Scott Rudin is returning to Broadway- Page 7

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 3/30/25 at 5:37pm

It's also a little gross that so many people on this board bang on about progressive values but don't care that some assistant was sent to the hospital by Rudin because they want to see Laurie Metcalf and Joe Mantello back on Broadway. Isn't workers' rights part of the progressive values?

It's easier to go on and on about Nicole Scherzinger liking one IG post than to actually support progressive values for workers.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 11:43am

Oh, they aren't actually progressive. They just pretend not to be like MAGA folks but they're basically the same, just without the crimson dunce cap or firearms. And the thing is they will never see it or admit it. Thank God they exposed themselves in this thread though!

"I just wannnnnnna see Laurie Metcalf and I don't care how many people have to be assaulted along the way!"

Scott Rudin Hopes Laurie Metcalf’s Talent Distracts You From His Past  

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 1:15pm

Sutton Ross said: "Oh, they aren't actually progressive. They just pretend not to belike MAGA folks but they're basically the same,just without the crimson dunce cap or firearms.And the thing is theywill never see itor admit it. Thank God they exposed themselves in this thread though!

"I just wannnnnnna see Laurie Metcalf and I don't care how many people haveto be assaulted along the way!"

Scott Rudin Hopes Laurie Metcalf’s Talent Distracts You From His Past"

I'm also sickened by how many people say "But other producers are jerks too!"

There's a huge difference between being hard-nosed and maybe even callous (the way Hal Prince would fire longtime cast members from his shows, or a lot of leading actors will have a long list of requirements in order to sign onto a project), and being abusive. Scott Rudin didn't just scream and yell and call people names. He sent someone to the hospital by bashing his hand into a computer screen. He had decades and decades of documented abusive behavior. A list theater stars like Donna Murphy have said that he bullied them nonstop. Absolutely unacceptable behavior. I don't care how much Laurie Metcalf wants to work with him. She's a talented lady I'm sure a slew of producers would be willing to sign her on for a project.

Updated On: 3/31/25 at 01:15 PM

[James885]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 2:18pm

I still think he should be given a second chance, but with many conditions. The problem is Rudin is accustomed to always being the top dog / alpha male in the room, and he's definitely not used to having to answer to someone. Who will be the person who will keep him in line? Can he even be kept in line?

If not, it seems like he's basically being given carte blanche to restart his empire again with little or no oversight, which definitely shouldn't happen - regardless how much of a 'genius' he is.

Updated On: 3/31/25 at 02:18 PM

[verywellthensigh]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 6:02pm

Sutton Ross said: "Oh, they aren't actually progressive. They just pretend not to belike MAGA folks but they're basically the same,just without the crimson dunce cap or firearms.And the thing is theywill never see itor admit it. Thank God they exposed themselves in this thread though!

"I just wannnnnnna see Laurie Metcalf and I don't care how many people haveto be assaulted along the way!"

Scott Rudin Hopes Laurie Metcalf’s Talent Distracts You From His Past"

Look at you go!  We're just like MAGA, everyone!  Rudin is going to produce whether you like it or now, so then why don't you protest his productions instead of seeing them?  Get similar minds together and make some protest signs, banners, and placards. You can show off your medal.



 

[Kad]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 6:06pm

...championing an abuser because you like his work is kind of MAGA's whole thing, actually.

I don't see this as an ideological purity test. The man is a power-hungry abuser. I don't think that's ever acceptable. I guess you're fine with it as long as you get to see a nice show as a result.

Updated On: 3/31/25 at 06:06 PM

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 7:54pm

verywellthensigh said: "Sutton Ross said: "Oh, they aren't actually progressive. They just pretend not to belike MAGA folks but they're basically the same,just without the crimson dunce cap or firearms.And the thing is theywill never see itor admit it. Thank God they exposed themselves in this thread though!

"I just wannnnnnna see Laurie Metcalf and I don't care how many people haveto be assaulted along the way!"

Scott Rudin Hopes Laurie Metcalf’s Talent Distracts You From His Past"

Look at you go! We're just like MAGA, everyone! Rudin is going to produce whether you like it or now, sothen why don't you protest his productions instead of seeing them? Get similar mindstogether and make some protest signs, banners, and placards.You can show off your medal.



"

It's not a purity test. It's quite frankly just pointing out the hypocrisy of people in this thread who are all about progressive values until Scott Rudin wants to produce something with Laurie Metcalf, and then all of a sudden it's "he's a genius give him what he wants."

I'm also struggling to see where Rudin is a genius. Sondheim was a genius. Fosse was a genius. You could say directors like Michael Bennett and Hal Prince were geniuses. Scott Rudin is more like a facilitator of talent. 

[DAME]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 9:29pm

But one could argue he was a genius in his field. Don’t get me wrong .. his behavior is unforgivable .  I hope I am a good enough person not to support his future endeavors.  But of course if he brought back Bette in Dolly or something to the level of when he brought back Glenda Jackson .. there is no telling what I would do.  

Updated On: 3/31/25 at 09:29 PM

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 9:39pm

I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did?  It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’ list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales. 

[joevitus]

Posted: 3/31/25 at 11:46pm

Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning that abuse. 

[DAME]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 12:00am

joevitus said: "Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning thatabuse."

Maybe watch your tone?  

[joevitus]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 10:50am

DAME said: "joevitus said: "Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning thatabuse."

Maybe watch your tone?"

Ditto.

[Owen22]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 11:00am

DAME said: "But one could argue he was a genius in his field. Don’t get me wrong .. his behavior is unforgivable . I hope I am a good enough person not to support his future endeavors. But of course if he brought back Bette in Dolly or something to the level of when he brought back Glenda Jackson .. there is no telling what I would do."

EVERYTHING about this is 100%!!!!!!!!!!!

[TommyWho99]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 11:25am

verywellthensigh said: "While releasing the NDAs may be what works for you to clear his name, that'snot going to be enough for other people, and what they want isn't going to do it for other people and what they want to happen is...do you see how this is bottomless and pointless? It has no ending. That's how cancel culture is a kind of incarceration.

You are not cops, judges, or litigators. If you don't like that someone you think is foul is doing something on Broadway, you as a non-toddler are entitledto not go and that is really the only thing you're entitled to. Wagging your finger at those of us who are over it changes nothing and, frankly, seems like a luxurious thing to be focused on in the United States in this cursed year of 2025.

"

Funny you say that, because I'd actually argue the reason we are where we are in "this cursed year of 2025" is because people are giving P.O.S human beings like Rudin, Trump, and Andrew Cuomo a second chance even though they've literally done nothing to earn it.  A lot of "Yeah, he sucks and is a terrible person, but things were better when he was in charge" for all three of them.

 

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 12:14pm

joevitus said: "DAME said: "joevitus said: "Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning thatabuse."

Maybe watch your tone?"

Ditto."

Your tone and message is perfect, it's so embarrassing that a poster like Dame would even have an issue with what you said (and not the poster you quoted), and admitted they may not have the self control to resist an abuser. Despicable and gross. 

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 12:18pm

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning thatabuse."

I'm merely offering a perspective that I don't believe was yet raised in a post originally titled "Scott Rudin is returning to Broadway."  My comment, I believe, was on target with the subject of the original post.  None of this takes away from anyone who refuses to avoid his shows. 

No reason to get ornery.  

Updated On: 4/1/25 at 12:18 PM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 12:29pm

Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."


 

I don’t think the point is really to expect the general public—who doesn’t know who Scott Rudin is—to protest.

 

I think the hope is that organizations like The Broadway League, ATPAM, Actor’s Equity, etc, would say something and make sure there are protections in place for workers.

 

and perhaps more importantly, I think the real hope is that top talent like Laurie Metcalf, Nathan Lane, and Joe Mantello, would not give credence to Rudin by working with him—because they should know by now they are the least likely people to be at risk of his abuse. 

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 12:44pm

and perhaps more importantly, I think the real hope is that top talent like Laurie Metcalf, Nathan Lane, and Joe Mantello, would not give credence to Rudin by working with him—because they should know by now they are the least likely people to be at risk of his abuse. 

I respect this position.  I do question how impactful my refusal or willingness to attend a Rudin production will be in light of my perspective that the public at large won't care.  

Case in point: the potential failure of the Kennedy Center (use whatever barometer of failure you chose, from loss of ticket sales to loss of funds raised by the board), has a meaningful and perceptible impact to the public at large.  Such an effort is a coordinated effort that will hopefully materialize as a form of protest against Trump that will certainly be publicized.  I don't see any similar coordinated effort occurring as against Rudin. 

You can decide not to attend one of his productions on principal, but I doubt it will have any meaningful effect.  This is not to say that principal does not have it's own meaning, but its impact is minimal.  I question my own fortitude when this issue inevitably comes up. 

[DAME]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 12:49pm

Sutton Ross said: "joevitus said: "DAME said: "joevitus said: "Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning thatabuse."

Maybe watch your tone?"

Ditto."

Your tone and message is perfect, it's so embarrassing that a poster like Dame would even have an issue with what you said (and not the poster you quoted), and admitted they may not have the self control to resist an abuser. Despicable and gross."

Who said I had a issue with anything he said?  Get of your high horse and stop being such a over the top drama queen.  Joe; I meant no offense.  All I was trying to say was that when one starts a post with something like "What is your point" in the way your post was constructed ; to me it makes the healthy discussion harder to continue.  I do enjoy you. And thanks for responding"Ditto" to me.  I got what your saying and I hope we can continue talking and kbitzing about other things as well.  

Updated On: 4/1/25 at 12:49 PM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 1:02pm

Play Esq. said: "and perhaps more importantly, I think the real hope is that top talent like Laurie Metcalf, Nathan Lane, and Joe Mantello, would not give credence to Rudin by working with him—because they should know by now they are the least likely people to be at risk of his abuse.

I respect this position. I do question how impactful my refusal or willingness to attend a Rudin production will be in light of my perspective that the public at large won't care.

Case in point: the potential failure of the Kennedy Center (use whatever barometer of failure you chose, from loss of ticket sales to loss of funds raised by the board), has a meaningful and perceptible impact to the public at large. Such an effort is a coordinated effort that will hopefully materialize as a form of protest against Trump that will certainly be publicized. I don't see any similar coordinated effort occurring as against Rudin.

You can decide not to attend one of his productions on principal, but I doubt it will have any meaningful effect. This is not to say that principal does not have it's own meaning, but its impact is minimal. I question my own fortitude when this issue inevitably comes up."


 

Agreed—but that’s what I’m saying.

 

To put my previous point more succinctly:

 

If no one with any name value or respect is willing to work with Rudin, then people won’t go and see his shows anyway.

 

The method has to be that high value artists need to withhold their value from Rudin and bring it elsewhere. 
 

That’s really the only way things change. 
 

The public will always go see things that they think will be worth the price of the ticket, no matter who is behind it. 

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 1:11pm

Oh yes Dame, you want a healthy discussion while calling me names. Totally tracks. Feel free to call out the men in this thread who can't wait to support a violent predator who commited aggravated assault. That should be your focus. Not to attack a woman whose friend was terrorized, traumatized and assaulted by a monster you just can't resist. 

Oh and here's a tip from me to you:  When you ask and ask and ask for discount codes on various threads because you can't simply do what the rest of us do, which is simply scroll and find the discount thread? Say thank you when someone bothers to help you, like they did in the Gypsy thread👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

Updated On: 4/1/25 at 01:11 PM

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 1:13pm

You were previously succinct, but I better understand your perspective now. 

Yes, Metcalf and Mantello agreeing not to be a part of his productions would make a big impact.  I would personally love to see Laurie on stage every season without consideration of who’s producing her work. 

This does bear another issue I don’t think yet discussed.  We are presumably operating on the position that these wonderful artists that we all adore are doing it for money or some other basis not associated with a connection to Rudin. But what if they’re doing it because they like working with him? Does this deflect from Rudin and then make it more about the artist who should, presumably, know better?  Yet another quandary: maybe they like working with him because they like him. Is it truly impossible to believe that these artists, who have known him for years, know him better than we as the general public do and, based upon those relationships, want to work with him again and again?

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 1:15pm

Or maybe they like working with him BECAUSE his power dynamics benefit him and them. I mean, I think the fact that these people are will to work with him says a lot about who they are and what they value: and it’s clearly not the safety of lower level workers in this industry. 

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 1:16pm

Ah yes, you want a healthy discussion while calling me names.

Read the room: everyone around you is trying to have a health and constructive conversation on the subject. Only a handful are trying to derail this conversation …like so many threads before this. 

I for one am enjoying the discourse. 

[joevitus]

Posted: 4/1/25 at 1:18pm

DAME said: "Sutton Ross said: "joevitus said: "DAME said: "joevitus said: "Play Esq. said: "I’m sorry if this has already been stated: but does anyone here, especially those espousing a litmus test, realize how few even know this guy’s name, much less what he did? It’s a rare sect of people who would scan the producers’list to see who’s involved, especially when names like Bette are at the top of the marquee. And those who don’t go because of Rudin, I believe, would hardly make any impact in terms of sales."

What's your point? No one here has said "The public will never stand for this, and anything with his name attached will flop." They are simply saying they find his behavior reprehesible and think if he comes back, he'll just be enabled to abuse people again. And thus if they attend his shows, they are to some extent sanctioning thatabuse."

Maybe watch your tone?"

Ditto."

Your tone and message is perfect, it's so embarrassing that a poster like Dame would even have an issue with what you said (and not the poster you quoted), and admitted they may not have the self control to resist an abuser. Despicable and gross."

Who said I had a issue with anything he said? Get of your high horse and stop being such a over the top drama queen. Joe; I meant no offense. All I was trying to say was that when one starts a post with something like "What is your point" in the way your post was constructed ; to me it makes the healthy discussion harder to continue. I do enjoy you. And thanks for responding"Ditto" to me. I got what your saying and I hope we can continue talking and kbitzing about other things as well."

I really appreciate this, and obviously misread your tone. I apologize in turn. Have a great day. :)