On The Town

[ivandixon2]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 3:15pm

It's been a while since a show survived doing 21% business with 600 people per show in a 1,900 seat theatre. What a horrible hit last week.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 3:17pm

I have a ticket to see it on March 12... I hope it's still running.

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 3:56pm

I'm sure the producers are trying to keep the show open for as long as they can at least through Award Season.

[Fantod]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 3:59pm

I don't really know what they expect, though. Revivals aren't really boosted much by Tony awards unless it is lead actor or actress, and I don't really think Yazbeck is a front runner right now (is he?)

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:00pm

From what I understand from several people involved, The Kagans is determined to keep it open through the slow season. Here's hoping it's here to scoop some awards! It's magnificent.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:28pm

Does anyone know why they chose to open the show in fall and not spring?

Updated On: 2/9/15 at 04:28 PM

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:30pm

To not directly compete with The King And I, their biggest competition for Best Revival, which opens this Spring? Just a guess.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:35pm

Wouldn't keeping the show open be more important than having a rival?

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:38pm

I mean, there's more to question the Lead Producers here than just the fall opening. Why the hell did they choose the Lyric? That's the real questionable decision.

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:40pm

It's better to open earlier and gain momentum than open at the same time and get swallowed alive, no?

The show has not (and is not) closed, making that point invalid.

Updated On: 2/9/15 at 04:40 PM

[MayAudraBlessYou2]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:40pm

sometimes there isnt much of an option. They had been trying to get it to Broadway. The Lyric happened to be open. My understanding is the rent is slightly reduced (though not by anything significant) because the owners wanted something in there. King Kong failed to come up with the cash and nothing else was on the horizon until the spring. Im sure the producers would have loved a theatre to open up right before Tony time in the busy spring, but the fall season and lyric theatre presented themselves and they took the opportunity.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:46pm

Just because they "had been trying to get it to Broadway" doesn't make it a rational choice. They could've waited and snatched up any of the theaters that happened to post closing this fall/winter season. Or held off til next year.

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 4:50pm

what is up with you people and rational decisions? Broadway is all LUCK! There is no rhyme or reason why anything happens on broadway. You can get a rave from the times and be in a small house, and open in the spring and that still might not save your show!

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 5:00pm

Broadway isn't all about luck, but it's important. I don't even know why they made the Lyric so big, what did they think they could put in there to sell out nightly for years?

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 5:06pm

The Lyric Theatre once stood as two theatres, actually. Combined into one and opened in the 90s under a large brand name: The Ford Center for the Performing Arts.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 5:10pm

I know. When they reopened it in 1998, what did they think would belong in there?

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 5:18pm

The Kaganas ARE...* Been a long day.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 5:19pm

Ha. Kagans.

I give up. :P

[jayinchelsea]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 10:22pm

Love this show, have now seen it four times (once at Barrington Stage) and everyone I've sent to see it has loved it. I know all the reasons it opened in the early fall, and why it went into the Lyric (where, despite poor business, it works spectacularly), and why it isn't packing them in (no stars makes it tough), but it kills me that it's never caught on. It's the best version that the show will ever be, the cast and the dancing and that orchestra and the staging, could not be better. What the hell do audiences want??? Yeah, I know.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 10:39pm

They want stories they already know, songs they can already sing - both so they can eat in the theatre, talk and not have to pay attention. Prices have chased real theatre goers away and replaced them with the laziest and stupidest people.

[South Florida]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 11:11pm

Didn't particularly care for this musical.

Updated On: 2/9/15 at 11:11 PM

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 11:25pm

"They want stories they already know, songs they can already sing - both so they can eat in the theatre, talk and not have to pay attention. Prices have chased real theatre goers away and replaced them with the laziest and stupidest people."

Great post. How can we better educate these dumba$$es that if they don't like what WE think is good theater, they are stupid and lazy? Blogs? Guys in Times Sq. passing out leaflets? Someone on top of the TKTS booth with a megaphone? Skywriting? We must educate them so they stop making these stupid choices and start choosing, good, worthwhile theater to see (i.e. what we like). By the way, if they are that lazy and stupid, how is it they have the money to pay for theater tickets when so much smarter people are being chased out by the prices? Crazy, huh?

[brdway411]

Posted: 2/9/15 at 11:33pm

I am with South Florida. Didn't care for this at all.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 2/10/15 at 3:07am

Sad to say ON THE TOWN has never been a big audience show. Even the original production, though financially successful at462 performances, had a short run for a big musical that got mostly positive notices (1 pan from John Chapman..he later apologized for it saying he must have been in a bad mood the night he saw it.) True, it faced tough competition in its day (OKLAHOMA!, SONG OF NORWAY, BLOOMER GIRL and CAROUSEL) but none of the revivals have proven to be strong box office draws.

[decotodd]

Posted: 2/10/15 at 7:38pm

Sorry to say, I agree with the other 2 posters who didn't care for this show, and I was primed to love it, but ultimately underwhelmed. Great Bernstein score but the book by very young Comden and Green is pretty clunky and full of tired schtick. Does anyone think Jackie Hoffman's character or Lucy Schmeeler funny? There were a bunch of teenage girls around me who just groaned at the forced humor.

Yes, plays often need stars to succeed (but of course, there are plenty of exceptions, e.g. CURIOUS INCIDENT) but not necessarily musicals. How many visiting tourists have heard of Bryce Pinkham or Jefferson Mays? By now, word of mouth should have helped OTT if it was going to help, plus the Bernstein name isn't nothing and there is the famous MGM musical. Frankly, I didn't even find the dancing to be that all that exhilarating -- wanted to be swept away by it, but just wasn't. I am not surprise me that this isn't packing them in.

On the other hand, BRIDGES and SIDE SHOW's relative inability to run does baffle me.