Oak Speaks out on great comet controversy- Page 11

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 11:22am

broadway86 said: "This is all very interesting, and I'm just hearing about it... I saw Oak on what I now realize was his final performance, and thought he was great. For the people who are complaining about his Pierre, what did you think he lacked?"

It's not that his performance was lacking.  It's that he first of all, showed up to rehearsals completely unprepared and unwilling to take direction, ultimately resulting in them having to push back his start date.  And then the show was struggling so the producers had no choice but to hire a name actor in order to try to keep the show running and keep hundreds of other workers employed.  And then he tried to make it all about race, when the fact is, this happens all the time--shows have to stunt cast when their grosses are low enough if they want to keep them going.  I'm not saying it doesn't suck for him, but unfortunately that's part of the business.  And Mandy Patinkin likely would have sold enough tickets to keep the show running longer.  But alas, everyone got put out of a job instead because Oak couldn't handle it.

[Impossible2]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 11:38am

Broadway61004 said: "broadway86 said: "This is all very interesting, and I'm just hearing about it... I saw Oak on what I now realize was his final performance, and thought he was great. For the people who are complaining about his Pierre, what did you think he lacked?"

It's not that his performance was lacking. It's that he first of all, showed up to rehearsals completely unprepared and unwilling to take direction, ultimately resulting in them having to push back his start date. And then the show was struggling so the producers had no choice but to hire a name actor in order to try to keep the show running and keep hundreds of other workers employed. And then he tried to make it all about race, when the fact is, this happens all the time--shows have to stunt cast when their grosses are low enough if they want to keep themgoing. I'm not saying it doesn't suck for him, but unfortunately that's part of the business. And Mandy Patinkin likely would have sold enough tickets to keep the show running longer. But alas, everyone got put out of a job instead because Oak couldn't handle it."

Plus the fact he agreed to it and then turned around behind their backs and starting all the drama with his vile friends.

[broadway86]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 11:48am

Very interesting. I saw the production with no context, and thought he was remarkable, so I'm definitely surprised.

[Impossible2]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 12:27pm

broadway86 said: "Very interesting. I saw the production with no context, and thought he was remarkable, so I'm definitely surprised."

Well all he had to do was stand and sing as apposed to all the other Pierre's who actually played all their instruments live as well. It's not like Pierre is a massive role either, he spends most of the night sitting beside a piano watching what is going on...

[broadway86]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 3:47pm

Impossible2 said: "Well all he had to do was stand andsing as apposed to all the other Pierre's who actually played all their instruments live as well. It's not like Pierre is a massive role either, he spends most of the night sitting beside a piano watching what is going on..."

Again, no context, so I couldn't compare his musicianship to anyone else's. It's not a huge role, not that a role needs to be for a performer to excel in it, but it's not an incidental role either. There's a poignant arc, I thought he nailed it, his behavior off-stage and in the rehearsal room notwithstanding.

[raddersons]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 3:58pm

I'm not gonna lie -- this left such a sore spot for me that when Rafael Casal is recommended to me on Spotify, I immediately skip it.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 5:43pm

Recently watched the new HBO film Bad Education and it took me a bit to realize Rafael was the character Hugh Jackmans was cheating on his partner with. But I guess causing drama suits him!! Great film by the way, albeit a bit homophobic, but the story is fascinating.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 6:54pm

I have to say that I am soooooo tired of this topic.  The whole subject comes down to two things for me: (1) the producers were STUPID to think that, just because he was a member of the original cast of Hamilton, somehow that would help the box office when the show's huge huge star left.  What were they thinking?  It wasn't exactly like Hercules Mulligan was a character that people left the theatre thinking about or praising the performance; and the reason at least half of the audience was attending every performance (at least at full price) was because of that huge star  THEY WERE STUPID.  (2) The Great Comet -- which i liked, not loved, but absolutely loved the physical production and absolutely love the cast recording -- was never a show that was going to appeal to a huge audience...it was just too 'cerebral', for want to a better word.  When the mega-star attraction left, the only way they were going to survive was by either hiring another mega-star or figuring out a way to reduce the operating costs big-time.  I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that the operating costs were high enough to require great business to eek out a long run.  Given the material, that was NEVER going to happen.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 7:58pm

Jarethan said: "I have to say that I am soooooo tired of this topic. The whole subject comes down to two things for me: (1) the producers were STUPID to think that, just because he was a member of the original cast of Hamilton, somehow that would help the box office when the show's hugehuge star left. What were they thinking? It wasn't exactly like Hercules Mulligan was a character that people left the theatre thinking about or praising the performance; and the reason at least half of the audience was attending every performance (at least at full price) was because of that huge star THEY WERE STUPID. (2) The Great Comet -- which i liked, not loved, but absolutely loved the physical production and absolutelylove the cast recording -- was never a show that was going to appeal to a huge audience...it was just too 'cerebral', for want to a better word. When the mega-star attraction left, the only waythey were going to survive was by either hiring another mega-star or figuring out a way to reduce the operating costs big-time. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that the operating costs were high enough to require great business to eekout a long run. Given the material, that was NEVER going to happen."

 

Totally agree with you on your first point. 

As for your second point - it contains its own rebuttal. You say it was "never going to happen" UNLESS they found big stars to sell tickets, but that's exactly what they did, and what they were trying to continue doing. As we all know, star-casting was, in fact, their business strategy. And for a while, it worked, and if things hadn't gone awry, it might have continued to work. So I think the show very well could have recouped if their strategy hadn't been interrupted. It might have been a long, slow road, but it could have happened.

Updated On: 4/28/20 at 07:58 PM

[Jarethan]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 8:30pm

JBroadway said: "Jarethan said: "I have to say that I am soooooo tired of this topic. The whole subject comes down to two things for me: (1) the producers were STUPID to think that, just because he was a member of the original cast of Hamilton, somehow that would help the box office when the show's hugehuge star left. What were they thinking? It wasn't exactly like Hercules Mulligan was a character that people left the theatre thinking about or praising the performance; and the reason at least half of the audience was attending every performance (at least at full price) was because of that huge star THEY WERE STUPID. (2) The Great Comet -- which i liked, not loved, but absolutely loved the physical production and absolutelylove the cast recording -- was never a show that was going to appeal to a huge audience...it was just too 'cerebral', for want to a better word. When the mega-star attraction left, the only waythey were going to survive was by either hiring another mega-star or figuring out a way to reduce the operating costs big-time. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that the operating costs were high enough to require great business to eekout a long run. Given the material, that was NEVER going to happen."



Totally agree with you on your first point.

As for your second point - it contains its own rebuttal. You say it was "never going to happen" UNLESS they found big stars to sell tickets, but that's exactly what they did, and what they were trying to continue doing. As we allknow, star-casting was, in fact, their business strategy. And for a while, it worked, and if things hadn't gone awry, it might have continued to work. So I think the show very well could have recouped if their strategy hadn't been interrupted. It might have been a long, slow road, but it could have happened."

Don't disagree at all; of course this thread would never have existed if they had been successful in hiring a big name to replace Groban.   The irony of course is that, as good as Groban was, this was an ensemble show, and one that he did not have to carry.

This is one where I can't wait to see if they can ever figure out a way to introduce it in regional theatres, where a modest budget will be critical.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 8:51pm

I don’t think hiring Oak was meant to be star casting as you perceived it to be. The producers knew he wouldn’t sell tickets. In fact, wasn’t it noted that once Groban left the show the bulk of their advertising focused on the diversity of the ensemble and not on either of the leads? I don’t even recall them promoting Ingrid Michaelson when she was in the show. I think casting oak, the producers were betting on the possibility of winning the Tony Award. When that didn’t happen, they had to reevaluate how to sell the show. So then, they relied on star casting. It was strange they announced Oaks run so early, though.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 9:22pm

raddersons said: "I'm not gonna lie -- this left such a sore spot for me that whenRafael Casal is recommended to me on Spotify,I immediately skip it."

I'm baffled this has ever happened to anyone. What's wrong with your Spotify suggestions?

[raddersons]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 9:29pm

VintageSnarker said: "I'm baffled this has ever happened to anyone. What's wrong with your Spotify suggestions?"

Great question. A few months ago I got one song of his on a discover playlist, and all I was thinking was "why do I know this name and why do I hate it". I wonder if it's a mix of independent labels and theater that makes the algorithm think I'd be into it. Now I get one of his songs every few weeks. He won't leave me alone!

[pollster2]

Posted: 4/28/20 at 9:32pm

I can safely say that after the Great Comet debacle, I won't support anything that has Rafael Casal, Cynthia Erivo, or Oak attached to it.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 2:48pm

Ok, so, do we know as a fact that he came into rehearsals not prepared and wasn't taking direction? As in, is that a fact or  something that came through the rumor mill? I was talking to a theatre friend of mine about this. The powers that be could easily thought it would take less time than it did for him to be ready.

There was an interesting article that I read awhile back on the NPR website during all this. It never talked about the rehearsal process. But, it did mentioned a website that tweeted (prior to any of the "names" that did) that was geared to black performers. For people in that world, they were angry because, Great Comet touted its ethnically diverse cast. Yet, for whatever reason, decided to kick out Oak in favor of a white actor.

[Impossible2]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 2:56pm

Islander_fan said: "Ok, so, do we know as a fact that he came into rehearsals not prepared and wasn't taking direction? As in, is that a fact or something that came through the rumor mill? I was talking to a theatre friend of mine about this. The powers that be could easily thought it would take less time than it did for him to be ready."

Yes Dave confirmed it all in an article. 

[CPannullo]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 3:00pm

pollster2 said: "I can safely say that after the Great Comet debacle, I won't support anything that has Rafael Casal, Cynthia Erivo, or Oak attached to it."

What did Cynthia Erivo do in this situation? 

[AndreyIsntHere]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 3:42pm

Didn't Dave Malloy imply that some bits of OCTET were inspired by what happened with Oak and COMET? (Particularly the verse in "Refresh" about cancel culture.) I believe I recall him mentioning that in an interview or something and it seems pretty accurate, but I don't want to spread it around if it's untrue.

Regardless, the whole thing still upsets me three years later. I can't look at Oak the same, even in the context of when I listen to him in HAMILTON's cast recording, as petty as it sounds. I still do enjoy his acting and singing (when he's actually being professional), but he was so immature about the Pierre debacle that I find it hard to believe he has a good personality.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 3:55pm

It's incredibly amusing people are still pressed about this. It's been three years, everyone has moved on, Oak is making tv dollas now, get over it. 

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 5:08pm

Sutton Ross said: "It's incredibly amusing people are still pressed about this. It's been three years, everyone has moved on, Oak is making tv dollasnow, get over it."

Exactly the point.  After the crap he pulled, Oak should be working a day job, not getting TV dollars.  An insanely unprofessional moderately talented actor is making millions of dollars on TV.  And that's why we're still calling him out.

[lachri5]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 5:12pm

pollster2 said: "I can safely say that after the Great Comet debacle, I won't support anything that has Rafael Casal, Cynthia Erivo, or Oak attached to it."

Same. Although I wouldn't go so far as boycotting Cynthia Erivo (if she's involved in something I'm interested in, I will still see it), it's hard for me to appreciate her performance anymore.

Updated On: 4/29/20 at 05:12 PM

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 5:13pm

Yep, I'm sure he GREATLY cares. Jesus. The bitterness about someone who you don't know is incredibly sad. Get lives, please. 

[Impossible2]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 5:14pm

Broadway61004 said: "Sutton Ross said: "It's incredibly amusing people are still pressed about this. It's been three years, everyone has moved on, Oak is making tv dollasnow, get over it."

Exactly the point. After the crap he pulled, Oak should be working a day job, not getting TV dollars. An insanely unprofessional moderately talented actor is making millions of dollars on TV. And that's why we're still calling him out."

Doll the show is pretty much a flop, he ain't making anywhere near millions...

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 5:18pm

People should really stop talking about things they know nothing about.

Station 19 ranks as the No. 1 program in the Thursday 8 PM hour this season in total viewers and Adults 18-49. Its viewership is up +9% vs last season as Station 19 is on track to to deliver its most-watched season ever. After 35 days of delayed viewing on linear and digital platforms, Station 19 averages 13.5 million Total Viewers and a 3.71 rating in Adults 18-49 this season. And it was just renewed for a 4th season. Happy to all involved including Oak.

Be bitter weirdos, he couldn't care less

Updated On: 4/29/20 at 05:18 PM

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 4/29/20 at 5:45pm

Sutton Ross, the reason this rose again was because Oak actually did express some lingering bitterness just a month ago. (I happen to be a big fan of Station 19, FWIW)





https://twitter.com/OakSmash/status/1242455316203274240"