Mixed reviews in- is Moulin Rouge a Big Far Hit?

It is hard to tell. I thought something like "Matilda" would run longer on Broadway, Brantley loved it . I thought this would get all around better reviews since it sounded like it was very well received in Boston. I really don't know how much reviews mean anymore in NY outside of the NY Times which was positive.

Could be like Wicked- where critics did not universally love it- but audiences did. I guess if word of mouth was very strong and positive- it will defy the mixed critical reception. But, Wicked was a family show- and appealed to a sider swath of the population.

Well, that is basically what they have already done. They have mixed in some new "classics" with some of the old classics in the movie to give it some fresh life. Some of the songs work splendidly, some not as much. But I'm sure it will get a younger generation more interested in the show (not just those who love the movie).

I'm still surprised there wasn't more changes made from Boston. Not that I didn't have a great time in Boston (and will be seeing it again in NY). But I feel like somewhere in Moulin Rouge is a great, great show (at least to me). The show as is, is a lot of fun. But it had the potential to be so much more...

Having said that, I'm happy we are getting some good reviews. Hope others who like this type of show get to experience it. Just make sure if you are spending good $$$, you are getting good seats. This is a show you want to be closer to the action so you can feel like you are part of the experience.

Updated On: 7/26/19 at 09:29 AM

It’s worth pointing out that Moulin Rouge, the film, was far from universally acclaimed itself. It averages 76% on Rotten tomatoes and 66/100 on Metacritic, and was consistently knocked for putting spectacle above deeper emotions and for throwing too much into the mix. In fact, to this day you’ll find people love it or loathe it in equal measure.

Speculating on its demise when out of the gate it’s doing numbers all producers dream of is silly.

Updated On: 7/26/19 at 09:43 AM

As someone else said, it all comes down to the operating cost. It's probably close to a million a week, with all that music licensing, heavy automation, etc. The Times was a rave, and none of the other reviews matter. It's going to take a good while to recoup those costs.

I do wonder if they'll pull a Harry Potter and instead of a traditional U.S. tour, do a handful of sit-down engagements first (LA, Chicago, Toronto, London, Australia, a one-act version in Vegas) if the environmental design of the set is really a selling point. That adds an air of exclusivity, too: "you can't see this show everywhere, travel to get the full experience!"

Updated On: 7/26/19 at 10:12 AM

Kad said: "It’s worth pointing out that Moulin Rouge, the film, was far from universally acclaimed itself. It averages 76% on Rotten tomatoes and 66/100 on Metacritic, and was consistently knocked for putting spectacle above deeper emotions and for throwing too much into the mix. In fact, to this day you’ll find people love it or loathe it in equal measure.

Speculating on its demise when out of the gate it’s doing numbers all producers dream of is silly."

The difference of course being Kad that the costs of seeing a film are such that a film can find an audience over time. Its pretty hard for a musical with a $300 ticket point to build a 'cult audience' -- typically musicals work the reverse -- they are front loaded in terms of audience interest and it wains. A true mega stage hit happens when people want to see a musical again and again -- LES MIZ, PHANTOM, WICKED all fit in this category. While we can't surmise the weekly box office grosses, we can guess if this is a show that is going to capture people's heart the way the shows I just mentioned did. I personally don't believe it will. So I'd be surprised if it maintained a $2 million dollar box office take for over a year.

Tonys?!

The noms wont be announced til May 2020, the awards til June 2020. That will have VERY little difference to the show unless it struggles until then. At this point, it is doing GANGBUSTERS biz--of course, all that was pre-reviews/opening.

Let's face it--Good reviews mean relatively nothing, re: Matilda, etc etc etc--its word of mouth--and the poster above showed how his ONE tix led to a TEN tix sale!!! (and even Beetlejuice is doing "ok" based on word of mouth--not reviews--and yes, the Tonys did help BJ).

Perhaps TV commercials/online ads could do the job of Tonys exposure--but I still think itll be fine (and they could always reduce tix prices/offer discounts).

and, im assuming the nut is higher than 1 million

"Why are people citing Matilda as a failure? It had an almost 4 year run on broadway. That’s a very healthy, respectable run, especially considering there were quite a few other musicals shooting to win the family demographic for that time..."

It recouped which means it was a success and to me a 4 year run is pretty good especially when so many shows barely make it a year. I think with the really good reviews (especially NY Times), people expected it to run 5-10 years.