Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.

Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 1:39am

What are some musicals that didn't do so well originally, but were later revived, and do great? There are a few revivals that didn't do so hot (Into the Woods comes to mind) but what about the other way around? Maybe its just my crazy mind subconciously hoping for a successful Lestat revival.

I want to apologize for some offensive messages posted on this board under my name. The night 0f 12-15-08 I did not have internet access, and someone had used my name to post something offensive. My avatar was also changed. I dont' know what else was posted, or if anyone recieved bad PMs, but I want to apologize for that. I've changed my password, and even though I was not the one posting these messages it still needed to be corrected.

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 1:40am

CHICAGO

"Winning a Tony this year is like winning Best Attendance in third grade: no one will care but the winner and their mom."
-Kad

"I have also met him in person, and I find him to be quite funny actually. Arrogant and often misinformed, but still funny."
-bjh2114 (on Michael Riedel)

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 5:51am

I guess if you are looking just in terms of length of run, the '74 Candide (740 performances vs. 73 performances for the '56 original) and the '98 Cabaret (2377 perfs. vs. 1165 for the '66 original) are some other examples. On the play front, the '80 revival of Morning's at Seven ran for 564 performances, while the original production ran for 44 performances. The Threepenny Opera played a mere 12 performances in its Broadway premiere in 1933, but played 2,611 performances in its legendary Off-Broadway revival at the Theatre de Lys/Lucille Lortel.

Begin at the beginning and go on till you come to the end: then stop.

Updated On: 3/29/08 at 05:51 AM

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 8:51am

Show Boat

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 10:36am

I should have mentioned Pal Joey. The 1940 production with Gene Kelly and Vivienne Segal got a few chilly reviews, quite significantly from Brooks Atkinson in the NY Times, who admired the skill of the writing and performances, but was put off by the show's acrid tone, concluding his review, "Although Pal Joey is expertly done, can you draw sweet water from a foul well?" He reversed his opinion a mere 12 years later when Pal Joey was revived in 1952 and that production, with Harold Lang and Vivienne Segal once more, was a much bigger hit than the original.

Begin at the beginning and go on till you come to the end: then stop.

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 1:01pm

As Wanna Be A Foster mentioned: CHICAGO.

Bob Fosse's original Broadway production ran from 1975 to 1977.
The Encores! Concert Series concert-style Broadway revival started in 1996 and is still going strong.

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 1:01pm

Brian Friel's play FAITH HEALER only lasted 20 performance when it opened in the 70s (earning no Tony nods). Then it was revived last season, opened to positive notices, ran for 117 performances, was nominated for Best Revival of a Play (among other Tony awards), and earned Ian McDiarmind a Tony for his performance. I believe Friel's TRANSLATIONS has more or less a similar history.

"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 1:24pm

Assassins

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 9:18pm

NO NO NANETTE ran a (very respectable for the time) 321 perfs in 1925, but lasted 861 perfs when revived in 1971.

The original musical version of PETER PAN (Mary Martin, 1954) play a successful engagement of 152 perfs before being telecast live on NBC. (The deal with NBC was in place before the show came to Broadway, so it was rare case where the show was a financial hit even befoire it opened.) The 1979 Sandy Duncan revival played 554 perfs.

Cast albums are NOT "soundtracks."
Live theatre does not use a "soundtrack." If it did, it wouldn't be live theatre!

I host a weekly one-hour radio program featuring cast album selections as well as songs by cabaret, jazz and theatre artists. The program, FRONT ROW CENTRE is heard Sundays 9 to 10 am and also Saturdays from 8 to 9 am (eastern times) on www.proudfm.com

#10

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 9:52pm

Money wise, this year's Sunday will certainly make more money than the previous. Also, musicals like Oh Calcutta, Gypsy (perhaps not performance wise), and the Rocky Horror Picture show have all made more money when it was revived.

#11

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 9:56pm

correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the off-broadway revival of Merrily We Roll Along run longer than the original?

Rant, Wickud, Rant, Wickud, Rant! We're not gonna pay Rant! 'Cause everythink is Wickud!

"Leave Walt Disney Theatricals new sparkling production of The Little Mermaid on Broadway alone!!!"

lakezurich will be played by Paul Groves in the BWW musical

#12

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 9:57pm

Sorry, I have to disagree about Chicago. The revival didn't even come close. Gwen Verdon, Chita Rivera and Jerry Orbach?? Doesn't get better than that.

The only review of a show that matters is your own.

#13

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 10:04pm

we're talking about financially, mc1227

#14

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 10:08pm

oops..........my bad...sorry

The only review of a show that matters is your own.

#15

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 10:12pm

Broadway revival started in 1996 and is still going strong.

No, if it was still going strong, they wouldn't feel the need to stunt cast all the time.

He's a faker, and you've been taken in by his con. And in doing so, you are enabling him. He is doing more damage to aspergers than papa's words ever could. -Chane/Liverpool on me having asperger syndrome.

Updated On: 4/12/08 at 10:12 PM

#16

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 10:13pm

I think you mean stunt cast, spellingbee

#17

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 11:04pm

Look back at Chicago's grosses. They "stuntcasted" for years when the show still sold out regularly. And yes it is still going strong--it sold 99% of its seats last week.

#18

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/29/08 at 11:49pm

but if they didn't stunt cast would the show be doing as well?

#19

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 5:05am

They have stunt-casted the guy from Dukes of Hazzard all winter and he did nothing for the box office, but spring break came, there were no stunt casters in the show, and it sold 99% of its seats. So stunt casts do not equal better grosses for Chicago. Even when Bebe Neuwirth came back, there were some very lean weeks.

#20

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 10:27am

Wow, "that guy" from Dukes of Hazzard has a name and has made quite a name for himself in legitimate musical theatre. Take the time to know what his name is.

#21

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 10:52am

The Cabaret revival lasted longer and made more money than the original, no?

"If there was a Mount Rushmore for Broadway scores, "West Side Story" would be front and center. It snaps, it crackles it pops! It surges with a roar, its energy and sheer life undiminished by the years" - NYPost reviewer Elisabeth Vincentelli

#22

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 11:06am

Smaxie already said that in the third post.

Like a firework unexploded
Wanting life but never knowing how

#23

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 1:31pm

Well thanks to him, I spent the better part of my childhood trying to jump into cars through the window rather than opening the door like he did on Dukes of Hazzard, so no matter how much theater he does, he'll always be The Guy From Dukes of Hazzard : )

#24

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 3:10pm

He still has a name, regardless.

Speaking of Mr. Schneider, there's a cute article here from the NYT about the "Dukes of Broadway," both of whom have now played Billy Flynn: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/fashion/30nite.html (Sorry if it's already been posted, but I haven't seen it here.)

#25

re: Revivals that did better than the original produciton?

Posted: 3/30/08 at 5:16pm

Schneider's STILL hot. (Just a random thought.)

← Back to Message Board

View all Videos

Tickets From $59

Tickets From $71

Tickets From $95