Star casting or breakout star?

[Theatrefanboy1]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 8:40am

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)

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 8:55am

Honestly? I don't have a preference as long as the performance works. I'm happy to see Eddie Redmayne in Cabaret but it's not THE reason to see it. I've heard raves about the production and look forward to introducing the show to my son .

 

Are there a few actors that get me to plunk $$ down quickly? Mandy Patinkin (heck, I'm still salty over the Comet disaster), & Bernadette Peters spring to mind. But it's not because they are "stars". 

 

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 9:35am

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.

 

[OMG U Guyz]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 9:40am

Theatrefanboy1 said: "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)"

it depends - usually I’ll see a show no matter who is performing if I’m interested in the work like the current Sondheim revivals but sometimes star vehicles are cost prohibitive (I don’t want to know how much they’re charging for Cabaret) the choice is made for me. I do love seeing up and comers though.   

 

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 10:50am

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.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 12:06pm

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. 

[berniesb!tch]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 12:20pm

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

[Jarethan]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 12:21pm

Love to see a breakout star, but if I am buying in advance of reviews, presence of a star will play a significant role in my purchase, most recently evidenced by Jessica Chastain, Jodie Comer, Lea Michelle, and Hugh Jackman.  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.

Also, for my money, purchasing tickets to see LM in FG was to see an event; when I finally saw JB, I thought she was solid, but could not compare with LM. 

Using JB as an example already cited in this subject, I also think there's a lot of latitude in the definition of a 'breakout star'.  Is JB really a breakout star or was she catapulted to the spotlight for awhile based on the drama surrounding FG and the fact that she came through in a pinch.  Her next role was a modest one in a musical in which 7 people take their curtain call after she does.  Not exactly Streisand in the original FG production or Jessie Mueller in Beautiful.

On the other hand, I have purchased tickets to see a particular star and have hated the show so much that the star's presence didn't matter.  One of the absolute worst things I have ever seen was a musical called 'Alice' at the Public Theatre.  It starred a young, but already very famous Meryl Streep in an enormous role.  I still remember that Streep was really amazing, but the show itself was so awful that it didn't matter.

So, I guess it depends.

[jagman1062]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 12:44pm

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.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 2:30pm

Jarethan said: "Also, for my money, purchasing tickets to see LM in FG was to see an event; when I finally saw JB, I thought she was solid, but could not compare with LM.
Using JB as an example already cited in this subject, I also think there's a lot of latitude in the definition of a 'breakout star'. Is JB really a breakout star or was she catapulted to the spotlight for awhile based on the drama surrounding FG and the fact that she came through in a pinch. Her next role was a modest one in a musical in which 7 people take their curtain call after she does. Not exactly Streisand in the original FG production or Jessie Mueller in Beautiful."

It's all about context. Julie has been around for a while, sort of like Solea Pfeiffer being a questionable "breakout". FUNNY GIRL is also a verrrry unique set of circumstances, the likes of which rarely ever come around: One of the most famous star performances in the history of Broadway/movie musicals, revival tries to get off the ground for years, it finally does with a star departing from the Barbra mold and it belly-flops, the standby shines brighter than the original star, and finally Lea Michele comes in and elevates the production & the box office. Had Lea or Julie opened the production initially, we really don't know what the response would have been like (since beyond the lead performance, Mayer's production was so critically disliked).

As for JB taking that thankless role in HARMONY –– she's a working actor who won't yet sell tickets to the masses, and a gig's a gig. There will be Tony voters seeing her onstage for the first time ever when they go see HARMONY, it's not a bad thing to be associated with Manilow/Sussman/Carlyle/Davenport, and maybe she gets something better after that.

Updated On: 10/23/23 at 02:30 PM

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 3:06pm

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.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 3:18pm

"There's room for both in a healthy Broadway ecosystem"

Sure, buy we don't have a healthy ecosystem right now. Which is why I often wonder why these "stars" are so eager to support it. Charging $500 per ticket does far more harm than good for the "industry" of theatre.

[jo]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 3:24pm

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

[Melissa25]

Posted: 10/23/23 at 5:34pm

I just love when I get to see breakout star performances.  Last one was Anna Zavelson in Encores! Piazza.  Praying that we get to see her on the boards soon.

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/24/23 at 5:39am

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

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 10/24/23 at 12:50pm

If I can throw in a sub-category of star casting:

I love an all-"star" ensemble play when it works. The Front Page, Iceman Cometh, The Women, The Best Man, Man Who Came To Dinner, You Can't Take It With You, 12 Angry Men, etc. where there's a deep bench of character actors who get to kill a scene or two.

There can be joy in seeing a cast with a bunch of "that guy" actors in supporting parts. Christopher Nolan said with Oppenheimer, the supporting cast was so vast that for the sake of the audience he tried to fill it in with people who would at a minimum be semi-recognizable to the audience. It somehow never became distracting, and helped us distinguish between twenty white guys over 40. So even on Broadway if you don't know Julie Halston or Bill Irwin or Lewis Stadlen by name, they're recognizable enough, they're unique, and they bring some juice.

(But you also have to be careful not to throw off the calibration of the piece -- which sometimes happened in those Rudin casts if people weren't exactly right for a part.)