SIDE SHOW To Replace BULLETS At The St. James?- Page 2

[newintown]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 8:24am

"This is not the little, precious, chamber musical Side Show that previously flopped on Broadway."

I don't know what show you saw in 1997, but the Side Show I saw was definitely not little, precious, nor chamber. It was large, dark, sometimes fun, and more often banal and maudlin. It had a cast of more than 20, and what counts as a full Broadway orchestra these days (actually larger than we get in 2014).

Its problem was that the writers couldn't settle on a tone - was it a dark Cabaret-style bit of expressionism? Was it a flashy showbiz story? Or was it a lowbrow and generic exploration of "feelings," showing that, despite extreme physical differences, we're all really the same (a Hallmark sentiment that gets the tourists almost every time - but not this time).

Maybe they've decided on what they're saying this time at bat. But there's no precedent to lead us to believe that a flop this big will hit the second time around.

[Huss417]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 12:01pm

"This is not the little, precious, chamber musical Side Show that previously flopped on Broadway."

Was just going to say the same thing newintown mentioned. As someone who also saw the original production I love when people make bizarre comments like this one.

[morosco]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 12:31pm

Stranger things have happened but my gut feeling is that this show will not proceed on to Broadway. Unless they do some stunt casting... would love to see Candy and Liz take a stab at it.

[dreaming]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 12:46pm

I think in a non-profit with a subscriber base, it could work. Otherwise, I think it's a very long shot indeed.

(And this season is very crowded with revivals, making the field even smaller.)

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 1:24pm

In terms of musicals, only three revivals have been officially confirmed so far (On the Town, On the Twentieth Century, The King & I), with several other possibilities (Dames at Sea, A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, Side Show, etc.).

[RippedMan]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 2:12pm

Forum is for sure happening. My guess is it takes the Nederlander. I think that'd be a great fit for it. But maybe they'll go the St. James route. It doesn't open until the spring so who knows.

[newintown]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 2:22pm

I think if Rebecca taught us anything it's that nothing is "for sure happening" until it actually happens.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 2:29pm

For those of you who've seen this production, do you think it potentially might appeal to those who, like myself, weren't impressed with the original? More specifically, those of us who didn't like it; and not because it wasn't a big enough show.



Updated On: 7/10/14 at 02:29 PM

[Brian07663NJ]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 2:32pm

just got off the phone with a friend from Philadelphia who saw the original and this revival. He was a fan of the original and is now raving about this revival. He would not tell me anything more because I am seeing the show this coming Saturday. He is certain though that since I loved the original I will really like this revival.

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 2:32pm

I personally don't think so. I didn't particularly care for the original production, and didn't care for this production. I almost went back to see it a 2nd time and decided it's just not a show I'm going to like.

[Trina55]

Posted: 7/9/14 at 2:56pm

I loved the original, and thought the revival was brilliant and much improved. I suspect it's suffering from the same problem the original did - the marketing challenge. Yes, it's gotten great reviews, and yes it's something theater people are eager to see (and should!), but beyond that it's still a hard sell, as evidenced by slow ticket sales in DC. I'd love to see someone take a chance on transferring it, but a fall opening at the St. James sounds like certain death.

I think dreaming's comment is right on. Is it even a possibility for the Roundabout or another subscriber-based company to take it? I don't know how they operate in terms of picking up works developed elsewhere.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 1:56pm

"For everyone getting their panties in a twist about this unfounded St. James rumor, I would ask you ----- have you seen the Kennedy Center production?"


Unfounded? Some of us actually know what we're talking about here.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 2:09pm

Well it would die a quick death there. If Follies can't make money, I don't know how they expect this to work. It's a cult musical at best.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 2:10pm

I absolutely agree with you.

[JRybka]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 2:34pm

Seriously thought this version of SS was so much better. That being said there were some clunker moments and I still think cutting Tunnel of Love was sad (even if what they do now fits) -- I hate to say that I doubt it will go on to NYC.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 2:53pm

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/10/side-show-producers-discussing-a-move-to-broadway/?ref=theater
The NYT article says it's a fairly new producer, which is probably why he doesn't know better than to put it in the St. James. I would love to see it come here, but they just need to wait until some of the smaller theaters open up. It should happen come fall.

[dreaming]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 4:08pm

I think putting it in the St. James is a huge mistake. That theater is a barn. The producer needs serious guidance here. BAD MOVE.

[James885]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 4:23pm

Agree. Moving the show to NYC would be a grave mistake unless it was being produced by a nonprofit. If it isn't selling well even with the good reviews in DC, what makes them think it'll sell well on Broadway?

And in the huge St. James?

Updated On: 7/10/14 at 04:23 PM

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 4:31pm

Great move to put it in the cavernvous St James, the show should make it to January 03rd.

So Bullets and Side Show another 2 flops for the St James!

Wonder what will go into the Palace and Marquis?

Updated On: 7/10/14 at 04:31 PM

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 8:51pm

St. James is an unfounded rumor, so quit having a heart attack.

[ggersten]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 9:00pm

Looking at Pippin's box office numbers, is it possible that the Music Box might be open by spring?

[Cupid Boy2]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 11:14pm

If they aren't going to come in through a nonprofit like what's already been suggested, they really should be waiting until the spring and going into a smaller theatre right before the Tony cut off date. While I selfishly wouldn't mind if it came in the fall since I'd like to see it sooner rather than later, it simply wouldn't last.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 11:16pm

I think a smaller theater could serve the musical better than a larger one like the St. James.

[Up In One]

Posted: 7/10/14 at 11:23pm

What makes a theatre a "barn"? Sitting in the orchestra of the St James is very cozy, tight even. The mezzanine is pretty nice actually. Because it has a second balcony? If they don't open the second balcony no one will be the wiser and everyone in the orchestra and mezz will have great seats. The Richard Rogers mezzanine is miles from the stage as is the Neil Simons mezz. My idea of a barn when describing a theatre would be the theatre where Wicked is playing and thats more like an air port hanger.

[mjohnson2]

Posted: 7/11/14 at 12:49am

I agree, Up in One. The St. James is extremely intimate for its size. I think it is the best theatre on Broadway that seats more than 1,500 people.

Updated On: 7/11/14 at 12:49 AM