Shows You Thought Would Flop That Ended Up Being A Success- Page 3

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/10/07 at 10:18pm

Exactly, not until there is an official announcement that the production has recouped its investment. This does not apply to non-for-profit organizations.

Posted: 5/10/07 at 10:20pm

This is pointless and anal of me to argue but I'm ina pointless mood.

"It didn't recoup all its money is what you mean right? still it ran 1543 performances (I don't get how it oculdn't recoup with that many) which by nearlya nyone's definition gives it SOME element of success as much as I don't necesarily like it

Well, we got to stick to the established Variety definition of hit or flop - otherwise, we could find success in ANY production.
So, no, sorry the show, like all of Wildhorn musicals on Broadway, flopped. "

The thign is if we go by those definitions these kinda threads could go on forever (ie the "fave flop thread" would include everything by Sondheim outside Company and Night Music)--u basically end up with very few hits. Does it count if they recoup on their tour? or no?

For me the word flop--Variety be damned *grin*--means something that fails fairly spectacularly. It's not just a financial failure or anything (and I bet to the producers of Juckyl and Hyde they saw their production as a success in many ways--considering it was up for so few Tonys, it got NO good reviews and it still ran longer than Evita and other famous hits. That's a pretty good track record no matter how you look at it as much as I don't wanna defend the show :P )

What about when a production that opened at a not for profit organization then becomes a commercial production (like Light in the Piazza) and then isn't the success they coulda hoped (like Passion)--then does it become a flop?

E
Updated On: 5/10/07 at 10:20 PM

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 5/10/07 at 10:25pm

I believe it depends whether a show has made its money back at the time of closing.

And you forgot Forum and ITW as Sondheim hits.

Posted: 5/10/07 at 11:15pm

I meant to include FOrum--I've read in different places about ITW--one place I read was it didn't fully make back its money (and a fairly decent profit) till it's Betsy Joslyn/Cleo Laine national tour but it doesn't look THAT expensive to run and did run 700 something performances (half of Jeckyl mind you which looks almost cheaper to run...)

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/10/07 at 11:41pm

Well, we got to stick to the established Variety definition of hit or flop - otherwise, we could find success in ANY production.
So, no, sorry the show, like all of Wildhorn musicals on Broadway, flopped. "

The thign is if we go by those definitions these kinda threads could go on forever

No, if we go just by our own definition of hit or flop, and start with "For me a flop is..." like you have, then the thread really could go on forever.

Posted: 5/11/07 at 12:46am

Uggh sorry for prolonging a thread needlessly *rolls eyes*

:) Seriously--I just find it odd when someone argues that someone thinking Jeckyl would close quickly and then being impressed it ran 4 years shouldn't go in here cuz it's still a flop.

*argue argue*

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/11/07 at 1:22am

I understand that there are a lot of flops that have characteristics which make some think they were hits - a lot of Sondheim works are a good example - but those specific productions never managed to make the investment back, which means that financially is the only way to determine hit or flop, because we have numbers.

For what we know, Brooklyn, In my Life, Lestat, etc. were all great hits in a lot of people's heads , but the fact is that the production was a business/financial failure, which somehow reflects the lack of interest for that specific staging (call it wrong, place, time or whatever), there was just not enough revenue at the time - and this technically has nothing to do with the quality of the piece, but it does reflect the box office sales, which means they never had enough appeal.
They might have kept the show alive for 5,000 performances, yes, but you don't know at what capacity and/or cost. Obviously, never enough to make a profit.

But if we were to go by our own opinion, then the thread will be full of "I don't think that Lestat was a flop, because my family really liked it, and when I saw it everyone was clapping very hard". :P

Posted: 5/11/07 at 1:43am

I knwo I know but I think with certain works the producers and creators expectations play a part. By the mid 80s people mounting a SOndheim show on Broadway didn't expect it to be a huge hit there--but could read success in other ways (the fact that the show owuld for sure have an afterlife, critical success, etc) and be happy if a show ran longer than expected (which is what happened with the non Sondheim Piazza).

Similarly I'd bet that the producers of Jeckyl and Hyde were happy with how long a run it had considering its original dire status. I know it didn't make back its money but it musta done well enough to be able to run on the boards that long...

(Sunset Blvd is another flop of course, and Ragtime is a BIG flop but even those--it's hard to put them in the same breath as a Lestat, and I doubt even Variety would do so)

:P (Thanks for not making this personal BTW as some of these kinda silly arguments can get--I dunno why I hold to my opinion so strongly about such a pointless thing I just think, Variety or not, to most minds, even investors, a FLOP is such an extreme word it doesn't work for a show that runs 4 years)

E