Posted: 11/30/25 at 7:28pm
So Paddington just opened in London and the reviews are glowing all around and it got me thinking…could a Broadway transfer of Paddington be not only plausible but imminent???
Posted: 11/30/25 at 7:33pm
They just opened in London. There's no way they could finance, build, rehearse and develop an advance to open this Spring. They'll enjoy being a London hit, grab some awards, and take their time building anticipation and word of mouth, just like MATILDA did. Smart producers don't want to rush -- see GROUNDHOG DAY.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 7:35pm
It would be veeeeery (bear-y?) expensive to bring this to NYC, probably to the tune of a $35-40 million capitalization and north of $1.5 million in weekly running costs.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 8:27pm
It will arrive on Broadway in Spring 2027, as it has West Ends and Broadways biggest producer behind it being Sonia Friedman. Transfers take 16 months (Matilda) to 24 months (Harry Potter)
$35-$40m could be in the ballpark, it will come to New York as a developed show, no workshopping needs to be done and contractors in place for construction. I wonder if this will land in the St James or Lyric, possible it could play the Al Hirschfeld.
Updated On: 11/30/25 at 08:27 PM
Posted: 11/30/25 at 8:33pm
It already kinda feels like the talk of the town here in NYC. The costume-puppet is extremely effective as a marketing tool.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 8:37pm
A transfer is almost certainly got to be in the works. Certainly it feels like a more commercial (and hyped) proposition for Broadway than, for instance, Benjamin Button. But I wouldn't be surprised if it takes up to several years for the aforementioned reasons.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 8:38pm
This will snag one of the ATG barns that EVITA will not take.
Wonder what’ll close first in that case, POTTER or ROUGE!.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 8:39pm
I hope we have a year and a half of non stop wondering in every single thread what theater it’ll go into.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 8:54pm
Jordan Catalano said: "I hope we have a year and a half of non stop wondering in every single thread what theater it’ll go into."
At least this doesn't need an exterior balcony.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 9:30pm
EDSOSLO858 said: "This will snagone of theATG barns that EVITA will not take.
Wonder what’ll close first in that case, POTTER or ROUGE!."
ROUGE will probably be gone sometime next year, so the Hirschfeld seems plausible.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 10:12pm
Sonia Friedman has a history of bringing shows to the Chicago Shakespeare Theater. I think it might be a good idea to bring the show there for Christmas in 2027 (at the earliest) to see how American audiences react and really build word of mouth in the states before opening on Broadway.
Posted: 11/30/25 at 11:00pm
EDIT
Never mind. I always get the two mixed up.
Updated On: 11/30/25 at 11:00 PM
Posted: 11/30/25 at 11:50pm
The response is far more promising than any musical aimed at Broadway this season.
As IP, Paddington is much much bigger in the UK than it is here, even despite the movies having a cult following. So this would probably be a BILLY ELLIOT situation where it runs respectably in New York while being bigger in the UK. But respectable is fine! Mass appeal + critical acclaim is a rare combo.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 12:03am
35-40 million dollars what exactly does that include? The Queen of Versailles cost 22.5 million, doesn’t that include the development of the show?
Posted: 12/1/25 at 7:06am
I'm sure it will transfer at some point, but it seems too big of a production to any out of town tryouts. I'd think since the reviews were positive, it'll just open cold on Broadway.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 7:54am
TommyWho99 said: "Sonia Friedman has a history of bringing shows to the Chicago Shakespeare Theater. I think it might be a good idea to bring the show there for Christmas in 2027 (at the earliest) tosee how American audiences react and really build word of mouth in the states before opening on Broadway."
Way too far away. Christmas 2026 should be their goal to open up on Broadway. I think it's possible as a workshop wouldn't be needed.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 8:48am
I really think they should just leave this as a cash cow in London. Is it really worth taking the risk to bring this to Broadway?
Updated On: 12/1/25 at 08:48 AM
Posted: 12/1/25 at 8:55am
Taking it out of town would be a waste of money unless Sonia owes a favor to someone like Nederlander or Mirvish. By that point they would be dead set on Broadway and money would be raised, gathering audience sentiment wouldn’t be *that* beneficial.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 9:18am
I’m really curious what the true cost of Matilda would be if it were to open today. I seem to recall it being reported to cost 18 million and that was in 2012, or 25 million in today’s terms. The 35-40 million figure seems nuts to me.
Similar to Matilda, I could see this working well at the Shubert, unless they’re dead set on an ATG house.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 9:42am
I actually think there is great window of opportunity for a successful family show that isn't Disney right now. They have nothing in their pipeline for Broadway for that demo right now and their current properties are long runners that many have seen or would easily pass up for a property like Paddington IMO.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 9:44am
It could take a very long time to recoup in North America. Last year's film Paddington in Perus did very well in the UK but only grossed $45.8 million in North America. It dropped out if thectop ten at the American box office in its sixth week according to Wikipedia.
Disney should just steal the puppet tech & do a Winnie the Pooh show.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 9:53am
For a show like PADDINGTON I’m more concerned about the weekly running cost than the capitalization. Sonia and StudioCanal can raise $25-30 mil. But if it needs to cross 1.2 or 1.3 mil a week just to break even, you have to enter strong out of the gate and sustain that for several years.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 10:03am
Yup I can't see it working long term in NY. It will be like Stranger Things. It might start strong but won't stay there long term.
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "For a show like PADDINGTON I’m more concerned about the weekly running cost than the capitalization. Sonia and StudioCanal can raise $25-30 mil. But if it needs to cross 1.2 or 1.3 mil a week just to break even, you have to enter strong out of the gate and sustain that for several years."
Posted: 12/1/25 at 10:06am
Paddington isn’t a cultural phenomenon in America like it is in the UK. It would be very interesting to see how something like this fares in America.
Posted: 12/1/25 at 10:49am
inception said: "It could take a very long time to recoup in North America. Last year's film Paddington in Perus did very well in the UK but only grossed $45.8 million in North America. It dropped out if thectop ten at the American box office in its sixth week according to Wikipedia.
Disney should just steal the puppet tech & do a Winnie the Pooh show."
To be fair, it had a very bizarre release schedule, premiering in the States three months after its release in the UK with very little fanfare. I remember seeing all the press coverage when it opened in the UK and then continually wondering about its US release until it came and went with, what felt to me, barely (bearly?) any promotion.
Update: it actually looks like Paddington in Peru made more than Paddington 2 in the US, proving everyone’s point that it’s just not a super popular property here.
Updated On: 12/1/25 at 10:49 AM
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
