RIEDEL: Spider-Man "The Biggest Fiasco in Broadway History" SHOW is OFF. — Page 4

I believe Sony had some money in the pot with Spiderman too.
Spiderman may be put on the back burner or it may be dead in the water. It all depends on the licensing and who has what rights for how long.
All of this will have to be hashed out.

---

You made a great point BroadwayLocal and that is very likely what may be going on. The only thing that puzzles me about the fiasco is how a show of this size can shut down production for nearly a month and still plan to open on time. It's the producers' insistence that nothing has changed regarding the schedule/plan of attack that makes me question the show's future.

---

It is dountful that the Disney merger is going to affect Turn Off the Dark at all.

---

it seems to me like they have no choice but to find the money and keep the show going. i can't even imagine all the money just flushed down the drain if they dont'. and i imagine that the lhilton is going to make them restore the theater if the show doesn't happen. and that would be even more money down the drain. what a mess!

I doubt DISNEY will be hands on with SPIDEY,
(guys swinging around the theatre has got to bring back bad memories) and I believe there is serious "bad blood"
between DISNEY and Taymor.

Trust me, it's not happening. Just as CPD said, there is some bad, bad blood. As someone who has worked for the mouse, I'd put very, very good money on the fact that Disney's acquisition has permanently halted production, for good. I had some friends involved in the production and it's always a shame to see people out of work, but there was no way this production was going to work with the absurd productions costs that Taymor had slated. Even those involved were skeptical that I know. All I have to say is that if someone is a *true* visionary, they shouldn't need an approximate 900,000 a week operating cost to bring their vision to fruition, especially in this economic state. I'm sure it would have been incredible visually speaking, but really? I'll gladly eat my words because of the employment potential, but it's not happening. Disney just nailed the coffin shut with this acquisition.

I think to dump 45M (although I have heard the figure is over 50 and closer to 55) into almost any artistic production is wasteful in ANY economy.

---

I'd really like to know where the idea comes from on this board that it's somehow bad for the economy for companies to spend massive amounts of money on shows, supporting hundreds of workers, set builders, actors, etc.

I'd really like to know where the idea comes from on this board that it's somehow bad for the economy for companies to spend massive amounts of money on shows, supporting hundreds of workers, set builders, actors, etc.

When all that money they're spending is actually a loan and the producers expect it all to be paid back, so they can take the profit and loan out it out to other shows. If one show wastes $45 million "supporting" the industry and never earns it back, that's $45 million that other shows, set builders, actors, etc. will never see. That's three large-scale musicals that now won't happen just so a few Spiderman fans can feel vindicated.

Please, explain where you got the idea that loaning massive amounts of money which will never be paid back helped the economy we're currently in.

---

Sorry I don't know the juicey details of the Taymor/DISNEY story, but at one point after the success of THE LION KING,
"There was talk of bringing PINOCCHIO to Broadway under her helm.
Then she started calling herself 'the Spielberg of the theatre'
and Schumacher began calling her a LOON."

And I heard that when Taymor saw THE LION KING in the Minsk for the first time, she blew an audible gasket in front of many people.

Wish I knew more.

Updated On: 9/1/09 at 06:49 PM

"I mean, it makes sense. We all know that Spielberg had one popular success amidst an endless slew of financially disastrous films that somehow managed to be pretentious and shallow at the same time, right?"

I assume you're being sarcastic? What films directed by SPielberg have been financial disasters? I can't think of one! :o)

In the 80's they would blame giving that much money
to a one trick pony (one financial hit) on the blow.
I don't know what they blame it on now.