Richard Rodgers: The Worst Theater On Broadway?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 1:21pm

I saw "In The Heights" last night, and I really enjoyed it. I could see its faults (I really didn't care for any of the characters, but Usnavi, which is probably the fault of the book and the lyrics combined). Anyways, I just find it weird how there is stadium seating, which cuts off half the set from a portion of the audience. Now, I understand it's not a huge number of the audience, but it's still a good amount that are being charged upwards of $80 for not being able to see half the set. I know this can't really be changed, but it bothers me when I can't see the whole proscenium and whatnot. Anyways, are there any other theaters on Broadway where the seating is just awful? I haven't really encountered anything just yet, but I think the Walter Kerr had the best seats. I was the last row in the balcony and could still see and hear everything just fine.

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 1:23pm

The mezzanine only cuts off about the top third, which is troublesome but not too much so because nothing happens up there. So it's not so bad for Heights, but when Disney's Tarzan played there, there was a huge uproar because a third of the audience couldn't see most of the aerial tricks.

Updated On: 1/25/09 at 01:23 PM

[zepka102]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 1:39pm

Walter Kerr's balcony was terrible! I couldn't see a thing! It felt like we were in a different atmosphere compared to the rest of the theater. Then there was also the pole that cut into my leg room. I was standing at my seat for most of Grey Gardens. Luckily we saw 2 open seats farther down, so we went at intermission and enjoyed it MUCH more.

Updated On: 1/25/09 at 01:39 PM

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 1:40pm

How was the show curtain?

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 1:42pm

I can't tell if you think you're being funny or you know you're not and you want to be "ironic".

[WishingOnlyWounds2]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 2:44pm

If you are under the mezzanine overhang at the Lunt-Fontanne, prepare to miss the whole top half of the stage.

[JP2]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 2:51pm

Wow, I actually think the Richard Rogers theater is one of the best theaters on broadway. There really isn't a bad seat. Because of the stadium style there is never a giant head in front of me.

I think the Palace has some of the worst seating in any theater I've ever been to. I don't understand why every seat is directly behind another seat. If someone tall is in front of you you're pretty much screwed.

[breakfree303]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 3:12pm

I agree with JP2!
But I guess I just love the Richard Rogers Theatre because that's where I saw my first broadway show.
:)

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 4:39pm

Seriously, nothing that you complained about has anything to do with the theater itself. The Rodgers is a stand out house.

First of all, the seats gives unobstructed views of the STAGE. The most import part of the space to see is at floor level and the seating is designed to give great views that. the house is ideally designed for dance style shows, such as Movin Out (Or Hairspray, which I think would have been ideally housed there), allowing the audience to see the depth of the choreography. The seating style also helps to keep it very intimate in relation to its seating capacity.

As far as the ITH set, it was designed for a theater with one level stadium seating, not a proscenium house with a mezzanine in general, or a house such as the Rodgers. the show was plugging in there.. it was designed with that space in mind. Almost any mezzanine overhang in any house will cut off at least the top part of the stage.. that is the nature of what it is and if you purchase a seat that far back, you should be prepared for that. If you don't want that, purchase a seat more forward. A good director will not stage a show with important action taking place outside of the view of a large portion of the house, so once again, it should be of no consequence.

In regard to ticket price, blame the producers. The present it as a partial view and should be discounted as such for that.. regardless of the actual view (which is fine for ITH).

[Schmerg_The_Impaler]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 4:43pm

If you are under the mezzanine overhang at the Lunt-Fontanne, prepare to miss the whole top half of the stage.
I know, it's a bit ridiculous! I got to choose between two different seats, and I picked the mezz because I wanted to actually see the ship descend from the ceiling (and the shirtless guys on it, of course!)

[Drunk Chita Rivera]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 5:08pm

It's actually one of my favorite theaters... if you have seats in front of row P or something. Although I don't mind the partial view I would still rather be up front. But if I want cheaper seats it's a good view.

Last time I was there I was in the second to last row and the people behind me were a group of 6 and they bought Premium tickets... for the last row in the orchestra.

[JP2]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 5:12pm

Meh, I just go day of and get "Obstructed view half price seating". Though nothing is ever obstructed for me. :p

[BroadwayBound115]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 7:10pm

You know, I saw ITH way up in the balcony and I loved my seats. I was like 10th row from the top and I saw everything fine. I think the Hirschfeld is one of the best theaters though. I saw Curtains from the VERY LAST row in the balcony and saw everything just perfectly.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 7:22pm

The Gershwin gets the top honor.

Sitting upstairs is like sitting atop the Matterhorn.

Updated On: 1/25/09 at 07:22 PM

[allofmylife]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 7:26pm

Clearly, Rentboy, you have little knowledge of theater in New York if you think the 46th Street Theater is a bad theater. Aside from the fact that it's the home of the original Guys and Dolls, Damn Yankees and How to Succeed in Business, it's got a killer set of sight lines and no seat is more than, what, 100 feet of the stage> It's FAR better than most houses.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 1/25/09 at 8:00pm

Clearly, the history of the theater has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I'm talking about simply the bare bones of the theater. I think the theater itself is kind of gorgeous, and I love the marquee (yes, Bobby). But it seems silly to design a space like that. I like the idea of the stadium seating, and the view from the Mezz is beautiful (trust me, I went and looked), but from the back of the mezz I just felt like I was missing parts of the show. Isn't there suppose to be some cool firework moment at the end of Act I? Well, I missed that. I think I'll go back in like April to check out some of the new cast members, and sit up in the rear Mezz.

I think the best theater on Broadway - purely aesthetic wise is the Lycuem.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 1:42am

Anyone who believes the Walter Kerr's balcony has the best seats has no authority on this topic.

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 2:10am

I would give the most beautiful theater award to the Amsterdam - hands down.

[Marianne2]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 2:25am

Well, I sat in row F of the rear mezzanine there, off to the left and I thought the seat was fine. The only thing that got cut off for me was Benny's face being blocke by a street light when he and Nina were on the second floor of the set.

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 6:29am

Although most seating at the beautiful Shubert is fine, including the 2nd balcony, the rear mezzanine is poor because the 2nd balcony cuts off the view of the entire playing area. I have seen so many shows at the Shubert over the years, many from the 2nd balcony: I CAN GET IT FOR YOU WHOLESALE, STOP THE WORLD-- I WANT TO GET OFF, A CHORUS LINE, AND CRAZY FOR YOU; from the rear mezzanine: BAJOUR; from the orchestra: THE ROAR OF THE GREASEPAINT--THE SMELL OF THE CROWD, A CHORUS LINE, and OVER HERE. I always remember the theatre where I saw a particular show. The Shubert is one of my favorites with its colorful murals and the wood beams on the underside of the mezzanine.

Updated On: 1/26/09 at 06:29 AM

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 6:48am

The only problem that I have with the Richard Rodgers theater is if I'm in the mezzanine it's a bitch to get to the mens room during intermission. So to solve this problem I always get an ochestra seat when seeing a show at this theater.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 9:14am

I've always been particularly comfortable in the Richard Rodgers Theater. There's a certain coziness about the place. Then, too, I have wonderful memories of DO I HEAR A WALTZ?, the original 1776, I DO! I DO! and a few other favorite shows that played there.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 11:24am

Just a matter of opinion. Jut curious to know what you all think is the worst theater, either seating wise, or structurally. And I had no problem at the Walter Kerr except for that the seating was a little uncomfortable, but I could still see/hear everything, even the back wall of the stage which I found surprising.

[heathurr2]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 12:10pm

When I saw In the Heights it was a Saturday night and by the time I had gotten to the box office all they had left were the obstructed view (orch. row V, seat 28 ) for $121.50. It was frustrating to have to pay that much for obstructed view, however - the show was so great I hardly noticed my frustration once it began - and the view was only really blocked during 'Sunrise' but if you leaned forward over the overhang you could see everything.

Updated On: 1/26/09 at 12:10 PM

[george95]

Posted: 1/26/09 at 1:07pm

I saw "In The Heights" last night too. And I sat in row V--with an OBSTRUCTED VIEW stamped on my ticket.

I would not call the Richard Rodgers theater "stadium seating". I still had a head in front of me for the whole show. The slope down was dramatic, but not enough to eliminate the "head" problem.

The only time that the view was obstructed was during the opening song of Act II, which they sang on the balcony--all I could see was from waist down. And it was not 80 bucks as another poster said, it was 60 bucks.

But to answer the title of this thread, I could definitely put the Rodgers in with the worst of Broadway theaters (I also think the Ambassador is too wide and the Minskoff/Gershwin are too ugly). Looking up at the underside of the mezz from Row V of the Rodgers, it really does come down farther than what I found reasonable. I know the theater was built 4,000 years ago when guys just juggled on the stage or whatever but still.

All in all, I LOOOOOOOOOOOVEd "In the Heights" and I am lookin forward to seeing it again. The jokes were very topical and fresh, the music was fun, the dancing was exciting, and I really felt like I was hanging out on a stoop in the neighborhood just watching the action.