Paddington at the Al Hirschfeld- Page 2

[Owen22]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 1:48pm

Paddington is fine. Some fun songs. And adorable bear. But a terribly overstuffed second act which just made me want the evening to end.  And the fully superior Matilda did not last long on Broadway. 

[Kad]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 2:04pm

Owen22 said: "Paddington is fine. Some fun songs. And adorable bear. But a terribly overstuffed second act which just made me want the evening to end.And the fully superior Matilda did not last long on Broadway."

Matilda ran for just shy of 4 years and recouped within 2 years.

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 2:06pm

If PADDINGTON has a MATILDA or BILLY ELLIOT-type run if/when it comes to NY, odds are it will not be profitable. 

[darquegk]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 2:17pm

I've said before, I'd like to see this show be successful. But if I were a big producer instead of an out of town small fry, I'd be wary: if shows often make back some of their money on the road or in licensing, how do you tour or license a show so dependent on a high-intensity special effect like this? Will regionals and schools still want to pay up to do Paddington when it's a high school freshman in a hat with ears, instead of a three-person animatronic puppet?

[DaveyG]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 2:35pm

darquegk said: "I've said before, I'd like to see this show be successful. But if I were a big producer instead of an out of town small fry, I'd be wary: if shows often make back some of their money on the road or in licensing, how do you tour or license a show so dependent on a high-intensity special effect like this? Will regionals and schools still want to pay up to do Paddington when it's a high school freshman in a hat with ears, instead of a three-person animatronic puppet?"

Shrek has been incredibly successful in licensing without each production having expensive ogre prosthetics. Some just have a green headband with ears and it works just fine. 

But the magic trick they're pulling off in the London production was worth every pound. It was glorious. Act Two does wander a bit and I hope they continue to work on it because it has the potential to be huge. 

Updated On: 4/8/26 at 02:35 PM

[Tag]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 3:37pm

The animatronic is the gimmick. If the West End production was using a "hat with ears", we wouldn't be talking about this show right now.

The show is too expensive to make sense on Broadway.

[DaveyG]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 4:22pm

Tag said: "The animatronic is the gimmick. If the West End production was using a "hat with ears", we wouldn't be talking about this show right now.

The show is too expensive to make sense on Broadway."

If the animatronic were the only thing going for it, I would agree. But that is not the case here.

King Kong was a gimmick. That puppet was the only reason to see that show.

Paddington is a fully realized show that happens to have an extraordinary piece of stagecraft at its center. Big difference.

[Owen22]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 4:30pm

Kad said: "Owen22 said: "Paddington is fine. Some fun songs. And adorable bear. But a terribly overstuffed second act which just made me want the evening to end.And the fully superior Matilda did not last long on Broadway."

Matilda ran for just shy of 4 years and recouped within 2 years.

I guess I'm just comparing it to its British run, as it's still playing in the West End. But ten years on, maybe Matilda would have needed its full four years to recoup! It would take even more for an uber-expensive, inferior product like Paddington. I don't see the NYC reviews equaling the obviously easy-to-please British critics either.

[Dolly80]

Posted: 4/8/26 at 6:23pm

EDSOSLO858 said: "If PADDINGTONhas a MATILDA or BILLY ELLIOT-type runif/when it comes to NY, odds are it will not be profitable."

The difference is that Paddington doesn’t have loads of kids in it. That made Matilda and Billy E unprofitable on Broadway due to astronomical running costs.