Sunset Boulevard Tonys?

[roseaddams]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 6:49pm

Why was Sunset Boulevard the only nominee for Best Book and Score in 1995? Were all the other musicals that awful?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 6:55pm

In a word -- yes.

Sunset Boulevard was the only competent new book musical that year, so it really had no competition in several categories (Smokey Joe's Cafe -- a successful revue -- picked up several nominations, as did the revivals of Showboat and How to Succeed).

Updated On: 2/3/07 at 06:55 PM

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 6:55pm

I didn't know that.

[purpleprince101]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 6:56pm

opened in a very slow year i guess

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 7:01pm

It was one of the weakest seasons in Broadway history and we all should be grateful for the large number of new musicals that have routinely opened in the past few seasons (including about a dozen this season).

[D2]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 7:04pm

If I remember correctly, wasn't there some talk by the Tony Committee that they were going to eliminate the Book and Score categories that year because of the lack of competition, but Sir Andrew raised a big fuss so they capitulated to him?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 7:44pm

I've heard that as well. While the Tonys did eliminate the Book and Score categories in 1989 -- the year of Jerome Robbins' Broadway (a revue), Black & Blue (another revue), and the flops Starmites and Legs Diamond -- Webber used his power to make sure the same thing didn't happen the year of Sunset Boulevard (even though he had absolutely no competition).

[folkyboy]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 8:37pm

ALW looks like he stores his Tonys in his cheeks

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 8:44pm

Why is it that I keep losing respect for Andrew Lloyd Webber?

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 8:52pm

I dont think it was Lloyd Webber who forced them to do that...

If I remember, the Tony committee agreed that it wasn't right to eliminate the category because Sunset was the only show eligible for those categories. Part of the reason no other show opened was they didn't want to compete against Sunset.

You have to remember - when it opened in London - July 1993, LA - December 1993 - and then all the goings on about who would be Norma (Patti/Glenn) - LA closing prematurely (firing Faye Dunaway before she took the stage...) there was such buzz - it was an incredible theatre and media event. It opened with an advance of 37.5 million dollars, which has yet to be matched or passed.

As much as people like to slam ALW and deride his shows - they do draw a hell of a lot of attention.

And truly - Sunset was theatre at its finest - onstage and off -has there been a show since that caused so much buzz? How many shows ended up as cover stories for the NY Post and Daily News?

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 8:54pm

You can hardly call SUNSET BOULEVARD theatre at its finest...

And THE CAPEMAN made the front page. So did THE PRODUCERS.

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 8:59pm

Just my opinion...

Rarely was there a show where star turns were covered like Sunset was. Names thrown around all over the place over who would take over the show next - Diana Ross - Carol Burnett - Meryl Streep - I have a list somewhere that was incredible of women who had been approached or were being considered -especially to follow Glenn Close.

When Betty Buckley took over - that even made national news - have the clips from CNN with her first night ovation and clips of her singing WOL (comparing her to Glenn Close)

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 9:02pm

Well it's a legendary ROLE. I enjoyed SUNSET and I thought Close was divine, but to act like it is the pinnacle of 20th century musical theatre is kind of crazy...

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 9:08pm

"It opened with an advance of 37.5 million dollars, which has yet to be matched or passed."

Funny that it still was a flop.

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 10:06pm

munkustrap178 - never said it was the pinacle of anything - but in terms of theatre history, it was definitely noteworthy -

MargoChanning - you know too much about theatre to make a snippy comment like that. You know that it returned 85 - 90% of it's investment by closing, and really useful had said they were going to make up for the other 10 to 15 with tours and future licenses on that. It was a show that 12 years ago was bringing in over 800K a week (and despite redaction history - with Betty Buckley was also making money pulling in on average over 700 K a week)... Lots of people had work, and were paid at a time where there were vacant theatres.

It's easy to bash Sunset for the soap-opera antics behind the scenes but it also drew tons of attention which Broadway needed at the time.

And in all the "theatrics" - people gloss over that it was one of Lloyd Webber's most beautiful scores. Can listen to the full score over and over again...

[RevolutionaryCostume]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 10:09pm

And I'd like to add a black girl snap to that . .

Mmmmm. . hmmm. .

~Jacob.

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 10:13pm

lol

thanks jacob....

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 11:08pm

"You know that it returned 85 - 90% of it's investment by closing, and really useful had said they were going to make up for the other 10 to 15 with tours and future licenses on that. It was a show that 12 years ago was bringing in over 800K a week (and despite redaction history - with Betty Buckley was also making money pulling in on average over 700 K a week)..."

I don't KNOW anything of the sort, other than, by all accounts other than yours, the show lost MILLIONS (and however Really Useful tried to spin it afterwards, the fact is that Webber ended up having to lay off workers due the the financial fiasco that the show caused). Its large advance was completely due to advance hype and star power, not the quality of the show itself and it spent much of the last year and a half of its run hemorhaging money.

I also don't buy any argument that it somehow was some savior of Broadway, as if Broadway was in some desperate straits at the time -- this wasn't the early 70s, after all. The vast majority of theaters were occupied and considering that Beauty & the Beast, Tommy, Grease, Smokey's Joe's Cafe, How To Succeed, Showboat, Rent, Bring in da Noise, Chicago, and The Lion King (to name a few) all opened within a year or two before or after Sunset (and, unlike Sunset, were all HITS), Broadway would have been in terrific shape had Sunset never even opened.

Just because you liked it is no need to exaggerate its importance. Critical opinion was decidedly lukewarm (with many finding it to be an overblown bore that was a pale shadow of the classic film it was based on) and, as stated before, audiences came for a while, but stopped showing up when the stars left -- hardly a ringing endorsement of the quality of the show itself if people only showed up to stargaze (and a problem Webber didn't have with his previous star vehicles like Phantom and Evita, which still managed to remain profitable after the initial stars left).

We get it. You like the show. No one's saying you shouldn't. But, to argue that the show was some major event in Broadway history is just plain silly. PLENTY of other shows have had as much, if not MORE buzz than it ever did. It amazingly somehow only managed to win 7 Tony Awards in one of the least competitive seasons in Broadway history, in which it was the ONLY new book musical to open (it's hardly surprising it received a fair amount of press). It was an overhyped, overwrought, financially mismanaged flop that quickly demonstrated how limited its appeal was once it ran out of major star names it could use to lure in an unsuspecting public.

Updated On: 2/3/07 at 11:08 PM

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 11:19pm

SHIKES - wasn't trying to exaggerate things...

The 85/90 % return and promise to fulfill the investment came from the NY Times article (which I still have) the day after Sunset closed.

Agree that it was financially mis-managed - as one investor on closing night stated "Cameron Macintosh could have made this run at a profit for years". Considering they spent 100's of thousands of dollars on the Car for the paramount scene (for all of about 30 seconds it was onstage) - extravagant is too kind a word.

I disagree that people stopped coming. At it's lowest - it was still pulling in over 450,000 a week - if it had been better managed it could have run longer.

But - people seem to enjoy deriding Lloyd Webber and his works. Was it a missed opportunity - overextension - overhype - all good questions worthy of debate. For me though, it was, as I said earlier - great theater on and off stage. Have yet to see an equal to it

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 11:35pm

This is very off-topic but everytime I hear the Sunset Boulevard cast recording (where there are only about three numbers that I enjoy) or watch the film (a bona fide classic) I can't stop thinking how great it'd have been if the Sondheim/Prince/Lansbury version had occurred.

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 11:40pm

Thats like saying I wonder how Passion would have been if Lloyd Webber had done it...

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/4/07 at 12:39am

"Names thrown around all over the place over who would take over the show next - Diana Ross - Carol Burnett - Meryl Streep"

Carol Burnett was never seriously considered due to the fact that everyone would think back to her parody.

"You know that it returned 85 - 90% of it's investment by closing"

Source please? Once Glenn Close left the Broadway production, tickets were regularly available on TKTS. I saw Buckley and Paige using TKTS. The Paige matinee that I saw wasn't even 50% full. It cost a lot of money to run that show (the set was a huge money eater, that huge house set had to move backwards and forwards as well as up and down). Also remember that they had to hire some high priced lawyers to deal with LuPone and Dunaway.

Updated On: 2/4/07 at 12:39 AM

[folkyboy]

Posted: 2/4/07 at 12:40am

hardly. NO ONE wonders how Passion would've been had Webber have done it.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/4/07 at 1:03am

Thats like saying I wonder how Passion would have been if Lloyd Webber had done it...

Ummm, not really since I do not remember Lloyd Webber ever wanting to adapt Passione D'la Amore for Broadway with a set director and star, and the Broadway version of Passion holds a candle to the film and the novel, and it's one of Sondheim's finest scores. Not the same can be said for Webber's Sunset Boulevard. But like I said, that's not what this thread is about.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/4/07 at 1:08am

"NO ONE wonders how Passion would've been had Webber have done it."

Sure we do. Fosca would have died while being lifted by a cherry picker, Giorgio would have worn a mask and paddled a boat with a long stick, and Clara would wear roller skates and have blinking lights for boobs.