CONFIRMED: CATS: THE JELLICLE BALL to close on August 8th — Page 6
Posted: 7/13/26 at 6:50pm
“If the people don’t want to come out to the ballpark, nobody’s going to stop them.” Yogi Berra
Posted: 7/13/26 at 6:53pm
One of those moments where I detest the knowledge I was right.
I’m Hannah Einbinder screaming about branzino before crashing through a security gate-level of pissed.
Buy now. Cry later. Queer joy has no closing date ✊
Updated On: 7/13/26 at 06:53 PM
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:05pm
quizking101 said: " Queer joy has no closing date✊"
not many of the theatre owners and producers on Broadway voted for the eradication of queer people. and voted for the people broadway is supposed to stand up against
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:07pm
Cats is an English musical, not a traditional Broadway musical, and this Cats is a very, very specialized production that was, never targeted to a mass audience as the original Cats was, so it was bound to have a limited appeal compared to the original Cats run.
That said, Broadway is having a very difficult time at the box office right now because too many of the shows appeal to specialized subset markets. The problem is what is being produced is just not appealing to a large enough audience to pay the production costs. Death of a Salesman appeals to all theatergoers, so does Giant, so does Hamilton, so does Just in Time, so does Wicked, so does Lion King.
Death Becomes Her appealed to a camp audience just as the film did - it was going to run out of an audience well before paying its production costs.. Jellicle Ball appeals to a very, very specialized niche audience. Queen of Versailles also had limited appeal -- a celebration of narcissism without a strong satirical comment on materialism. Too many shows have generic characters, or unpleasant characters, or superficial characters - not people we want to spend an evening with. The shows are production driven - sets, costumes, choreography - not character driven. Nothing wrong with that, but not lasting which means the box. office cannot pay off that initial investment unless it runs for 2 or 3 years.
Ironic that Salesman was written in 1948 and sells out in a larger theatre now than it ever did -- the characters, the story, the themes speak to a mainstream audience.
Oh Mary is such a clever style piece -- it plays like the old comedies of Broadway where great actors can sell a show -- ike an old Bert Lahr , or Rox Russell, or Beatrice Lillie show where an outrageous oversized star can create a wonderful evening of mayhem and merriment. We don't see many of those anymore.
Go ahead, shoot. But over the last there years how many 15-25 million dollar shows can go under before Broadway no longer becomes a good investment for producers or audiences?
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:11pm
SALESMAN, GIANT, and JUST IN TIME themselves do not appeal to all theatergoers. Like I said, they're coming for the celebs in those shows.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:22pm
EDSOSLO858 said: "Right on, and the general public is largely musical-averse (both because of lack of interest and disposable income)."
And most of the general public is all cisgendered older white people (who are mostly conservative). Would'nt be surprised if a Scott Rudin-produced show takes over the Broadhurst next (and I have been boycotting his shows ever since he came back)
Updated On: 7/13/26 at 07:22 PM
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:30pm
Broadhurst would be a nice choice for PRIVATE LIVES (Jeffrey Richards + Rebecca Gold) or CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF (Seaview).
Updated On: 7/13/26 at 07:30 PM
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:34pm
I'm said I won't get to see this. I just looked yesterday for tickets on a September Wednesday and decided, based on how expensive they were, to just wait and try TKTS to get a better seat for (likely) a better price than the $115 for the last couple of rows.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:35pm
EDSOSLO858 said: "Broadhurst would be a nice choice for PRIVATE LIVES (Jeffrey Richards + Rebecca Gold) or CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF (Seaview)."
Wouldn't be surprised if they got idk, Jennifer Lawrence to be in one of those
Posted: 7/13/26 at 7:52pm
I am very sad this didn’t catch on, but, at the same time, unsurprised it didn’t. But I don’t see its failure as an indictment of Broadway; this is hardly the first great production to flop in Broadway’s history, nor will it be the last.
I do think it’ll be remembered more than many other productions, even more successful ones, though. It’s audacious and historic in a way few productions are and took a show that is now widely seen as musical theatre cringe and reinvigorated it.
There’s that old Brian Eno quote that goes something like, “The Velvet Underground didn’t sell many records, but everyone who bought one went on to start a band.” I feel like Jellicle Ball will be that kind of production, one that will prove influential in the long run.
Updated On: 7/13/26 at 07:52 PM
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:04pm
I said this the other day, but I think this show had a serious momentum problem that it could never overcome. They waited too long to transfer, and some of the luster had disappeared between PAC and Broadway, perhaps by nature of the space it was in or the burden of expectation.
From the start, it did not seem like Michael Harrison and Mike Bosner had a great grasp on how to market the show. They were trying to straddle traditional CATS and new reconceived CATS, and you obviously cannot advertise it as "the production for everyone who hates CATS" when ALW himself is involved.
Let's also acknowledge that Andrew Lloyd Webber could keep funding this through the end of the year and Shubert would go along with it because it's Andrew. But he clearly does not want to do that.
Purely anecdotal and probably not indicative of the general public, but I know people who were putting off seeing it because somehow they got the impression that it was this sell-out hit with only expensive seats - when in reality it hasn't had a sellout week since week one, and it crossed the $1 million mark only 4 times (which wouldn't have been great even a decade ago).
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:04pm
I am not being snarky, but I was surprised that this transferred.
I don't understand how anyone thought this would have broad appeal.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:08pm
Kad said: "I am very sad this didn’t catch on, but, at the same time, unsurprised it didn’t. But I don’t see its failure as an indictment of Broadway; this is hardly the first great production to flop in Broadway’s history, nor will it be the last.
I do think it’ll be remembered more than many other productions, even more successful ones, though. It’s audacious and historic in a way few productions are and took a show that is now widely seen as musical theatrecringeand reinvigorated it.
There’s that old Brian Eno quote that goes something like, “The Velvet Underground didn’t sell many records, but everyone who bought one went on to start a band.” I feel like Jellicle Ball will be that kind of production, onethat will prove influential in the long run.
"
I really like this perspective. Personally, I LOVE the ball element and, 9 times out of 10, would've been all over a show that incorporated it into its fabric. That 10th time, when it's a show that's as unappealing to me as Cats, I fully passed on seeing this.
I appreciate they took the swing, and love that it was as well received as it was up to this point, but someone would have to pay me money for me to sit through any sort of production of Cats. I'm a single gay Hispanic man in his 40s, I love musical theater and go to NYC multiple times in a year to see shows. Technically I had multiple opportunities to go see, at PAC or Broadway, and never chose to put myself through Cats even with friends who've seen it challenging me to do so.
Yes, we know the cost of entry for a ball themed show was high for many, and that's a shame. But I think the cost of entry for Cats was a challenge for more people than we think as well.
I do hope this leads to more reinventing of other pieces through lenses that haven't normally gotten their due on Broadway. Hopefully this opens up more doors and minds, and the next "Jellicle Ball" type show makes if longer.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:12pm
Kad said: "I think we will see more "limited runs" in the vein of Operation Mincemeat: effectively open-ended productions scheduled for an initial run that then release further blocks of tickets as "extensions.""
Yes, but limited in the 12-16 week sense --- not BEACHES announcing 6 months of performances and calling itself "limited" :)
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:14pm
After this & Here Lies Love maybe marketing teams should pass on using disco balls in their marketing campaigns. It doesn't seem to be the draw they think it is.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:16pm
So weird that, like yesterday, we were reading comments about how so many people going just "really" understand this production, and sneering at some older woman who was watching it and saying "Now Cats finally make sense" when she couldn't possible "get" ballroom culture. Now it's all about how Broadway is dead because it won't support shows like this. Did people want Broadway to support this, or did they want some private gem for their little niche circle? It can't be both. Looks like people got the latter. Congratulations?
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:22pm
nmartin said: "I am not being snarky, but I was surprised that this transferred.
I don't understand how anyone thought this would have broad appeal."
I'll never knock a show getting a chance at a bigger audience (which it did in fact have here than Downtown) and do so with rich people's money to get something and people that never get to be on a Broadway stage.
I need the Bootleggers to get on their A Game because I've seen a significant lack of bootlegs out for this run. I only know of one and it's only like... the first act.
joevitus said: "So weird that, likeyesterday, we were reading comments about how so many people goingjust "really"understand thisproduction, and sneering at some older woman who was watching it and saying "Now Cats finally make sense" when she couldn't possible "get" ballroom culture. Now it's all about how Broadway is dead because it won't support shows like this. Did peoplewantBroadway to support this, or did theywantsome private gem for theirlittle niche circle? It can't be both. Looks like people got the latter. Congratulations?"
Almost like you're conflating statements from multiple people into one hivemind and ignoring all context from those statements. I was not saying that to be pretentious, I was saying that Ballroom doesn't make Cats "Good", it just allows people to put a distance between what they didn't like and allows THEM to be pretentious about a production of Cats. Jellicle Ball and Original Recipe are the exact same show. With all of the Cringe, Camp, and Grandeur it allows. I say this as someone who loves both. I've seen Original Recipe 4 Times, I'll have seen Jellicle Ball 4 Times (twice downtown and twice Broadway).
Updated On: 7/13/26 at 08:22 PM
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:23pm
DrMonicaDeMoneco said: "8-10 stand by’s?! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!"
This is becoming the norm now.
DEAR EVAN HANSEN was the first show I can recall that had more swings/standbys than its onstage cast of 8. TWO STRANGERS has 4 covers for 2 roles.
CATS' coverage problem has plagued it since the PAC run. It's physically demanding, and some of its cast is not used to doing this kind of thing 8x a week. Apparently it's been split-track hell over there recently. How they thought 5 offstage covers would be enough mystifies me.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:24pm
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "
CATS' coverage problem has plagued it since the PAC run. It's physically demanding, and some of its cast is not used to doing this kind of thing 8x a week. Apparently it's been split-track hell over there recently. How they thought 5 offstage covers would be enough mystifies me."
I do have to wonder if this was a significant factor in deciding to close. There is no way this was sustainable without adding significantly more people to an already large company.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:26pm
its weird, the people apologizing and mea culpa-ing to quizking must be whispering, i can barely hear them?
the notion that this closing has something to do with "white" audiences is so silly--i sat in a packed Black audience watching Joe Turners Come and Gone last week, and I was surrounded by people of all ethnicities and ages at Spelling Bee this weekend. CATS + drag culture is not going to appeal to mass audiences without a truly brilliant marketing campaign of some sort-
and this was marketed as avant garde out there wild LGBTQ party time, which is why it has been so popular with that segment of ticket buyers, but hasnt really caught fire with 55 year olds (of any race) from Iowa or the soccer moms from Long Island and Jersey. Its ASTOUNDING to that some people are angry/bewildered that this struggled to sustain a run of more than a few months- it did better than many thought it would.
i detested the material, but i was amazed by the genius involved in reviving it, and i hope the creators come back at us with bigger and better in the future, onward and upward.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:31pm
TheatreFan4 said: "nmartin said: "I am not being snarky, but I was surprised that this transferred.
I don't understand how anyone thought this would have broad appeal."
I'll never knock a show getting a chance at a bigger audience (which it did in fact have here than Downtown) and do so with rich people's money to get something and people that neverget to be on a Broadway stage.
I need the Bootleggers to get on their A Game because I've seen a significant lack of bootlegs out for this run. I only know of one and it's only like... the first act."
There won’t be a cast album, so lucky for me I got my hands on an audio slime from the Broadway run.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:35pm
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "DrMonicaDeMoneco said: "8-10 stand by’s?! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!"
This is becoming thenorm now.
DEAR EVAN HANSEN was the first show I can recall that had more swings/standbys than its onstage cast of 8. TWO STRANGERS has 4 covers for 2 roles.
CATS' coverage problem has plagued it since the PAC run. It's physically demanding, and some of its cast is not used to doing this kind of thing 8x a week. Apparently it's been split-track hell over there recently. How they thought 5 offstage covers would be enough mystifies me."
Bryce Harris has performed in every show since it started previews. Get that $$$
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:36pm
EDSOSLO858 said: "TheatreFan4 said: "nmartin said: "I am not being snarky, but I was surprised that this transferred.
I don't understand how anyone thought this would have broad appeal."
I'll never knock a show getting a chance at a bigger audience (which it did in fact have here than Downtown) and do so with rich people's money to get something and people that neverget to be on a Broadway stage.
I need the Bootleggers to get on their A Game because I've seen a significant lack of bootlegs out for this run. I only know of one and it's only like... the first act."
There won’t be a cast album, so lucky for me I got my hands on an audio slime from the Broadway run."
Ding Ding Ding.
Also a relevant statement, they said on Socials that they are going to be filmed for NYPL.
Posted: 7/13/26 at 8:54pm
malcs98 said: "EDSOSLO858 said: "Right on, and the general public is largely musical-averse (both because of lack of interest and disposable income)."
And most of the general public is all cisgendered older white people (who are mostly conservative). Would'nt be surprised if a Scott Rudin-produced show takes over the Broadhurst next (and I have been boycotting his shows ever since he came back)
"
lol yea isn't Rudin taking the St. James for his revival of 42nd Street spring 2027?
Latest Posts
BroadwayWorld TV