in the Post. I don't disagree with you on the former, which was usually quite good, but I was under the impression the OP was talking about his columns, which were garbage. There is a not-at-all well-kept secret explaining this seemingly inexplicable contradiction, and her name is Susan Haskins. As his co-host and the show's EP, she had no tolerance for his other (frankly much more native) persona. She made him a better human for a half an hour a week, and I think he appreciated it even though he was either unable or unwilling to hold onto it when she was not around.

^the pages of Vanity Fair apparently

"I seriously doubt that he was right 51% of the time, unless you count half-truths at 50%.

People spoke to him because he was more than willing to be their unquestioning conduit in exchange for either a promise of future info on shows (whether accurate or not) and/or a few drinks at Joe Allen's."

Or Angus McIndoes, where he was punched in the face by David Leveaux, after Riedel called the 2004 Fiddler on the Roof revival "de-jewed,". Riedel used to hang out at Angus' upstairs bar, eavesdropping on patrons, many of whom were actors, musicians and crew members, unwinding after their shows. Occasionally, he would insert himself into their conversations, asking them leading questions, trying to get them to say something bad about their production that he could use.

Initially, many would talk to him, because he was always alone - and they didn't know who he was. As his questions got more and more pointed, people would start to withdraw. Sometimes he would get called out, and he would become belligerent and goading. On more than one occasion, he had to be told to stop harassing patrons.

Some of what he wrote about was from these overheard, taken out of context conversations in a bar. These he would often attribute to "sources who work on the production" or more despicably "my spies connected to the show tell me"...and sometimes he just made things up.

From the Gawker article I linked to:

"Riedel is obsessed with the negative—and he's admitted as much in the past: 'I love a fiasco, and I love to watch it all fall apart.' "

HogansHero is right. A great deal of what Riedel wrote was inaccurate. I think some people spoke to him because they didn't want to get on his bad side. From that same article:

"He's also been accused of harboring grudges against specific producers and directors. In recent years, he's trained his ire on Dance of the Vampires, The Scarlet Pimpernel, Sweet Smell of Success, and Seussical! "

You can add Titanic the Musical to that list. He completely invented a backstage drama there that never happened. He referred to it in article after article for at least a month.

It was an absolute fabrication - but, hey - "sources told" him, so it must be true.

I'm with TotallyEffed and Kad. I'm finding it hard to miss Riedel.

Updated On: 2/15/25 at 09:09 AM

There is a Spin-off version that still tapes today. “Theater: All the Moving Parts” which is hosted by Patrick Pacheco. Michael was a guest on it a few months ago.

This version is heavily edited and very formal in terms of format. It’s more educational and informative; unlike Theater Talk where it was both of the later, it was also fun and snarky.


i watch Theater: All the Moving Parts on Youtube—I think it started a little bit after the pandemic.

Here is the most recent episode:

Eureka Day and Wicked: From Stage to Screen | THEATER: All the Moving Parts

Updated On: 2/15/25 at 05:27 PM

Ke3 said: "everythingtaboo said: "Reading Harvey Fierstein's autobiography, I was reminded of all the fun chats he had with Michael on Theatre Talk. I actually do miss him. I appreciated that he really did love theatre."

Did he? I watched a lot of TheatreTalk over the pandemic and they consistently mentioned his failure to see the very things he talked about.

"

I don't remember that at all.

Has he surfaced anywhere yet? With Rudin's return, can he be far behind?