Riedel: Bebe B'way house of horror

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:31am

Oh my. Nothing we really didn't know. Bebe is really the reason I am most looking forward to seeing this show. I wish they would give her more material.

Lane and the famous title should bring in the tourists in the summer. But, in the end, it looks like "The Addams Family" is shaping up to be this season's "Young Frankenstein."

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/bebe_way_house_of_horror_9KpizbyYBX5A8hw97gaeAO
Updated On: 3/19/10 at 01:31 AM

[choitoy]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 2:01am

Poor Bebe. She always seemed to me like one of the many people who should have become great theater stars, but never really got the roles they deserved (or roles created for them in mind, like in the musical heyday of Merman and Martin), and thus will always be remembered as a one note character actress (Lilith on "Cheers" and "Frasier"). Heck, it seemed every role she has played has been some variation on the Lilith theme.

[BroadwayBound062]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 2:36am

I think she is talented sad she is in such an awful show.

[BrianS]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 7:32am

"But, in the end, it looks like "The Addams Family" is shaping up to be this season's "Young Frankenstein. Da da da dead."

So Michael writes an article about a supposed unhappy star and that means the show is gonna flop? I don't follow his logic. $15M advance. $1.1M last week at an average price of $113. Even with a high weekly nut, the show is already 30-40% paid off before opening night with that kind of advance. I'm not predicting its success or failure, but I really don't understand how Riedel's mind is coming to these conclusions.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the challenges facing this show are completely different than YF (which shot itself in the foot in so many ways). This show isn't going to get well reviewed so the tourist buzz needs to be great and from what I'm hearing, it is. Stick to gossip, Michael. Analysis doesn't seem to be your thing.

[taylorPHENOMENON2]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 7:54am

I feel terrible for her. You can tell she's miserable in her performance. She deserves better.

Posted: 3/19/10 at 9:58am

The show also made 11 Mil in Chicago.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 10:16am

"So Michael writes an article about a supposed unhappy star and that means the show is gonna flop? I don't follow his logic. $15M advance. $1.1M last week at an average price of $113. Even with a high weekly nut, the show is already 30-40% paid off before opening night with that kind of advance."

There's no way this show can possibly pay 30-40% of its investment by opening night. That advance can't be touched. And there are many shows that have had large advances that ultimately flopped. When the reviews come out and people start to stay away, those grosses will sink faster than the Titanic.

"I'm not predicting its success or failure, but I really don't understand how Riedel's mind is coming to these conclusions."

Young Frankenstein also had a healthy advance. It didn't live up to the hyp, and therefore people stayed away.

[WestVillage]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 11:11am

So true .. the advance is based on the name recognition of the title, Nathan Lane and Bebe. But the comments I've been hearing are not ones to inspire others to buy tickets ... things like "It was OK; not as bad as I had heard." I have not heard anyone say "You MUST see this show!"

Posted: 3/19/10 at 11:33am

Hmmm anyone want to apologize to that poor sap who got ripped to shreds for saying that Addams Family had a huge advance?

[Brick]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 11:43am

No, because an advance only means it will run well for awhile, w year perhaps. But if word of mouth and reviews aren't great, then the advance and ticket sales will dry up.

[averagebwaynut]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 11:51am

ChicagoStar -- the show grossed $11M in Chicago. It didn't make $11M in Chicago. My rough guess would be $1.5M in profits or so. Maybe $2M depending on how they managed expenses.

On a separate note, ignoring the usual bitchiness and snarkiness and implied glee in rooting for a show's demise, what fascinates me about Riedel's feelings about the quality and/or dearth of Bebe's material in the show itself and some of the subsequent chatter, is that while I too would love to see Bebe Neuwirth the actress have more to do in a musical theatre vein (the Bebe Neuwirth I remember from decades past), I have my doubts as to whether the character of Morticia really lends itself that much more material than they've given her.

For better or worse, Gomez is the irrepressible imp, the mischief maker, the "master-of-the-revels" as I recall reading in a descriptive paragraph somewhere. Morticia is the paragon of self-confidence (paraphrasing another poster from a few months back), positively stoic in being unfazed by the world at large. In Chicago, her storyline gave her a wider range of emotion to play, and therefore lent itself to more material for her, but the reaction to her more "human" emotions was almost uniformly negative. Now, it seems, they've dialed the emotion back for her which makes her more aloof and cold -- arguably more consistent with the Morticia of the cartoons but less appealing for the audience, and specifically for Bebe's fans (of which I am one).

But I'm honestly not sure it would work to have it both ways -- that is, if we require her to be relatively emotionless, deadpan, unmoved , how much can there possibly be for her to sing about? The sardonic "Just Around the Corner" is perfect for both Morticia and Bebe (as even Riedel seems to admit), and a wonderful Act II opener, but even if her voice was better and even if her physical mobility was somewhat the same as it was 20 years ago, what else should Morticia be singing about that would be consistent with her nature?

Of course, I'm not a composer, lyricist or bookwriter so perhaps there are indeed unexplored themes that Morticia could be singing about while remaining true to her character (I expect subsequent posters to lecture me on precisely that). But I do sometimes wonder if everyone lamenting how little they feel Bebe has to do in the show -- and per Riedel, Ms. Neuwirth's own frustrations with same -- is really a fair critique of the show on its own terms or just fans like me (and Riedel) wanting to see more of her whether or not it serves the show best.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 11:59am

Bebe is a triple threat. She threatened Ben Brantley, Frank Rich and Michael Riedel.

[sondhead]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 12:10pm

They're probably not giving her more songs because she can barely sing the ones she has. I mean, at least when I saw it she sounded terrible.

Then again, the show was pretty terrible, too, so..

[best12bars]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 12:15pm

I don't understand why he says she can't do the big dance numbers like she used to. So what?

Morticia Addams shouldn't be Cassie from A Chorus Line. She doesn't need a big "Music and the Mirror" -type, show-stopper, sing/dance/act number. That would be SO wrong for this character.

How about giving her a better story arch for her character? How about writing her a few more laughs? How about a big number where she's the focal point in the middle, and let the chorus work hard around her? (How many times have we seen that? But it works!)

Yeah, she had a hip replacement, and she can't join the Rockette line anymore. If the creative team can't utilize her stage presence, comic timing, quirkiness, and (yeah) the TALENT she does have, that's their fault, not hers.

But it's also her problem now. And it's a big one. Such a shame to be in that situation.

[GoSmileLaughCryClap]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 12:18pm

What appear to be huge advance sales these days are very misleading. The weekly gross potential for Addams is well over a million dollars a week. That 15 million advance accounts for about 3 months of sellout business. If the ticket sales are spread over a 6 or 7 month period the show could be operating at weekly losses within weeks if the reviews are harsh and ticket sales dry up.

For a good comparison, in 1988, Phantom had an advance of more than 16 Million dollars at the Majestic before it opened. At that time its potential gross was about $500,000. Every good seat in the house was sold for 10 months. Scalpers tickets sold for less than premium seats to Addams!

To match Phantom's advance in adjusted dollars, Addams would need to have banked in excess of 35 million dollars already.

[BrianS]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 12:24pm

"There's no way this show can possibly pay 30-40% of its investment by opening night."

Fosse, you're right as I forgot to account for the creative side. I can't imagine the nut for this show is much above $650k a week. If they didn't sell another ticket beyond that advance and just ran 15 weeks at a $1M gross, that would be a net of over $5M minus creative would still be a healthy $3M (20% of Riedel's claimed $15M production). Not 30-40%, but still not bad if those numbers are close.

My overall point is that very few shows are fortunate to have that large of an advance and even though my friends' opinions of the show are mixed, they all seem to agree that the tourists really like it and laughed throughout. That is something that didn't happen with YF.

[BrianS]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 12:28pm

Gosmile, for a "good comparison" you pick the single most successful musical of all time?! By that standard, Wicked is coming up way short.

Point made about the advance being spread over 6 months though.

[GoSmileLaughCryClap]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 12:33pm

No, my point is that the current "huge" advances that are promoted about shows, and create the aura of a smash are very misleading. A 15 Million dollar advance on a big star driven new musical these days is promising, not exceptional.

It amounts to 12 weeks of business. How is that particularly notable; except to throw out a number that on the surface looks impressive?


Updated On: 3/19/10 at 12:33 PM

[Amneris]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:03pm

sad man.
Updated On: 4/20/10 at 01:03 PM

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:10pm

"There's no way this show can possibly pay 30-40% of its investment by opening night."

Fosse, you're right as I forgot to account for the creative side.

I have no idea what you think you're saying, but the creative side has absolutely nothing to do with when you can use the advance.

Income for future performances can not be touched or used for ANYTHING until the performance has happened. What if they spent the money and then were forced to cancel a performance because of the weather or a star was sick or something? They'd have to refund the ticket-buyer, so the money has to be there.

Furthermore, we don't know when the advance tickets are for. They could all be for the summer, which means that the producers have to take a chance that they'll make enough money to survive the slower months in between, or that they're able to cover the losses until they start making a profit. Some producers have enough cash available that they can do that. If they don't, they have to close the show, even with millions of dollars in ticket sales for the future. Those millions of dollars then have to be refunded.

THAT is why the advance can't be touched and why the investment will not be "30-40%" paid off by opening night, even if the producers technically have the money in the bank.

[James885]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:40pm

Remember, highly anticipated shows like Tarzan and Young Frankenstein had large advances when they opened and both flopped. The $15 million advance is good and the show should last at least through the summer but it's way too early to tell if it'll be a financial hit. If the advance dries up, they'll be in trouble. From what I can tell, it's not shaping up to be a critical hit either.

Updated On: 3/19/10 at 01:40 PM

[BrianS]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:46pm

Yero, you take the gross minus the weekly operating expenses and you have $X (say $350k/week possibly for this show). Before a show recoups, that amount is usually divided 35% (creative)/65%(back to investors). After recoup, this number changes a bit and the lead producer take a cut from the investor side. I didn't account for the creative side (the 35%) when I first said that they should be already $5M in, which made my number lower.

While that money can't be accessed, it is committed. Barring a catastrophe, those tickets are sold. I've seen shows with small advances forced to refund when they closed early, but not shows with a healthy advance. I already conceded that the advance could be spread a bit, but it's hard for me to believe based on how full the house is that a majority of those tickets are for 5-6 months away.

Time will tell.

edit:
I'm sure people will put examples of shows that had large advances and didn't recoup. I didn't mean to start a budget debate. I'm not saying the show is gonna recoup. My whole initial point was that Riedel was starting an article taking backstage gossip about a star being difficult and then ending the article with how the show was going to be this years Young Frankenstein without addressing the fact that it's been warmly received by the public so far.

Updated On: 3/19/10 at 01:46 PM

[averagebwaynut]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:52pm

I agree with the spirit of what both GoSmile and Yero have said -- the advance is essentially meaningless from a financial point of view. It may provide a small measure of security early in the run and it may provide a reasonably accurate measure of advance interest in a show, but it can't really be used -- certainly not pre-opening -- as an indicator of success or recoupment.

That said, I do disagree with GoSmile's semantics. A $15M advance -- if Riedel is correct -- is exceptional in this day and age, if only because it is so rare that any show achieves that kind of number. Does it ensure anything for "Addams"? Certainly not. But it still is exceptional.

I also would note that most shows, 'Addams' included, tend to shy away from "promoting" their own advance numbers, especially pre-Opening, so as not to seem arrogant or overconfident -- in particular, in the eyes of critics (who might feel the need to knock them down to size even farther). Indeed, except for Flahooley2 on this board, this is the first time I've seen a specific number for the Addams advance in print. So whether or not $15M is promising or exceptional or even accurate, the only person who is suggesting that we should be impressed with $15M is Riedel himself. At least based on the chatter on BWW, I'm sure the Addams folks understand the finances of Broadway -- as Yero and GoSmile have detailed -- and are no less nervous just because of their healthy advance than they would otherwise be.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 3/19/10 at 1:53pm

Back to Bebe, I loved her on Frasier aand Cheers, it was the perfect combination of actress, role and exceptional writing.
I never really got her as a musical comedy performer. Even in her most notable Broadway role in CHICAGO I was not that impressed, she is a servicable but not spectacular dancer (think McKechnie, Reinking or the ultimate Rivera) They have a spark that I feel Bebe has never touched. As far as a hip replacement Chita had her leg shattered in a car accident. If you saw her in THE VISIT you would know that the "spark" has not dimmed, The creators of THE VISIT even got her to dance THE ONE-LEGGED TANGO which was a nuanced example of style and imagination. Bebe was cast as Morticia because of her looks and name sake, if they can't capitalize on her talents, thecrative team are to blame here.
As far as Reidel being a failed actor or a sad man, we all have to get over that. He has created his position and made a name for himself. We all love the theatre and the drama behind the curtain as well as in front of it.

Posted: 3/19/10 at 2:16pm

The argument started: this show will bomb. And some timid soul stepped forward and said "It's got a huge advance- over $11 million already."

So the naysayers immediately charge in: "No, it doesn't! How could you possible know that!? You are a lying shill!"

So now Riedel says the advance is up to $15 Million and the chattering class can't decide if that's a lie or it's not really that much these days or still not a sign this show could be successful.

You're right- it's not proof that this show is going to be a hit, but it absolutely is proof that this is, right now, the most anticipated new show and there are a LOT of people who want to see it.