Riedel on All Shook Up

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:39am

'I GOT Stung" never made its way into the Elvis Presley musical "All Shook Up."

But it's the perfect song for backers of a show that had enormous potential but, because of mismanagement, behind-the-scenes feuds and an arrogant and inexperienced lead producer, has turned out to be one of last season's costliest flops.

One person involved in the production calls "All Shook Up," which will likely lose more than $10 million, "a massive missed opportunity."




http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/53334.htm

Updated On: 9/14/05 at 10:39 AM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:41am

Any day now, I guess. sigh.

[liotte]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:42am

Oy. Hope they get their act together, I'd love to see it stay open through the end of the year!!! The cast works so hard and they are so talented, the show is so much fun, and they deserve a better shot.

[bdwaygirl]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:42am

What I don't understand, is, if they had money invested in the show, why didn't they have any say in anything? What am I missing here?

[RockabyeHamlet]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:43am

wow....I don't know what to say.

[Forester]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:47am

"He produced a little off-Broadway show, and he thought he was Cameron Mackintosh."

There can only be one Cameron Mackintosh.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:56am

It's one of Riedel's more vague articles though, I thought.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 10:59am

There is typically one lead producer who makes most of the final creative and marketing decisions on behalf of the rest of the producers (most shows have so many producers and investors, it would be chaos otherwise). For example, while the Weisslers have dozens of investors involved in all of their shows, they are the only ones who have direct contact with the director and star and creative team of the show and they make all of the final business decisions. The other producers can have input and make suggestions and ask questions, but the final word is Fran and Barry's.

In this case, Pollard fancied himself lead producer, but apparently didn't know what the hell he was doing (echoes of Rosie and Taboo). Once again, this proves that neophytes to Broadway should never be allowed to be in charge of $10 million shows. Pollard should have hired a partner with real Broadway producing experience and sat back and learned from him/her how it's done (heck, at the very least he should have listened to Harvey Weinstein who has a dozen Broadway producing credits to his name including DRS and The Producers) . But, he let his ego get in the way and as a result he's doomed a show that had the potential to be a hit, alienated several members of the theatrical community and lost a few million dollars to boot.

Updated On: 9/14/05 at 10:59 AM

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 11:01am

Another thought:

Maybe Elvis isn't nearly as popular as everyone assumes he is/was?

This could apply even moreso for LENNON.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 11:02am

Uh, if Abba can sustain a show, I'm pretty sure Elvis can.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 11:14am

The Jukebox Musical has had the final nail pounded in it's coffin.

[popular_elphie]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 11:15am

I wish they wouldn't just keep dragging the show along like this. If the attendance for the next 2 weeks is really that bad, they should just post a notice.

I love this show a lot, but if they're performing to a 1/3 full house, and their hearts aren't in it, what's the point?

[WOSQ]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 11:24am

Pollard sounds pretty lame. I wonder if he has learned anything or has the Great God Hubris gotten in the way?

But on the other hand, no one forced Miramax and Clear Channel to put in money where it was spelled out that this virgin was lead producer. Either of them could have demanded in writing some input or the hiring of an experienced Broadway hand, and if that didn't happen, not to have written a check.

Put it on the road in 1-2 week stands and see what happens. I'd start booking now for January. There have to be vacant subscription slots somewhere.

[Shoshana BeanieBaby]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:24pm

first off Margo Channing if you are going to insult the man get his name right. It isn't "Scott Pollard" it's Jon Pollard as the article says. Second I think we all need to give him a break. Has anybody here produced a smash hit Broadway musical? I'm sure he's having a hard enough time as it is right now.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:37pm

Give him a break. Why? For having such an enormous ego that he screwed up, wouldn't bring in help and now it's going to cost several dozen people their jobs (on a show that had it been properly produced could have run for years)? Sorry, I don't feel sorry for incompetent, egomaniacal millionaires who's troubles are entirely self-inflicted.

"Has anybody here produced a smash hit Broadway musical?"

No, but there are dozens of people out there who have. Pollard should have called one of them and had them run the show for him, but his ego wouldn't allow it, so he deserves all of the humiliation and lost millions that have been brought on by his own hubris.

Updated On: 9/14/05 at 12:37 PM

[Forester]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:41pm

"Has anybody here produced a smash hit Broadway musical?"

This type of question have always irked me. So, people shouldn't criticize GWB or an athlete because they've never done it?

[Fosse76]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:42pm

When can the theatre evict the show?

[liotte]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:43pm

"so he deserves all of the humiliation and lost millions that have been brought on by his own hubris."

He may deserve it, but the cast and hardworking people running that show certainly do not!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ShuQ]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:45pm

I'm with Margo..give the guy a break. So many people try to produce Broadway shows and are never successful, even if you HAVEN'T heard of them...he at least had people lining up to help him. And props also to the amazing cast...they don't deserve any of what's coming to them.

[liotte]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:46pm

Margo isn't giving him a break ShuQ. You read that wrong.

[kidmanboy]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:46pm

As for Elvis not having a draw, go to Vegas or any amusement park around the country and there are many many people simply watching impersonators. I think he has a draw. Likewise, I think the show itself has a lot of charm and even if it's music wasn't by Elvis is pretty well constructed and is a great time at the theater. I think maybe too much time was spent marketing the Elvis and no one actually stopped to say that the show might even be good. (It got quite a few glowing reviews). I think the snubs by Tony may have had something to do with it (it's sets? choreography? Nothing?) It's a shame because I think this was the only jukebox musical that was even remotely successful artisticly.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:50pm

Typically a theatre can invoke the "stop clause" after two or three consecutive weeks of a show failing to break even. A theatre will usually only do that though when it has a new show anxious to come into the theatre. I can't remember exactly what the rumor was, but I know that there was a show or two angling to get the Palace for later this season. Until a new tenant is signed and ready to move in, The Palace may leave All Shook Up alone, it's better to have the theatre occupied than dark for months.

Updated On: 9/14/05 at 12:50 PM

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 12:57pm

Does this remind anyone of "Capeman", another situation where newjacks came in, saying "this doesn't look all that hard, what do we need experienced Broadway people for"?

Fosse, a theatre can evict a show once its gross falls below x amount of dollars two weeks running. It's called, I believe a "drop show clause". If it's invoked, it doesn't matter how deep the producer's pockets are, that show is out the door.

Elvis and Lennon not a big enough draw? I laugh in your general direction [Spamalot/]. They just need a good book to with experienced producers. It'll happen. Just because these two forays failed doesn't mean someone else won't get it right somewhere down the line.

[Liz_Bennet]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 1:04pm

Capeman had artistic problems as well. All Shook Up's issues are primarily mismanagement, which makes its death less necessary, and more depressing.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 9/14/05 at 1:16pm

Point taken, liz, and Margo, as usual, beat me to the stop clause explaination and said it better.