Riedel on Great Comet's big price tag
Posted: 6/23/16 at 9:17pm
Actually, that's about how much I suspected this show's production cost to be. I wounded how well this show will be received by audiences. I love it's score, and it's general story, but I'm not sure how much others will. Oh well, what an interesting article, thanks for sharing!
Posted: 6/23/16 at 9:27pm
Posted: 6/23/16 at 9:44pm
Yeah, I really love this show and want to see it have a nice, long run. I was all ready to pay full price to see it early on in previews, but then their ticket prices were revealed and I was rather surprised to say the least. It's going to be an uphill battle, for sure.
Posted: 6/23/16 at 9:58pm
How well did Comet do Off-Broadway?
Posted: 6/23/16 at 10:01pm
Tend to agree with everything that has been said. The steep ticket prices are problematic. I would like to see the show do well but right now, the odds seem stacked against it.
Posted: 6/23/16 at 10:38pm
I'm a fan of the show, but I smell a big ol' stupid floperoo. The show was a smashing success downtown, less so when it came up and I suspect the trajectory will continue. These producers have not seemed to learn a lot from past failure, but they can afford another loss. Will it limp for as long as OTT is the question.
Posted: 6/23/16 at 11:15pm
“He’s a star, certainly,” says another producer who also reviewed the investment papers. “But are his fans Leo Tolstoy fans? I don’t see the crossover there.”
Maybe it's just my state of mind tonight, but the "anonymous" producer quoted in Riedel's piece above comes across like a fool... Do we think the Victor Hugo fan club shot "Les Miserables" into the stratosphere? If they're banking on Tolstoy fans...wow.
Posted: 6/23/16 at 11:36pm
¿Macavity? said: "How well did Comet do Off-Broadway?
"
It did very well but you have to also remember tickets were less than $120 for the best seat. I recall rush was around $20-$25.
from what I recall of the show when it was at the Kazino tent in midtown back in early 2014, The two actresses I remember were Philippa Soo (Natasha) and Brittain Ashford (Sonya.) not sure why but I felt role of Pierre, who Groban will be playing, was forgettable. I remembered Anatole more for sure. My favorite song from the musical was "Sonya Alone", sung by Ashford.
Posted: 6/23/16 at 11:46pm
Based on today's news re Shufle Along, what I am more interested in seeing is how the show does when Groban leaves. I am thinking that he is as big a star as Jackman was when he opened in Oz (I know that is arguable, but he IS big). Oz closed when Jackman left...admittedly Oz was junk food, and Jackman was its only raison d'être.
If Groban gets good reviews, unless the show takes on its own identity, what happens when he leaves, unless his replacement is big. I am guessing that he will be gone from the show before it ever reaches its first anniversary, assuming it does run that long (which I bet it will, based on Groban and the fervor of people on this site who have expressed love form the show).
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:09am
Posted: 6/24/16 at 9:24am
I'm fairly certain Comet did not do very well off Broadway. There were lots of discounts available and they closed it pretty soon after moving to midtown. It's, imo, a fantastic show, but thus far they have not been marketing or pricing it to succeed.
I really think putting it into the Imperial was an act of stupid hubris.
Updated On: 6/24/16 at 09:24 AM
Posted: 6/24/16 at 11:38am
neonlightsxo said: "I'm fairly certain Comet did not do very well off Broadway. There were lots of discounts available and they closed it pretty soon after moving to midtown. It's, imo, a fantastic show, but thus far they have not been marketing or pricing it to succeed.
I really think putting it into the Imperial was an act of stupid hubris.
That has been my thought since the production was announced. I'm not terribly familiar with the ins and outs of Broadway houses but if they waited this long to make the move why not just wait until a theater that was better suited to the show was available rather than going to the trouble of renovating the Imperial to fit the immersive nature required by the piece? Studio 54 comes to mind. They'd have a smaller house to fill and save money from avoiding the renovations.
But like I said I don't know the realities involved here. Studio 54 is a Roundabout venue which is nonprofit, this is a commercial production. I don't know what arrangement producers and theatre owners strike up when intense renovations are required to accommodate a show. So much goes into these decisions that can seem arbitrary or all end up a crap shoot if the stars don't align. Look at Shuffle Along.
"
Posted: 6/24/16 at 11:44am
Obviously Studio 54 is off the table as Roundabout is using it, but they could've just waited for Circle in the Square. They stupidly thought Josh Groban was enough of a draw to fill the Imperial. That doesn't appear to be true.
I want it to succeed but this is another example of poor Kagan strategy.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 11:58am
I love the show, and even went to Boston to see it- but I have to admit I have held off on buying a ticket to the Broadway engagement and am holding out for a potential cheaper ticket.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:08pm
I just don't see this being a slam dunk, especially to merit those prices and venue size. As a star vehicle for Groban, it's a poor choice even with the expanded role of Pierre. As a piece of musical theatre, it is not as simple a crowd pleaser as something like Les Mis or even Hamilton. It's really a shame they did not hold off until Circle in the Square, with its small size and flexible seating plan, had availability.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:10pm
If the run is short-lived, does anyone think Miss Saigon could take the Imperial in time for the spring?
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:16pm
Kad- I mentioned this in another thread, but I actually had a meeting with one of the producers of this production about being a potential investor and among questions I asked (like was Phillipa Soo offered Broadway? She was and declined was that response). I also asked about how the piece came to the Imperial. I was told that the production had the chance to grab Circle in the Square back before Fun Home transferred but the producers decided they wanted a proscenium house- because of the higher seating count.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:23pm
I understand the desire for more seats... but the Imperial is enormous. And this show- even in the proscenium house at ART (which has a seating count far closer to Circle in the Square)- has never played in such a large venue, nor seemed to be conceived for such a venue.
I would even have more confidence if it were in the Hayes, though that is obviously no longer a viable option.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:24pm
I'd love to go see this while we're in New York in January but the prices are so high. Not only are the on-stage seats outrageous... but there's also a large amount of premium priced tickets in the orchestra.
I'm also confused. If this is staged as a truly in the round experience for the folks on stage... will people who paid premium prices to sit in the orchestra be cool with that? If it's stages more for the orchestra... will people who paid bank to sit on stage be ok with that?
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:32pm
The tickets are going to remain as high as they are now probably through January I would imagine. Advanced sales are great and the show will only pick up more steam and attention as we head into the Fall.. I really see this and Dear Evan Hansen making a name for itself this season.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:37pm
"Advanced sales are great "
That's the OPPOSITE of what Riedel's article says and what I've heard elsewhere.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:40pm
KJ.....the show is not staged exclusive to those on the stage. Is it different when on stage, a little bit. There are also things staged in the house. The whole thing is staged to be immersive, not in the round.
I saw this twice at the ART, once in the orch, once on the stage, and I slightly preferred the orchestra.
Posted: 6/24/16 at 12:42pm
That's helpful, thanks!
