Star casting or breakout star?

As a theatre goer do you prefer attending a show with a star casting (ala Glenn close, Angela Lansbury, James earl Jones&hellip or a show featuring a breakout star (Julie benko in funny girl or Cynthia erivo in color purple)

Definitely breakout star.

Because they are usually cast because they fit the role. It also helps to see the character as the character.

I stay away from star casting. Not only in theatre but in movies too. It takes me out of the story. Also, I detest audiences hollering throughout scenes and numbers just because their favorite star walks on. Often they are are not aware of the story at all.

It all depends, and the answer will be very different for us the frequent theatergoer, versus the general public who doesn't see 50+ shows a year.

I love a "star is born" moment, but for every Hailey Kilgore or Alex Brightman or Julie Benko or Lorna Courtney you can end up with a Linedy Genao or Jim Weissenbach. Or the dreaded "competent" performance –– technically good, sometimes great, but doesn't transcend the material (Arielle Jacobs in HLL, for example). And sometimes the creative team doesn't realize what they have until there's a paying audience.

With a star, the audience is drawing from what they know of the star's past. Part of what made GOODNIGHT OSCAR such a success for Sean Hayes is that it was completely different from the Hayes we knew from his previous work. By crafting Mrs. Lovett around Angela Lansbury, Sondheim knew that the audience would start out with some level of empathy for her. With Leo DiCaprio as an aging matinee idol in Once Upon A Time in Hollywood, some of the character-building work is done for us because it's playing with the Leo persona. From a purely economic perspective, Jamie Lloyd's DOLL'S HOUSE simply doesn't happen without Chastain or a comparable star, because the general public requires the draw of a star.

"Breakout" is also a relative term. ALMOST FAMOUS was Solea Pfeiffer's Broadway debut, but by that point she had done 3 Encores shows, the Hamilton tour, some Hollywood Bowl concerts & regional productions, and led a Tyler Perry film.

TLDR, there's room for all in a healthy Broadway ecosystem.

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "It all depends, and the answer will be very different for us the frequent theatergoer, versus the general public who doesn't see 50+ shows a year.

I love a "star is born" moment, but for every Hailey Kilgore or Alex Brightman or Julie Benko or Lorna Courtney you can end up with a Linedy Genao or Jim Weissenbach. Or the dreaded "competent" performance –– technically good, sometimes great, but doesn't transcend the material (Arielle Jacobs in HLL, for example). And sometimes the creative team doesn't realize what they have until there's a paying audience.

With a star, the audience is drawing from what they know of the star's past. Part of what made GOODNIGHT OSCAR such a success for Sean Hayes is that it was completely different from the Hayes we knew from his previous work. By crafting Mrs. Lovett around Angela Lansbury, Sondheim knew that the audience would start out with some level of empathy for her. With Leo DiCaprio as an aging matinee idol inOnce Upon A Time in Hollywood,some of the character-building work is done for us because it's playing with the Leo persona. From a purely economic perspective, Jamie Lloyd's DOLL'S HOUSE simply doesn't happen without Chastain or a comparable star, because the general public requires the draw of a star.

"Breakout" is also a relative term. ALMOST FAMOUS was Solea Pfeiffer's Broadway debut, but by that point she had done 3 Encores shows, the Hamilton tour, some Hollywood Bowl concerts & regional productions, and led a Tyler Perry film.

TLDR, there's room for all in a healthy Broadway ecosystem."



Sad to hear you aren't impressed with Arielle! I think she is doing phenomenal work. If you've seen her standby, I think it would only deepen the appreciation for Arielle's work (not saying to go see the standby - save your ears)

I agree with the sentiments above. I love to see both as long as it's a great performance, but there is definitely something special about seeing a star at the top of their game lose themselves in a role.

Updated On: 10/23/23 at 12:20 PM

Sutton Ross said: "Sure, it's exciting to be in the same room as a celebrity you admire but they have to be talented and work in the part, or else it's a giant waste of my time and money. And break out stars will always be exciting. Julie was the story in the Spring of 2022 which was thrilling and crazy all at once."

I completely agree with Sutton. If a star is giving a high-quality performance, then I certainly am happy to see them in the show. Unfortunately, there have been stars who whose performances were painful or just not impactful (e.g., Julia Roberts in "Three Day so Rain," Hugh Jackman in "The Music Man", and I was disappointed. I find that seeing a high-caliber performance from a known star can be a hit or miss situation, and if one waits to get tickets, great WOM and/or reviews can prevent one from getting a decent ticket. For a breakout star, it's exciting to see someone who is unknown make their mark on a show and launch their career. Kristin Chenowith comes to mind after seeing her in "Scapin" off-Bdwy, among others. When I saw "Funny Girl" in May 2022, I didn't know that Julie Benko was performing until I was in my seat and found the announcement in my Playbill. I was pleasantly surprised, but ecstatic when I left the theater. As we know, people had an easier time getting a ticket to see Julie than for Lea, the star. Seeing a star comes with certain expectations, and disappointment is a result of unmet expectations. There are fewer expectations when one sees a breakout star because the person is still generally unknown and can be a revelation. Of course, each person's appreciation of a performance is subjective, so there's really no correct or incorrect response to the original question.

Talent over fame, every time. It's nice if the star has both, though.

Example. Can Daniel Radcliffe sing? I think I'd prefer to see Lonny Price. Or Raúl Esparza, or Chip Zien.

jagman1062 said: "Sutton Ross said: "Sure, it's exciting to be in the same room as a celebrity you admire but they have to be talented and work in the part, or else it's a giant waste of my time and money. And break out stars will always be exciting. Julie was the story in the Spring of 2022 which was thrilling and crazy all at once."

I completely agree with Sutton. If a star is giving a high-quality performance, then I certainly am happy to see them in the show. Unfortunately, there have been stars who whose performances were painful or just not impactful (e.g., Julia Roberts in "Three Day so Rain," Hugh Jackman in "The Music Man", and I was disappointed.



************************

Sometimes, where one is seated can make a difference in appreciating a performance. But in the case of Julia Roberts in Three Days of Rain, where I was seated on the 4th row, orchestra, she could hardly be heard or her acting was more for the camera than on a live stage...she was a disappointment. She did improve in the 2nd act but she was still behind the 2 other actors with her on stage ( Paul Rudd & the actor whom I did not know at that time, Bradley Cooper).

I was lucky to see one breakout star in my theatre-going days. I was in London for a business trip in 1999 and happened to see that a revival was ongoing for a musical of one of my favorite composers. I did not know the lead at all-- but he had a commanding stage presence & a powerful legit stage voice. Later on, I got to know his name ... when he had been discovered for another medium. It seems that the producer of a movie that was trying to rejuvenate a major film genre ( now Hollywood's most profitable genre) saw this new theatre actor in Oklahoma! and eventually decided to cast him as...Wolverine! It seems that this was one breakout star who really made it big! Last time I saw him ( actually several times... front or second row center), he played a conman. His style was different from the original actor who was more of a brash-talking revival tent type of conman. This lead decided to use his triple-threat talent & charisma to BEGUILE the River City kids to form a band ... through dance & miming musical instruments. It worked! Not only did he restore the town's sense of community, but he also won over the most difficult maiden to court, name of Marian! He also led the biggest hit of the season and helped Broadway regain its bright lights once again.

But after seeing him in The Music Man, the work that further impressed me after was his film called The Son by Florian Zeller. Heavy dramatic stuff where he played the central character in a familial drama that touches on a current societal concern, that of mental health issues. He was recently awarded in a film festival in Nice, France for his exceptional work as an actor in this movie.

To me, a real star is not just someone who can sing and dance... first and foremost I want him to be outstanding in the profession of acting! And Hugh Jackman is an exceptional actor (major in dramatic theatre) who also learned to sing and dance! His background has always been in the theatre..but he has learned to master acting (and sing & dance) before the camera, too. Too bad his Emmy/Grammy/Tony has not yet been joined by an Oscar. He has been nominated for an Oscar, though, for his work in the film adaptation of one of the most famous literary works, musicalized version, called Les Miserables!

Updated On: 10/23/23 at 03:24 PM

Jarethan said: "If I am buying in advance of reviews, presence of a star will play a significant role in my purchase. I would not have purchased tickets (or paid full price) to any of those shows in advance of reviews without those stars in the leads."

There is always a reasonably big chance that the "star" isn't on on that particular date. In my opinion that should not matter, you visit a musical production with a story and a whole cast and team, not a concert. Also, I have found that the chance that a person fits a role better is hugely increased when it's not a big name. The person was chosen because of their talent and suitability for the role only.

I am only buying in advance of reviews if there is no star casting, and only buy last minute tickets (in the case of star casting) when the understudy is on. I actually felt belittled on many occasions (Hugh Jackman in the Music man, Christy Carlson Romano in Beauty and the Beast, Hasselhoff and Paul Nicholas in Jekyll & Hyde, the list is endless. The inadequate performances is one thing, the audience reaction to failed scenes, songs or notes, as if they are deliberately faking enthusiasm to pull the struggling actor through as if he is giving the best performance in the world is another. Are we there to enjoy a beautiful story or to help someone struggling out of sympathy? Paying a lot of money to visit a musical production and then not caring about anything in the show but the star name, hollering and neighing at whatever they do, no matter how bad is just another level of stupidity that I could dedicate a whole post to. I even see this happening in current productions like the slaughtered Sunset Boulevard in London at the moment, a certain leading lady sang off key quite a bit, notes really didn't come out well, and the audience was hollering as if it was the greatest thing they've heard. When a note went wrong, de hollering became louder right after that. Is this some kind of "fooling yourself" because you want your star to be great so desperately, that the experience turns into a charade?

Updated On: 10/24/23 at 05:39 AM