Sutton Foster replaces Megan Mullally for London revival of ANYTHING GOES — Page 4

Islander_fan said: "Dolly80 said: "Bettyboy72 said: "I thought it was going to be a new production with Megan but when she got fired they just decided to remount the Roundabout production as that would be easier. "

Yes they can scrap an entire production and build a whole new one at the very last minute."

Two things. One regarding your statement, no they can’t just trash a set/physical production and up and build a new one at the last moment. You clearly have no idea how much work goes into building a set. And, they wouldn’t just do a new one because Sutton joined the cast.


Also, answer me this you all knowing theatrical genius. When the LCT productions of both King and I and South Pacific went to London they were billed as The Lincoln Center Theater production of…..

Now, regardless of Marshal being at the helm, wouldn’t it be billed as the Roundabout theatre company production of Anything Goes? It’s not nor does the site does the show have the words Roundabout Theatre anywhere on it. It just shows how you have no sense of how all this works."




I look forward to you realising despite new costumes , that this is the same production as Roundabout.
you can see the set designs in the rehearsal pictures- it is the Broadway design, and it’s the same choreography in the clip on tv.

Perhaps because that was a decade ago, they don’t have to declare its that production.

Updated On: 7/12/21 at 06:49 PM

Dolly80 said: "Islander_fan said: "Dolly80 said: "Bettyboy72 said: "I thought it was going to be a new production with Megan but when she got fired they just decided to remount the Roundabout production as that would be easier. "

Yes they can scrap an entire production and build a whole new one at the very last minute."

Two things. One regarding your statement, no they can’t just trash a set/physical production and up and build a new one at the last moment. You clearly have no idea how much work goes into building a set. And, they wouldn’t just do a new one because Sutton joined the cast.


Also, answer me this you all knowing theatrical genius. When the LCT productions of both King and I and South Pacific went to London they were billed as The Lincoln Center Theater production of…..

Now, regardless of Marshal being at the helm, wouldn’t it be billed as the Roundabout theatre company production of Anything Goes? It’s not nor does the site does the show have the words Roundabout Theatre anywhere on it. It just shows how you have no sense of how all this works."




I look forward to you realising despite new costumes , that this is the same production as Roundabout.
you can see the set designs in the rehearsal pictures- it is the Broadway design, and it’s the same choreography in the clip on tv.

Perhaps because that was a decade ago, they don’t have to declare its that production."


And, I look forward to you realizing that yes, of course it has then same choreography it’s the same direction and choreography as the Roundabout one. But, the length of how long it was between the show being on Broadway produced by Roundabout and this production means jack in terms of how they have to bill it. Roundabout is still due credit for the original production if this indeed were to be the roundabout production.

I think it's time to break out a term that I once came up with to describe productions like this. I believe I made this term up myself, but maybe I heard it somewhere once: this production is appears to be a "soft remount" - it's essentially using the same staging, direction, set design, etc. but with significant changes as well, particularly with the costume design, etc. It's not a hard remount, in that it's not an exact replica of the 2011 production, but neither is it a new production: it's very obviously based on Roundabout's version.

Why Roundabout isn't billed, I couldn't say. Maybe because there were enough differences that it no longer qualified as a remount of their version? But that doesn't mean we just throw the whole conversation out the window and pretend that there's no connection between these 2 productions, simply because of the billing.

As with most arguments on this message board, this can be easily solved by not looking at it as a binary, and by acknowledging that more than 1 thing can be true at the same time.

Islander_fan said: "I mean of course direction and choreography would be the same. After all, Kathleen Marshall has helmed both productions.

And, I think the reason roundabout isn’t listed in the credits is maybe because it’s not a carbon copy transfer. And there is a difference between that and say, being inspired by Roundabout’s production. Unlike the two Lincoln Center revivals that went to London.

This just occurred to me while writing this post. If this was a true, nothing changed replica production of what was revived on Broadway, wouldn’t Roundabout want the credit. Say it was, Roundabout would make money off of it. Considering that the pandemic shut down Broadway and they are in need of money, as a result, after all they are a non profit.
"

Except it wouldn't really be a question of Roundabout "wanting" the money -- it would depend on how long they had an option on the show. If their option had expired, they wouldn't be entitled to money (or credit) unless it had been specifically pre-negotiated.

CarlosAlberto said: "So, I had a question. Is this revival the same as the Roundabout production that played Broadway in 2011?"

Thank you for the laugh.

joevitus said: "CarlosAlberto said: "So, I had a question. Is this revival the same as the Roundabout production that played Broadway in 2011?"

Thank you for the laugh."

I don't get it.

bjh2114 said: "Islander_fan said: "I mean of course direction and choreography would be the same. After all, Kathleen Marshall has helmed both productions.

Let me stop you right there. You don't think a director is capable of revisiting the same material and taking a difference approach a second time? May I remind you that in recent years, Michael Greif did a complete re-staging of Rent for the off-Broadway revival years after he directed the original production. To say that "of course" the direction and choreography are going to be the same is foolish. The reason the direction and the choreography are the same is that the production is essentially the same one. Tweak a line here or there, change a few costumes, but at its core, this production is THE SAME,Roundabout credit or otherwise."

Kinda feels like you are both arguing the same point there to be honest !

bwayphreak234 said: "Regardless of billing for the production and how one things/feels it should be billed, everything we know about this so far seems to indicate that this is going to be the same production that played Broadway ten years ago. Same director, choreography, and set design. I just watched a video of the set load in on Instagram, and it is the EXACT same set down to the show curtain."

Where did you watch it? Love to see!

Islander_fan said: "Dolly80 said: "Islander_fan said: "Dolly80 said: "Bettyboy72 said: "I thought it was going to be a new production with Megan but when she got fired they just decided to remount the Roundabout production as that would be easier. "

Yes they can scrap an entire production and build a whole new one at the very last minute."

Two things. One regarding your statement, no they can’t just trash a set/physical production and up and build a new one at the last moment. You clearly have no idea how much work goes into building a set. And, they wouldn’t just do a new one because Sutton joined the cast.


Also, answer me this you all knowing theatrical genius. When the LCT productions of both King and I and South Pacific went to London they were billed as The Lincoln Center Theater production of…..

Now, regardless of Marshal being at the helm, wouldn’t it be billed as the Roundabout theatre company production of Anything Goes? It’s not nor does the site does the show have the words Roundabout Theatre anywhere on it. It just shows how you have no sense of how all this works."




I look forward to you realising despite new costumes , that this is the same production as Roundabout.
you can see the set designs in the rehearsal pictures- it is the Broadway design, and it’s the same choreography in the clip on tv.

Perhaps because that was a decade ago, they don’t have to declare its that production."


And, I look forward to you realizing that yes, of course it has then same choreography it’s the same direction and choreography as the Roundabout one. But, the length of how long it was between the show being on Broadway produced by Roundabout and this production means jack in terms of how they have to bill it. Roundabout is still due credit for the original production if this indeed were to be the roundabout production."

Only if it’s contractually obligated. It’s as simple as that. It was ten years ago, the right to billing may have run out. They may have had an option that passed. There are many options. To insist you know better when you aren’t holding the contract is very dreary

I wonder if the producers specifically wanted a replica of the 2011 revival?

I could be wrong but wouldn't Kathleen's services cost more if she were to create new choreography rather than use the existing choreography? Maybe it was a cost decision.

Loopin’theloop said: "Islander_fan said:Roundabout is still due credit for the original production if this indeed were to be the roundabout production."

Only if it’s contractually obligated. It’s as simple as that."



Contracts and rules are important to consider, I agree. I think we can assume that - for whatever reason - the UK producers were not obligated to credit Roundabout, otherwise they would have.

But philosophically / on principle, I'm generally in the camp of "credit where it's due, at any opportunity." Giving Roundabout some sort of credit (even if it's just "loosely based on the Roundabout production" I think would've been the classier thing to do.

I think about Dave Malloy; in the program of all his shows, he includes an extensive list of works that gave him any inspiration or information during his writing process for the piece. Not because he has to contractually, but because he believes it's important to offer that recognition of contribution at any opportunity.