Shows that picked the wrong theatre and the right theatre- Page 3

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 10:08am

^LOL

I kind of wish Hamilton had picked the Neil Simon. It would be nice to have another hit in that beautiful theatre.

[Cupid Boy2]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 10:51am

devonian.t said: "Gerald Schoenfeld re-told the story of Cameron kind of stabbing him in the back over Phantom, but Hal Prince had it in his contract that he could approve the theatre.  He picked right for everyone because they made more money at the Majestic."

Adding to that, I believe Jujamcyn was offering them the Martin Beck rent-free (or maybe it was for no more than its operating costs) until the show recouped, which was what made that deal awfully enticing at the time. The extra seats in the Majestic certainly ended up making a difference.

 

[Randomlink1]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 2:14pm

Gentlemen's Guide could've been in a theatre that felt smaller, even though in terms of seating the theatre is relatively small compared to some other theatres. It's a show that deserves to be experienced in a personal way, and having a larger theatre kind of made that something only people in the first few rows could've experienced. I don't know if a theatre that felt smaller would've helped, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt.

[Cupid Boy2]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 2:19pm

Randomlink1 said: "Gentlemen's Guide could've been in a theatre that felt smaller, even though in terms of seating the theatre is relatively small compared to some other theatres. It's a show that deserves to be experienced in a personal way, and having a larger theatre kind of made that something only people in the first few rows could've experienced. I don't know if a theatre that felt smaller would've helped, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt."

Having sat at the backs of both the orchestra and the mezzanine, I wouldn't consider the Walter Kerr a large theatre at all. I think it's incredibly intimate, and I thought Gentleman's Guide felt right at home there. Perhaps it felt too distant sitting in the balcony. Is that what you meant?

 

[Randomlink1]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 2:33pm

Cupid Boy2 said: "Randomlink1 said: "Gentlemen's Guide could've been in a theatre that felt smaller, even though in terms of seating the theatre is relatively small compared to some other theatres. It's a show that deserves to be experienced in a personal way, and having a larger theatre kind of made that something only people in the first few rows could've experienced. I don't know if a theatre that felt smaller would've helped, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt."

Having sat at the backs of both the orchestra and the mezzanine, I wouldn't consider the Walter Kerr a large theatre at all. I think it's incredibly intimate, and I thought Gentleman's Guide felt right at home there. Perhaps it felt too distant sitting in the balcony. Is that what you meant?

 

 

"

Actually, I was fortunate enough to sit in the front row seats when I saw it. My friend commented that when she saw it in the mezzanine that it felt less intimate then when we got into the orchestra. I think I spoke a little too soon on that. Sorry!

[Cupid Boy2]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 2:39pm

No need to apologize, you're absolutely entitled to your opinion! I saw Gentleman's Guide in particular from the back of the orchestra, but I've never had a problem with the view from the mezzanine there. I was just wondering if there was a certain part of the theatre to which you were speaking.

[annipri]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 2:44pm

After mulling over the Crucible, I really would've preferred it in a smaller space. Firstly, because a missed a huge amount of dialogue at the beginning. But I really thing the subtlety of the production and performances would've been better served in a smaller space.  

[gleek4114]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 3:14pm

The St. James was the wrong choice for Side Show. It was just too big for a show that isn't well known. If they had waited until spring 2015 or even 2016, it could have done so much better. Rushing it in because a theater (one of the biggest on Broadway) happened to be open was a bad move. That decision killed this show's chance of ever becoming successful. I doubt it will ever be revived commercially again. 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 3:30pm

I think Fun Home didn't work at the Circle in the Square.  I didn't like the show and suspect one of the reasons was that I missed the faces a lot of times.  Yet, the Norman Conquests -- which also was in the round -- was perfect.  Part of it may have been the set itself.

Hair was perfect in the Martin Beck theatre, seemed particularly suited to it (although I have a bias...that is my favorite theatre).  

War House was perfect at the Vivian Beaumont, as was The Road to Utopia, South Pacific and TKAI. 

One Man, Two Governors seemed perfect for the Music Box, as did Pippin.

The Glass Menagerie was perfect in the Booth.

Follies should never have been at the Belasco.  It was rundown at the time, a plus, but it was too damn small.     

In the Heights should not have been at the Richard Rodgers...usually a great theatre for viewing musicals because of the incline, that incline cut off much of the terrific set.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 3:43pm

vfd88 said: "I was going to say On the Town also. And anything else that picked the Ford/Hilton/Foxwoods/Lyric barn.

In terms of shows that picked the correct theatre, Fun Home works perfectly at the Circle in the Square.

 

 

"

I dunno-aesthetically, the Ford was a good fit for the mammoth original staging of Ragtime a show with such a large cast that it also needed to sell a lot of seats

[NewsiesForever]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 3:47pm

Mr Roxy said: "Any musical that picked the Neil SImon since Hairspray

 

"

What is wrong with the Neil Simon, CATS has moved in?

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 3:51pm

Wow that's the first dissenting opinion I've heard about Fun Home at Circle. I rarely like theatre in the round but thought it was perfect. We were in one of the last rows on one of the long sides but still felt so connected and close. I can imagine the only lesser seats would be behind the orchestra where you are a ways away from action at the opposite side. 

[pupscotch]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 4:22pm

I think every show at the Beaumont has been perfectly suited to it, and I can't wait to see what show Lincoln Center does next. I also think that Wicked at the Gershwin, Next to Normal at the Booth, and Cabaret in Studio 54 were great choices.

[funhamilton_rent]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 4:32pm

Fun Home is PERFECT at the Circle in the Square. I can't imagine how it looked not in the round. 

Wicked could not be better suited than it is at the Gershwin.

Spring Awakening was great at the Atkinson. It felt very intimate. To be fair, I was sitting in the 7th row center orchestra, so I'm not sure how it would have felt in the Mezzanine.

Hamilton is not getting its full potential (shocking, I know) at the Rodgers. It is a beautiful theatre, but there are theatres just as big that don't feel so bulky. It could have been better at the Atkinson (if they wanted it to feel intimate) or Gershwin (if they knew that it would be the biggest freaking hit ever).

She Loves Me should have been in the American Airlines instead of Studio 54. It is too big for a rather quaint show. On The 20th Century could have done well at Studio 54, but they might not have sold out the house like they did at the American Airlines.

[Alex M]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 6:30pm

DottieD'Luscia said: "^LOL

I kind of wish Hamilton had picked the Neil Simon. It would be nice to have another hit in that beautiful theatre."

Never thought about Hamilton in the Neil Simon but now that you bring it up i completely agree! 

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 8:10pm

Haven't read this entire string, but I think ON THE TOWN would still be playing today had it not been booked into the Lyric. 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 8:16pm

MichelleCraig said: "Haven't read this entire string, but I think ON THE TOWN would still be playing today had it not been booked into the Lyric."

I couldn't agree more. I'm still salty over that perfect and sumptuous production of On the Town going into just the absolute worst theatre possible. Truly a shame.

[Drewski Vanderbilt]

Posted: 5/8/16 at 11:08pm

I think, although an unpopular opinion, that the current fiddler production is perfect at the Broadway. I love the vastness of the stage and theater with the small set, it had the feeling of emptiness and hoplessness that I feel anetevka being a little rural town should be like. The vastness also worked towards the end as the community of anetevka all decide to leave, Tevye being alone on a barren stage gave a powerful feeling of being small in the universe that I  can't recall have ever felt In any Broadway theater besides the Broadway.

Updated On: 5/8/16 at 11:08 PM

[ChildofEarth]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 12:46am

The Humans at Helen Hayes is perfect because of how intimate it feels but it still allows you to see upstairs and downstairs on the set.

As has been noted, Wicked and the Gerswhin are a perfect pair. Book of Mormon and Kinky Boots found perfect matches as well.

To me, Lin&co's desire to be in the Richard Rodgers wasn't the best for the set design - and they had to have known it going in because of In the Heights.

Disaster at the Nederlander felt so wrong. Those boards didn't deserve that.

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 12:58am

I think that Beautiful at the Sondheim works perfectly. 

Hamilton's desire to play the RR was done for the wrong reasons. Lin wanted to "bring it home" but the house does not suit the shows design at all and while it wasn't a guarantee, now that they're the sold out mess that they are they occupying a theater that a smaller show could take advantage of and leaving the massive houses probably empty in the near future where they could play and probably still sell out. 

Mormon made the right choice at the O'Neill. 

Bright Star fits beautifully in the Cort. 

Fun Home, while stunning at the Circle, would have been lovely at the Belasco as a previous poster mentioned. 

I love, love, love Wicked at the Gershwin. Always have, always will. That being said and for the sake of this thread, I just thought about it playing on a stage like the Beaumont and the design and staging possibilities had me giggling with excitement. 

I think Hedwig looked great at the Belasco but I'm wondering if they played an even smaller house if they'd still be around (had their casting choices been better). 

Something Rotten probably could have taken a smaller theater and survived longer. Not that they're closing anytime soon, but it'll be sad if they lose steam in the massive St. James. 

Tuck is lovely at the Broadhurst. As is Shuffle along at the Music Box. 

I thought King Charles III, The Heidi Chronicles and Pippin also worked well at the Music Box. 

The Elephant Man and Hand To God were perfect for the Booth. 

American Idiot could have been cool at a smaller house. 

 

[¿Macavity?]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 1:02am

I never saw this production, only the taped production of the tour, but Sweeney Todd would've probably worked better in a smaller theatre, not even a small theatre, just not such a big one. I'm sure that it fit beautifully, but it was already a tough sell, so I'm not sure if picking the biggest house on Broadway was a very financially wise decision. Same sort of thing with Cinderella at the Broadway, too big of a house! Any show is taking a risk by choosing a larger house, but the Gershwin? Or back then, the Uris? That's an odd choice.

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 1:06am

I thought I was done, but I have more...

School of Rock plays great at the Winter Garden, as did Rocky. 

I think Cats is foolish to play at the Neil Simon. As is Great Comet at the Imperial. But hey what do I know? 

The Spring Awakening revival at the Brooks was great, but I can't help but wonder how it would have looked in the round at the Circle. Or in an even more intimate venue such as the Hayes or the Booth. 

I can't think of any better home for Curious Incident than at the Barrymore.

At first, I'll admit, I thought The Color Purple would be strange at the Jacobs after seeing it at the Broadway, but I absolutely loved it in that space. 

I wonder if and when a RENT revival happens, where it will go...

I think I'm done. For now. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 1:10am

Every show at the Beaumont is designed FOR the Beaumont so I'd imagine they are a good use of the space.

I'd love to see Curiois and Color Purple in their original stagings as their current situation is oddly designed with a thrust stage designed for a proscenium, which makes the directing weird.

 

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 1:31am

RippedMan said: "Every show at the Beaumont is designed FOR the Beaumont so I'd imagine they are a good use of the space.

I'd love to see Curiois and Color Purple in their original stagings as their current situation is oddly designed with a thrust stage designed for a proscenium, which makes the directing weird.

 

 

"

I wouldn't consider Curious OR Purple to haves thrust stage design...

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 5/9/16 at 7:11am

Tuck Everlasting at the Broadhurst works fine except for the HORRIBLE sight lines created by mezzanine overhang and the massive tree on the side of the proscenium. That show would have those problems in pretty much any theatre, though.