Riedel on the Tony Awards and Bette not performing — Page 3

There is a very successful production of Dolly on now in Melbourne WITHOUT the passerelle--it can be done.

I think it's safe to say that Hello Dolly! is the biggest hit of the season. Although the show doesn't need the publicity, I can't help but think the Tonys will be one big missed marketing opportunity. Sure people don't really watch the Tonys live telecast, but they do sure share videos on YouTube and videos seriously go viral causing even more buzz on social media (Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Reddit..then it gets shared on Buzzfeed and other sites with huge traffic). The whole show could have been one big coronation for Bette Midler and the show, and thus could have simply become one huge Dolly showcase (imagine Midler hosting the show, being part of big opening number, doing a big showcase number from the show, and then probably winning Tonys and making a show out of their acceptance speeches). It would have been even bigger since there has been little-to-no video footage of the show itself as of today. The Tonys could have been a huge coming out party.

I mean Rudin can do what he wants since the show has a giant advance and isn't dying any time soon, and the Tony producers can stick to their principles to avoid unwanted precedents. Both parties are within their rights to act the way they did and I know people can see both arguments. However, this really is one giant missed opportunity for both parties, even if both parties feel they don't need to take that opportunity. The much derided and so-called entitled theatre queens and bitches may be really the ones who will miss out the most by not seeing Bette perform that glorious title number (or hell any number!), but it's the queens and bitches that are the heart and soul of theatre fandom and keep Broadway (both hit shows and flops and everything in-between) alive in the public consciousness (even if it's on the edges of the mainstream).

In short, I feel like David Merrick would have been a lot more savvy about this, and would have done a better job "compromising" with the Tony producers and CBS.

Updated On: 5/31/17 at 03:56 PM

ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 said: "I think it's safe to say that Hello Dolly! is the biggest hit of the season. Although the show doesn't need the publicity, I can't help but think the Tonys will be one big missed marketing opportunity. Sure people don't really watch the Tonys live telecast, but they do sure share videos on YouTube and videos seriously go viral causing even more buzz on social media (Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Reddit..then it gets shared on Buzzfeed and other sites with huge traffic). The whole show could have been one big coronation for Bette Midler and the show, and thus could have simply become one huge Dolly showcase (imagine Midler hosting the show, being part of big opening number, doing a big showcase number from the show, and then probably winning Tonys and making a show out of their acceptance speeches). It would have been even bigger since there has been little-to-no video footage of the show itself as of today. The Tonys could have been a huge coming out party.

I mean Rudin can do what he wants since the show has a giant advance and isn't dying any time soon, and the Tony producers can stick to their principles to avoid unwanted precedents. Both parties are within their rights to act the way they did and I know people can see both arguments. However, this really is one giant missed opportunity for both parties, even if both parties feel they don't need to take that opportunity. The much derided and so-called entitled theatre queens and bitches may be really the ones who will miss out the most by not seeing Bette perform that glorious opening number, but it's the queens and bitches that are the heart and soul of theatre fandom and keep Broadway (both hit shows and flops and everything in-between) alive in the public consciousness (even if it's on the edges of the mainstream).

In short, I feel like David Merrick would have been a lot more savvy about this, and would have done a better job "compromising" with the Tony producers and CBS.



"

Very well stated. I agree 100 percent.

PalJoey said: "

f*ck Scott Rudin and everyone defending him.





"

This has all been so upsetting . And yes I am one of those queens.

HogansHero said: "That "heart and soul" of yours represents a single digit percentage of the audience; your perception is way off. You are right that it is that demographic that cares about this.



"

My perception is not off. I didn't say the fandom was the majority of the theatre going audience. Those are mainly tourists and those who want to see a big named show. Many of them are foreign.

When I said "fandom" and "heart and soul" people who live and breathe Broadway and talk about it all year round. To me, that's the heart and soul of theatre as an art. The body may be the money-paying audiences which feeds theatre the business and thus also necessary. They may not be the majority of the theatre audience (I do wonder how you measured it in order to come out with it being in the single digits), but it's not as they are an insignificant population. Having a dedicated fan base to keep an art form present is actually a big deal for any industry, no matter how small. I really do think passion and fanbases have kept shows floating far longer than they should have or even funded from the beginning to all the workshops and then put into a theatre.

Updated On: 5/31/17 at 09:55 PM

My parents, who don't live in New York and most likely won't get to see Dolly, are in the demographic of people who go to the theatre all the time locally (in Tampa, which has a great performing arts center and consistently solid tour schedule) and absolutely care about what's new on Broadway and what might be coming their way in the future.* And we always prioritize seeing shows here when they come up to visit me. I wouldn't call them the "heart and soul" of theatre in the way it's being described in this thread - they're certainly not posting on BroadwayWorld and I'm sure they have no clue who Scott Rudin is - but they were genuinely devastated when I told them that Bette/Hello Dolly might not be performing at the Tonys. Obviously my parents are just anecdata, but I think there are a lot of theatre fans like them around the country, young and old, who will be affected by this news and really bummed. It's about more than just catering to the die-hards.

*They of course know that Bette wouldn't tour even if Hello Dolly did. But it's still about enjoying the highlights of the season.

Well, how many tickets is "Penny in My Pocket" gonna sell?

If Bette Midler really doesn't perform, and they really stick David Hyde Pierce out there by himself for the Hello, Dolly performance, I will feel sorry for him. He seems like a consummate professional, and he wouldn't deserve that shabby treatment.

I'm in a different category than others here. I don't really care much about Hello, Dolly one way or another, as I'm in the wrong demographic, and I haven't even seen the movie. But I am certainly curious to see a song from the revival - especially after reading all the praise both from longtime Dolly fans and from other people who had a good time. I have raised questions about why, if the revival is so good, it couldn't continue without Bette Midler. My questions were partially answered by the demand, or lack thereof, for tickets when Midler is out even at discount prices with a two-time Tony winner in her place. I guess people care only about Midler, which is understandable given the way the show has been promoted.

The whole Tony Awards ruckus surprised me, because I just assumed the nominated musicals would perform something that included the star of the show. Now I certainly understand the bottom line reasoning. Why bother promoting Bette/Dolly when it's sold out with her in it? But if Broadway producers like Scott Rudin want to promote theatre, maybe they should give the people what they consider their best.

I wrote a thing here a while ago about how my experience seeing Hamilton last year has encouraged me to attend more shows, from revivals like The King and I on tour to new productions like Dear Evan Hansen and Great Comet on a New York trip last month. So here's Dolly, the biggest hit of this season featuring a veteran star with legendary performing skills, and it won't be on the Tony Awards? Does Rudin want to introduce Dolly to a new generation of folks who might enjoy it, or does he just want to keep everything exclusive and limited to a select few? Unless this is all an annoying publicity stunt, I guess we have our answer.

The Hamilton producers got plenty of grief for being greedy, some of it deserved, but they've done right by their musical and have reaped the rewards. Plenty of people who never could set foot in the Richard Rodgers Theatre to see the show can find clips online, television appearances, et cetera. Now, I know they weren't doing all that to be nice. The promotion, including the multiple appearances on last year's Tony Awards show, was designed to sell higher-priced tickets that very night and to promote the upcoming tours.

But if Hello, Dolly is really as good as so many people here say, why hide it? I'll bet you that JudyDenmark's parents would be interested in seeing a touring production. Shoot, I might talk my wife and/or daughter into seeing it. But if I don't see a single clip of the show, I will lose interest long before the Tony Awards start. The current mini-drama is already irritating me, because Rudin is telling obvious lies and insulting everyone's intelligence (and putting Pierce in an absurd position) by saying Dolly will perform "Penny in My Pocket."

Rudin can make his money, and I'm glad Dolly fans have been enjoying the musical in person, but he's rendering the show invisible and irrelevant to everyone else.

Updated On: 6/1/17 at 01:07 AM

To me, the show is billed as "Bette Midler in Hello Dolly." So, to have David Hyde Pierce come out and sing a song by himself, to me, just seems like a cowardly move by Midler. And that, as an audience member, would rub me the wrong way. I already have tickets to see Midler. But, you better believe if I was above the title and it was national broadcast I'd be out on that stage singing. It all just seems so odd and gross.

JudyDenmark, you and I are in the same boat. I'm a 50ish married man, too young to have seen the movie when it came out. I know the plot only in very basic terms, and yeah, I've probably seen more of it in Wall-E. Obviously, I am familiar with Midler and David Hyde Pierce and recognize a few other names as Broadway veterans. When the cast recording was released, I listened to that. I wandered past the Schubert a few times last month when I was in New York seeing other shows. (My wife, who has seen the supposedly inferior film, wasn't all that interested as a result, and we weren't around long enough anyway.)

Your experience is exactly the reason why I think I might like the show, even on tour, without Bette Midler. But Rudin doesn't seem to care and is making no effort at all to promote the show. It's a sort of anti-promotion, a finger in the eye of anyone who might be interested in seeing what all the fuss is about and to people who truly love the musical.

It's just puzzling to me.

Updated On: 6/1/17 at 02:31 AM

Everyone's blaming Rudin for this, but surely it's according to Bette's wishes, right?

Although I'm sure people would be blaming Rudin anyway, I think putting in DHP and performing "Penny in my Pocket" as a substitute is what makes people think it's beyond Bette's wishes, which probably says a lot about how people view that song.