Seaview To Lead Produce Broadway Transfer Of "Every Brilliant Thing"- Page 2

[JSquared2]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 1:39pm

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Radcliffe has a great box office track record. I think CRIPPLE is the only one that didn’t announce recoupment, and even that one probably got 75% of the way there and was an interesting use of his star power. So sure, it’ll be the first time where he is the SOLE draw, but I also doubt it’ll be super expensive to produce or run. And could have the possibility of extension withother stars."

 

I'd argue that he was the sole "draw" on CRIPPLE (with a scattering of McDonagh fans on the side).

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 1:42pm

75 minutes. No set. One cast member.

Why is "Broadway" necessary, and how can Broadway prices be justified?

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 1:54pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "75 minutes. No set. One cast member.

Why is "Broadway" necessary, and how can Broadway prices be justified?"

Broadway is where they can pack in the most people over the course of a 4-month run and command the most money from a show with low overhead costs (unit set, one actor, one act). Daniel Radcliffe is a celebrity and just won a Tony Award a couple years ago, so producers are capitalizing on those factors. That’s it. That’s the answer. And then there’s the added bonus that, if it does well, it can extend with a revolving door of talent.

The less cynical answer is that Broadway could use a dose of something heartwarming and hopeful, and Every Brilliant Thing is a well-constructed play that provides that without overstaying its welcome.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 1:59pm

Isn't such ruthless greed (and exploitation of celebrity) totally against the spirit of the play?

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 2:09pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "Isn't such ruthless greed (and exploitation of celebrity) totally against the spirit of the play?"

No? It’s about living with depression and grief.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 2:22pm

Oh. I thought it featured "the best things in life are free" vibes, emphasizing what's really important.

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 2:25pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "Isn't such ruthless greed (and exploitation of celebrity) totally against the spirit of the play?"

I'm curious as to how you define something to be "exploitation of celebrity."  Given how frequently Radcliffe appears on stage, I find this to be more of a routine casting decision involving a popular actor.

 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 2:33pm

SteveSanders said: "Jay Lerner-Z said: "Isn't such ruthless greed (and exploitation of celebrity) totally against the spirit of the play?"

I'm curious as to how you define something to be "exploitation of celebrity." Given how frequently Radcliffe appears on stage, I find this to be more of a routine casting decision involving a popular actor.

"

That wasn't aimed at Daniel Radcliffe personally, who undeniably is a great guy with significant talent.

More the rotating-cast idea that London has been using. Familiar TV names all, some with no stage experience.

 

[JSquared2]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 2:36pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "SteveSanders said: "Jay Lerner-Z said: "Isn't such ruthless greed (and exploitation of celebrity) totally against the spirit of the play?"

I'm curious as to how you define something to be "exploitation of celebrity." Given how frequently Radcliffe appears on stage, I find this to be more of a routine casting decision involving a popular actor.

"

That wasn't aimed at Daniel Radcliffe personally, who undeniably is a great guy with significant talent.

More the rotating-cast idea that London has been using. Familiar TV names all, some with no stage experience.

If they've got legit acting chops (film/TV), then sure, why not?  If they're using Real Housewives or Love Island refugees, then no thanks!

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 2:46pm

Thanks for your clarification Jay Lerner Z.  The London cast has included several people known as much (if not more) for their work as comedians or TV presenting. 

I don't recall reading anything on theatreboard.co.uk that takes much exception to those chocies, but I haven't followed that conversation particularly closely.

[MezzA101]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 4:59pm

Daniel Radcliffe Will Return to Broadway in ‘Every Brilliant Thing’

“Every Brilliant Thing” involves audience participation — unusual for Broadway — although Radcliffe, mindful that could turn off some people, took pains to point out that no one will be required to speak, if they don’t want to.

 

“There’s something about the nature of this play and the connection that is being constantly made with the audience, from before the play even starts when I’m out there interacting with people as they come into the room, that I’m very intrigued by and excited by,” he said. “This play is built with the audience new every night.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/theater/daniel-radcliffe-broadway.html?unlocked_article_code=1.xE8.O-_u.qsFRRB_v-6ql

[mar6411]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 7:05pm

I saw this at the Barrow Street Theatre in 2014. I’m kind of surprised this is coming to Broadway because it’s a very intimate experience - which will be a different experience in a Broadway house.
 

We’ve had these discussions ad nauseam when smaller shows move to Broadway.  Who the hell knows why and how producers make their decisions. 
 

But I think ColorTheHours048 said it best in thinking about this (and I hope they don’t mind me quoting them): Broadway could use a dose of something heartwarming and hopeful, and Every Brilliant Thing is a well-constructed play that provides that without overstaying its welcome.

 And I think Daniel Radcliffe is a great choice.