Riedel: No 'Woods' on B'way

I will say that he has Eustis pegged. That man will do anything to get a show on Broadway. Other than that, I wonder if his sources are the same ones that told him all about those theatre switches that never came to fruition.

The last line of the article is quite funny. I wondered the same thing when I read about the "high demand" quote in the Times.

---

Riedel is such a Debbie Downer

---

But he's right here. It's all PR horse manure. Joey Parnes has not dime one, there is no offering, no papers, no plan - he's just putting it out there, gets his name in the press and because of it gets his deserved ridicule from Riedel.

I don't know if anyone else saw Amy Adams' appearance on Live With Kelly last week, but when Nick Lachey (who was guest co-hosting) asked her if this experience has made her want to do a show on Broadway, she was very awkward in responding. She paused for an inordinate amount of time before saying, "Um... I'll think about it. I'll definitely think about it. Right now, I'm so focused on this, and then, um -- I've got a few films coming out, but I'd love to, yeah. I'd like to do something dancey. Something real... showey."

For what it's worth, I've heard similar things to what Reidel's reporting, which is nothing particularly new: Joey Parnes is trying to use the Times piece to drum up interest from investors, but no one wants to go near the show. While Adams has apparently been the definition of lovely to work with, as Reidel says, I've heard she has no interest in moving forward with the show, if it really does go anywhere. Her schedule doesn't really afford her the opportunity to commit to another run anyway, but the person I spoke to got the impression that she's walking away from this experience feeling very burnt out and emotionally exhausted. She wasn't well prepared at all for the demands that are presented by putting up a show in the park, and all the drama behind the scenes throughout the rehearsal and preview period really took a toll on her, as I'm sure it did for everyone.

And as harsh as Reidel may be, his criticisms of Oskar Eustis's Broadway ambitions going against the essential mission of The Public are very valid. I'm surprised he didn't mention THE MOTHERF*CKER WITH THE HAT, which was another show that was supposed to happen downtown before Eustis moved it to Broadway when they were able to land a viable film star. There have also been similar rumors that Eustis has Broadway hopes for GIANT, though that's about as uncommercially friendly a piece as I've ever seen.

---

Updated On: 8/15/12 at 12:37 AM

While GIANT may not be commercial, neither was BRING IN DA NOISE nor PASSING STRANGE. But the Public transferred those to Broadway.

To transfer this production of INTO THE WOODS to the Delacorte was ambitious. It fits SO well, and it makes perfect sense to produce at that venue. I'm proud that the Public produced this production. It's understandable that there would be a tight and difficult schedule to get the production up. It seems that schedule may have taken a toll on the actors, as per the reports about Amy Adams and Donna Murphy.

I don't think you can do this production in a Broadway theater and still retain its awe and atmospheric wonderment that the outdoor venue provides. It just wouldn't be the same.

In addition, in a season that is already packed with high-profile productions, I question that there is "room" for INTO THE WOODS on Broadway this Spring. Too much competition to take away from its box office.

The Public did right by producing INTO THE WOODS at the Delacorte. Now let it end and move onto the next show.

---

Or it's not going to Broadway because of the fact that from what I've seen of it (which, granted, is just photos and a few videos), it relies very heavily on the whole "outdoor" aspect of it, so some major changes would have to be made to move it to an actual theater. Just my opinion, but again, I have not seen it live- unfortunately....

I feel also he is spot on about Eustis (and I said it somewhere a few days ago).
The Public, (like every other theatre company) needs money to do ALL the smaller projects they do, but you can't force something on the paying audiences, they have to find it and make it a hot ticket.
It must be hard to walk the lines of Art and Commerce.

I'm still amazed that the director didn't see the pratfalls of this production and plan accordingly. When I saw it again this week, after that first preview, they did fix a lot, but it just isn't up to the great score and book.

I have a like-hate relationship with Riedel's column. In this case, I have have to agree with him. Eustis seems to have an obsession with Broadway, and though he's a fine dramaturg and all, he ought to stick with putting on exciting and quality work downtown, and not worrying about Broadway.

It was a good move for the summer. As CapnHook said, end it.

Bitchy, nasty, venomous and 100% correct.

---

Why is GIANT, a musical based on an epic novel which was a popular Hollywood movie, be non-commercial? It would seem to be the first R&H type new musical in decades.

double post

---

Updated On: 8/15/12 at 08:41 AM

Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and I think its Riedel's time of the day... from all accounts I've read and people I've talked to, transferring this to Broadway is not a good idea and all this talk is simply to lure the money in.