Spring Awakening to move to Broadway- Page 3

[tophertilson]

Posted: 7/20/06 at 7:25pm

It's a great production with a superb cast, but...Broadway?! It'll die a torturous death. And it's not the subject matter that will do it in, it's the central gimmick. Every time you start to relate to the characters and invest in the plot, it lurches out of the show and comments ironically on events by way of mediocre songs with pretentious and ultimately trivial lyrics.

I never wanted to love a show so much going in. But after about fifteen minutes, I knew I was in for a long, long night.

Like GREY GARDENS this just does not belong on Broadway. What happened to commerical off-Broadway? Does it even exist anymore? Soon, I fear, Off-Broadway will consist solely of not-for-profit companies. In this atmosphere, shows like WIT and LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS would never stand a chance.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 7/20/06 at 8:40pm

I wish there was a good solution for all of this. Several longtime producers have gotten out of the Off-Broadway game altogether because following failed attempt after failed attempt, they simply cannot figure out how to turn a profit off-Broadway anymore. Even with a rave from the Times and a small cast, it's a struggle and a crapshoot. In commercial off-Broadway your capacity is limited (houses are often a third or fourth of the size of the average Broadway house), but your marketing costs are the same. You're limited in how much you can charge for tickets because most Broadway shows have readily available discounts reducing their prices to the $50-65 range and many theatregoers given a choice would prefer to spend that amount on a $10 million Broadway spectacle than on your intimate little two character play (and given even at $60 a ticket your profit margin is so small that reducing the price much further would make it very difficult for you to break even).

Once upon a time, it used to be that people would take a chance on an interesting-sounding little show with a good notice from the Times, figuring that for $20 or $30, it was worth taking a risk; for $60-70 though, people want a sure thing or at least a bit of spectacle. Those little plays that were more understated or quirky or experimental or attempted to play with form and style and content in ways you wouldn't normally see in traditional theatre are disappearing. They weret were what made downtown/off-Broadway theatre thrive and seem so exciting for a couple of generations and they no longer really have an outlet or a place to try out. If a show doesn't fit into an easily identifiable box or category and can't be simply packaged and marketed and sold to the masses
it has nowhere to go (other than perhaps not-for-profit off-Broadway if it's lucky). These were the shows that broke new ground, were where fledgling artists learned their craft and were the spark and inspiration for other artists who were influenced by these works and went on to later create similarly notable (and at times more commercial works) that had a great impact on the theatre at large. We're losing that legacy.

Commercial Off-Broadway doesn't seem fixable at the moment. And Broadway as it currently exists isn't the answer for many of these shows either. It'd be nice if there were a few more houses the size of the Helen Hayes or Circle in the Square for some of these sorts of shows. But, beyond that, perhaps a concerted effort to negotiate concessions with the unions, the New York Times advertising board (which overcharges the same for all shows, Broadway and Off-Broadway regardless of size) and any other entities which have caused costs off-Broadway to balloon in such epic proportions in recent years that it's hurting everyone involved -- producers, directors, playwrights, theatre staffs, marketing people, actors, musicians, theatregoers and yes, even the New York Times, which can't make as much money overcharging if there are few shows that can have a decent run in this environment. We've also lost nearly a dozen commercial off-Broadway houses in the past couple of years to developers who realize there are much surer ways to make money from these properties than from them being legit theatres -- no matter how historic or important they have been. For the good of the American theatre, major changes need to occur ASAP.

Updated On: 7/20/06 at 08:40 PM

[kenmarksnj]

Posted: 7/20/06 at 8:49pm

jonathan groff has his options open, he's not signed onto anything for the fall.

lea michele can probably get out of Les Mis if she wants to stay with spring awakening, which i'm sure would be a great move.

in terms of waiting for the "6 month revival of les mis" to finish before starting spring awakening on broadway so that lea can star in it....

i'm not so sure it IS indeed a 6 month revival. :)

[folkyboy]

Posted: 7/20/06 at 9:33pm

i completely have to throw in that Margo has it 100% right yet again!

unless they do something wildly inventive with the sets, we're going to get lost in the muddy staging.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 9:06pm

I'm still of the opinion that with the right marketing and a touch of moral outrage, this show could do very well on Broadway.

They need to invite a church group to the opening preview.

[eve harrington2]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 9:32pm

oops Updated On: 7/22/06 at 09:32 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 9:57pm

he could maybe get out of it and also we don't know if it's opening in the fall or going on hiatus until the spring.

[eve harrington2]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:01pm

oops Updated On: 7/22/06 at 10:01 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:04pm

well I think they were getting that from when they had talked to Groff who obviously hadn't signed on at the time.

edit
and if you read the article it says that nothing official has been announced and it was going off something he said in an interview

Updated On: 7/22/06 at 10:04 PM

[eve harrington2]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:18pm

oops



Updated On: 7/22/06 at 10:18 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:28pm

OK, but all kenmarksnj was saying was that Groff has options...since he's not officailly in Godspell he can still stay with SPRING if it transfers. Nothing it seems has been signed. MY point was: yes he has alternative plans but he's not bound to Papermill yet.

[eve harrington2]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:37pm

oops...
Updated On: 7/22/06 at 10:37 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:42pm

all I'm saying is that kenmarksnj was right when claiming the Groff is not SIGNED with another show.

[eve harrington2]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:44pm

Oops, I missed the first page of this thread. I thought I had read it earlier, I guess I did not. Updated On: 7/22/06 at 10:44 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:50pm

ken didn't say Groff had nothing...he even said he had options...he knew about Godspell he was just saying he's not SIGNED to anything.

[eve harrington2]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 10:57pm

Nevermind Updated On: 7/22/06 at 10:57 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/22/06 at 11:01pm

well in the first page of this thread there was discussion about Godspell and that's where I assumed he knew of Groff's involvement. But by his saying Groff had options...I took it as he knew that Groff had alternative plans other than Spring.

but w/e I don't need to argue this...hopefully Groff just stays with Spring and none of this will even matter

[Fairies]

Posted: 7/23/06 at 2:44am

My personal opinion (as a Producer / Writer of theatre and film) is that WE ALL need to get out to the theatre and support this show as vocally as possible. It may have flaws - but my god, in Bway's Golden Age, 70% of the shows had major flaws and have NEVER been heard of since. Does "Pipe Dream" ring a bell - to most - no.

Bway is too expensive now but this show IS the future of musical theatre - in other words = the future audience. Without them, we are nothing.

Musical theatre was born out of a desire to tell stories using the popular music of the time. Today, people are still telling stories using music in the style popular during the birth of musical theatre. Cole Porter wrote songs that became instant hits with the majority of the population. We shouldn't still be copying his style in writing for contemporary musical theatre. Now, the only popular musicians writing on Bway are writing for bloated Disney projects.

This piece has amazing potential on Bway. Not only that, but we NEED it or we can resign ourselves to decades more of musicals with music in the vague style of days gone by. If we are to re-invigorate musical theatre audiences and perpetuate our own future - it is our responsibility to make this piece a hit.

Just imagine, if this were like the Golden Age of Bway - there would be 40 shows opening this year with the kind of popular music, style and POV that Spring Awakening has and we'd be able to choose which ones we liked - which ones were to become classics. Instead, we have this ONE, lonely, trailblazing show to support. For the future of our art - we need to.

We can't continue on a diet of re-hashed movies turned musicals, juke-box musicals and overly satirical musicals. We need to return to telling great stories with POPular music. To the true roots of musical theatre. Spring Awakening does that. Like it or not. If we had a bunch of similar shows from which to choose our favorites for the time capsule - we might choose a different one - but we don't. Celebrate what we do have. Possibility.

[Fairies]

Posted: 7/23/06 at 3:07pm

[uncageg]

Posted: 7/23/06 at 6:13pm

Fairies, I agree with you. And that's what broke my heart about Caroline or Change. I left that show thinking, wow, something new and fresh musically. Even though some of the musical stles were familiar, it was the way they were used. It was challenging and I liked that.

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/23/06 at 6:15pm

well said fairies. I can't wait for it to movie to Broadway either. I think that if they re work it for a larger stage it can be wonderful!

[hauntedcoffeepot]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 7:27am

This is an amazing show. I purchased one of the $10 tickets onstage and, even though my view was limited, I had a great time. I plan on going back (once more off bdwy and when it transfers).


Updated On: 7/24/06 at 07:27 AM

[tophertilson]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 8:43am

Actually, hauntedcoffeepot (great name by the way), there was at least one point in the show where I would have LOVED to have been sitting in the onstage seats. :)

[hauntedcoffeepot]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 1:11pm

tophertilson,

I'm hoping you're referring to the amazing dance/stomp sequence early on in the show. I really wanted to join in. It was very intense to be that close to the action.

hauntedcoffeepot

[tophertilson]

Posted: 7/24/06 at 5:46pm

I wish I could say that was the moment. But alas, I blush to admit I was thinking of the end of Act I. :)