Posted: 6/29/16 at 8:46am
I don't buy his logic. The people clamoring to see Hamilton are not the typical Broadway demographic. I don't know many people who have actually seen Hamilton, whereas people I know have seen a number of other Broadway shows.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 8:50am
because they can't get tickets to Hamilton
Posted: 6/29/16 at 9:39am
Remember how Riedel told of all the aggrieved Tony voters who resented the show, because the producers would only grant them tickets during the late summer?
Yeah.
Right up there with his prediction of Bullets Over Broadway being the next Producers, with a ticket line down the block.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 9:40am
He's gone from presenting crazy opinions to presenting outright lies and factual errors. Yay Riedel.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 9:44am
He's not just a hack, he's a lazy hack.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 10:45am
Kad said: "He's not just a hack, he's a lazy hack."
Lazy not only in positing "facts" that are readily shown not to be true, but also, especially this year, just not getting to the types of true stories that are the actual beat. Not that I suggest it's worth the effort, but it would be telling to plot a graph in which some breaking theatre news is the x axis and his rank in reporting on it is the y axis.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 10:48am
I will give him credit where it's due: he's far better at writing about interest stories.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 1:36pm
mariel9 said: "Now, I can't even get a decent ticket at face value 1 year out.
Everything you're complaining about is the direct and sole result of the limited number of tickets available for any live theater event, coupled with this show's wild popularity. Neither of those things are Hamilton's fault, unless you think they should have tried to be less good, less popular. You can't get a ticket because it's sold out. The secondary market went nuts because it's sold out. What is it that you think Hamilton should do so they don't "change the business end in a negative way?"
Also, since you seem unaware of the outreach to low income public school students: http://www.gilderlehrman.org/about/hamilton-musical-and-rockefeller-foundation-announce-partnership-with-Gilder-Lehrman
They will be continuing the program in Chicago and on tour.
I was totally unaware of this program and fully support it. Now, if only I could turn back the sands of time, be a kid in NYC, and get in on this, I'd be golden. And it would be hard not to laugh at the idiots paying 25 times the face value for their tickets.
"
Posted: 6/29/16 at 1:43pm
Michael Riedel also REALLY loves writing about Jeff Daniels.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 1:50pm
@SFFrontRow "laugh at the idiots"
There are plenty of reasons in this world to laugh at fools and their money, but I don't really begrudge people to whom the money doesn't mean anything from spending it on the hottest things. (Some people spend thousands to wear the latest thing; that seems pretty much the same thing to me. I reserve my criticism for people who spend money on things that aren't good, whether its premium tickets to Disaster or Tuck Everlasting (etc etc) or the hideous dress in the window of Bergdorf's or producing a show that has no chance of being well-received (the same examples, again).
Posted: 6/29/16 at 1:58pm
Whatever percentage, it is pricing out people and probably taking business from other shows because a theater goer has to spend 25 times the face value for one ticket.
Nobody "has to". They choose to pay it or choose not to pay it and wait instead.
I feel like like we should just copy and paste the discussions when The Producers ran through the Tonys. People moaned how it caused shows to close and the introduction of premium seating and it being a show for the wealthy and elite, though it all stopped when Lane and Broderick left the show.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 2:05pm
@MisterMatt, as I said earlier, there always has to be a scapegoat. There are no rules in the theatre but this is an exception to that rule.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 2:49pm
Many of the shows that folded this season were all predicted to fold by people here... often when they were announced.
Often, it just doesn't take a seer to determine what will take off and what won't.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 3:15pm
While I agree with the general consensus that most of the shows that are closing probably wouldn't have survived anyway, I don't think anyone here is qualified to say that Hamilton isn't indirectly responsible for some of these closings. Let's face it, all of the hype surrounding Hamilton has dominated the season, and these other shows had very little visibility as a result. If people spent their time and resources trying to get Hamilton tickets, then it is safe to say there was probably no chance of them looking into seeing other shows.
And using personal experience as indicative of a norm is dishonest. The people on this board are more likely to see more shows in a month than the general theater-going public sees in a year. Therefore the personal experiences of this board's members is not an accurate measurement of ticket buying behavior.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 4:03pm
@Fosse, I agree with some of what you say but I do not think it is fair to say other shows did not get exposure. I think if you look at the publicists' clip files you'd find they all got a typical level of coverage. Most of the Hamilton "hype" was outside the normal channels, which is why it constituted hype. Had 60 Minutes not profiled Miranda, it would not have profiled Seth Rudetsky instead. And it should also be mentioned that the one show that seemed to surprise many when it flopped, Bright Star, had disproportionately high coverage, not so much because of the show but because of Martin.
Did Hamilton interfere with the market at all? Sure, but I don't think there is a show that closed that would not have closed in approximately the same frame anyway. It is also worth noting that I think much of the Hamilton premium/secondary sales are also outside of normal channels: a lot of those folks are not looking for a show to see; they are going to see it because they think it is something they can't miss. Just look at the parade of celebrities-the overwhelming majority of them do not fit in the "sees everything" category.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 4:11pm
"Did Hamilton interfere with the market at all? Sure, but I don't think there is a show that closed that would not have closed in approximately the same frame anyway. "
Agreed.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 4:19pm
Wouldn't it be their responsibility to make some noise? If they weren't looking for new ways to get the attention they needed in a unique year, that's their fault as well.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 4:39pm
I don't think anyone here is qualified to say that Hamilton isn't indirectly responsible for some of these closings.
Nor would they be more qualified to say it that it is.
Therefore the personal experiences of this board's members is not an accurate measurement of ticket buying behavior.
That cuts both ways. You make assumptions on how and why people may or may not spend their time and money. It's all assumptions made on getting into the heads of strangers or "what if" suppositions without much verifiable evidence. It's the game musical theatre fans play whenever any show becomes a juggernaut. The whole "but this is different" defense only illustrates how much things really stay the same.
Posted: 6/29/16 at 4:59pm
Kad said: "Remember how Riedel told of all the aggrieved Tony voters who resented the show, because the producers would only grant them tickets during the late summer?
Well, #Actually, Kad, they DIDN'T break The Producers record. This was CLEARLY due to the Tony voters' resentment.
Posted: 6/30/16 at 5:32am
Give it time, the fervor will indeed pass, especially once the main leads are gone. I hear Miss M warming up in the wings.
Posted: 6/30/16 at 6:41pm
I think the fervor is going to continue until the next MONSTER hit opens; and, based on an historic view, that is a long way out. And I don't think that another Disney rehash, no matter how good, is going to displace it. Although rich people will pay ridiculous amounts to see LMM before he leaves, that is because he wrote the show, not because he was a big Broadway star. The star is the show.
In my 50 plus year of theatre going, there has NEVER been anything that has entered into the national psyche like Hamilton. NOTHING. Not Hello Dolly, not A Chorus Line, not Phantom, not Chicago, not Lion King. The closest is Wicked with teenage girls (and I don't think there has ever been anything like that, either). There is no telling how long the fervor will last.
Even in its heyday, did anyone think the original production of Phamtom would run for 28 years (so far -- who knows how long it will run). The 'rules' have changed and will continue to change. And Hamilton fervor is going to continue for a long, long time, because it is one of a kind.
Posted: 6/30/16 at 6:56pm
I think it's reasonable to guess that the hype will die down within a couple of years to that of a more typical long running hit though. For example Book of Mormon is still doing blockbuster business but it's not a red hot water cooler topic anymore but is more just there as a Broadway fixture.
Updated On: 6/30/16 at 06:56 PM
Posted: 7/1/16 at 1:51pm
Even in its heyday, did anyone think the original production of Phamtom would run for 28 years
I did. The London cast recording created an obsession in the US long before the show started previews on Broadway and the first national tour several years later brought out the worst in people the likes of which I'd never seen in regards to musical theatre (until now). The broad international appeal was instantaneous. To me, it was quite apparent that the show would break all kinds of records is sales and longevity. I'm actually more surprised at the staying power of Lion King, which I thought would have run its course by now, but still continues to be heavily sold with no discounts.
Posted: 7/2/16 at 1:01am
I think Hamilton is great (after only hearing the recording), but I don't see it becoming a Phantom only because it actually doesn't rely on spectacle. Wicked, Phantom, and Lion King all rely on spectacle, and they could be understood without totally understanding English. But something like Hamilton? Those words are quick. I don't think that will appeal to a lot of tourists. Plus once the show opens overseas and gets oversaturated the way Book of Mormon has, I think the intensity will die down. Book of Mormon and Wicked are still doing killer business, they just aren't "hot" tickets anymore.
But yes, I do think Hamilton killed the other shows coming in this season. But, they were the first show to open the season, so every other show knew before going into it that they were here. It's not their fault. Sure, had I wished Bright Start would have waited? It's a quiet little musical which would never cause an uproar. But it's pretty good and Cusack is a star. But oh well. It is what it is.
Posted: 7/2/16 at 3:39am
carnzee said: "Kad said: "Remember how Riedel told of all the aggrieved Tony voters who resented the show, because the producers would only grant them tickets during the late summer?
Well, #Actually, Kad, they DIDN'T break The Producers record. This was CLEARLY due to the Tony voters' resentment."
Huh?
Updated On: 7/2/16 at 03:39 AM
