'Swept Away’ to Close on Broadway December 15- Page 3

[SingingEachtoEach]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 11:52am

kdogg36 said: "I understand that Josh Breckenridge is speakingfrom a place of frustration and real concern for new and vibrant shows on Broadway, but his message really does seem like an attempt to shame potential audience members, and I can't imagine that that will be helpful. Also, it's a little peculiar to single out two jukebox musicals as examples of new and original works."

 And we've seen more unusual shows like Kimberly Akimbo and Shucked do decent, if not recouping, runs and then tour.

[yyys]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 12:00pm

white audience primarily. Do you see other ethnicities at this or Stereophonic? 

Difference is that Stereophonic has a good script.

 

MezzoDiva47 said: "its difficult for shows like this one to catch on

the basic question still remains

who wasthe audience for this?
 

 

[broadway86]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 12:10pm

Of course, it's always sad when talented actors like John Gallagher Jr and scores of actors, technicians, and artists lose their jobs in one fell swoop. And it is sad when original pieces of theatre are shuttered while purely commercial ventures see much more immediate, sustained success.

That being said, while I definitely don't regret seeing this production, it didn't resonate with me. The book couldn't have been thinner and the songs, while decently integrated, were mostly unmemorable. Not my favorite work from the Avett Brothers or Michael Meyer. JGJ was excellent though, he put his all into this.

[BJR]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 12:25pm

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "We are stuck in this endless cycle where writers/directors and their agents want to develop work for commercial life (for financial and visibility reasons), but in reality an off-Broadway nonprofit is a more appropriate venue for a musical like SWEPT AWAY.

It is viewed as a failure if the last stop on a musical's New Yorkjourney is the Public Theater or Playwrights Horizons and I wish that wasn't the case. But, the problem is, even the big nonprofits can't produce musicals without commercial producers enhancing the production, and they certainly can't commission at a meaningful price tag. And for commercial producers, actually mounting the show commercially is the only way to have a prayer of making back any money (even though that involves zillions more dollars).

"

Exactly. And this is where it's unfortunate how expensive it has become to produce on Bway. Because ideally, folks should shoot their shot. The more diverse of portfolio of stories on the Main Stem, the better for everyone. But it's sadly, then, true that we the state of things is such that a show can't be developed unless it is has enhancement.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 1:13pm

I'm sorry but the cast calling foul on audience not discovering new, original works, when Swept Away is in itself a jukebox musical is a bit much. (That said, I still don't know who the hell the Avett Brothers are.) While I can't escape Death Becomes Her, I haven't seen a Swept Away ad in months, and opening a musical in the fall is a fool's errand in itself, unless it is a known property like Death. So maybe point the blame at your producers for failing you for lack of awareness on multiple counts. 

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 1:48pm

everythingtaboo said: "I'm sorry but the cast calling foul on audience not discovering new, original works, when Swept Away is in itself a jukebox musical is a bit much. (That said, I still don't know who the hell the Avett Brothers are.) While I can't escape Death Becomes Her, I haven't seen a Swept Away ad in months, and opening a musical in the fall is a fool's errand in itself, unless it is a known property like Death. So maybe point the blame at your producers for failing you for lack of awarenesson multiple counts."

And for bringing a show that isn’t ready to Broadway. I am the target demographic for this show: I love the creative team, I love The Avett Brothers, I love dark, daring musicals with bold subject matter. 
 

At the end of the day, while I was happy to see the show, it wasn’t good enough to recommend to anyone. And even the folks I DID tell about it, j had caveats and reservations. 
 

We all have limited time and money. I can’t see everything I want to see, and neither can my enthusiastic theater going friends. When I recommend things to see, I keep that in mind.

 

There are things that are, in my opinion, so good, I even talk them up to people outside their typical audience (Teeth, Stereophonic), there are things I think most people will love (Maybe Happy Ending), there are things I haven’t even seen yet that I’d recommend to people over Swept Away based on word of mouth (Death Becomes Her). 
 

The call from artists to “support” new theater always feels so naive. We are supporting theater—we just have limited resources. We can’t throw our money at something we’re not sure we’ll enjoy because we generally love art. We all want to spend our hard earned money and limited time on things we think we will actually enjoy.
 

We have to consider the fact that we can’t do and see it all, and the things we end up investing time/money in are the shows that win our interest—through the people involved, good marketing, good word of mouth, good reviews. 

Swept Away had the first one. It visually had nice marketing (one of the best key art pieces in recent memory. What it did not have was good word of mouth or many good reviews—and everyone who chose to see it did so in spite of that. 

Updated On: 12/6/24 at 01:48 PM

[seaweedjstubbs]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 2:33pm

This is just gonna keep happening every time a show closes early, huh? The cast lashes out, the fans lash out, everyone starts blaming jukebox musicals and IP based shows, etc. Rinse and repeat. Getting tiresome at this point.

I’m absolutely heartbroken that the cast had the rug pulled out from under them with such short notice. I totally feel their frustration and anger. But directing it at audiences is not really the way to go. If we were living in a world where Broadway was free, and the thing that kept a show running was how full the theatre was every night, I could understand. But getting angry that people would rather spend their limited funds on shows that have strong buzz or are based on familiar properties instead of a show with mixed buzz and source material unfamiliar to the majority of audiences is just naive. Us actors are very emotional and protective of our work, but sometimes we have to take a step back, look at the big picture and be realistic.
 

Still, giving the cast and crew a week’s notice right before the holidays is brutal. I feel for each of them.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 3:05pm

To the point made earlier about authors saying how important it is to preorder books, it’s a bit like selling physical copies of music now. There is a lot of times lately an incentive to do so, like a signed cd or lp or even the chance to get one if you preorder by a certain date. This shows first preview gift (which I’m sad I wasn’t at, to get) of a signed window card would be a good incentive for sales, maybe? A poster for every order placed by a certain date? Or a cast recording with every ticket sold (Singers have done this lately and counted those albums into their total sold).
 

I think if the goal is to get more people in early to build word of mouth then these shows need to start looking at incentive type giveaways to excite people and make them whip out their credit cards, when tickets go on sale. Who knows if it’ll work or not but it seems like it would be worth taking a shot. 

[AKarp2013]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 3:11pm

At the end of the day, audiences are complicated. We can theorize, speculate, and even come close to the exact answer of why -- but ultimately, we don't know why audiences go to one show and don't go to another.

We do know that audiences want to be challenged; they want new work; they want original work; they want to be entertained -- and each production has to convince them that they are the one to do it.

Reviews matter, word of mouth matters, marketing matters, the quality of the show matters. But it all comes down to the decision of the audience of which show has convinced them to spend the big dollars.

As it turns out, outside of the big dogs on Broadway, audiences decided that during the Thanksgiving weekend, shows like The Great Gatsby, Romeo + Juliet, Death Becomes Her and The Outsiders convinced them more so than did Swept Away or A Wonderful World or Tammy Faye.

Audiences are complicated. And we can't chastise them because they didn't pick your show. It may seem mean, but your show, sadly, didn't do enough to convince them.

My heart breaks for the cast and creative team, but I will never blame the theatre-going audience for which shows succeed and which shows fail. I hated Romeo + Juliet, but I won't question the audience's decision to go see it, and I'm glad they're doing the bonkers business they are because I want Broadway's economy to thrive.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 3:15pm

I don’t think there’s anything to question, really. As we all know prices are so stupidly expensive that people want to spend their money to see either people they know/recognize  or a show with a title they know/recognize. As we’ve said for years now, it’s just too expensive for tourists (and locals) with limited time and money to take a risk on things anymore. 

[BETTY22]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 4:32pm

A guess a NYT CRITIC PIX doesn't mean much in ticket sales anymore - expect to see more big name movie titles on Broadway. 

[mmh1019]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 8:29pm

My thoughts exactly. I deeply feel for people like Josh & Raymond J Lee (going from Heart of Rock & Roll to Swept Away & Tammy Faye), I can't imagine how stressful and frustrating it is. Swept Away is such a specific show, and I am an Avett Brothers fan. I don't regret seeing it, and that I got to tell John Gallagher Jr that I felt like we'd grown up together because I'm the same age as most of the Spring Awakening cast. He couldn't have been more gracious. Did I want to bring my family who was visiting the next weekend? No, it's a dark show and I struggled with the book. It's a show I think could do more in a more intimate house, (or maybe should have opened next spring) but I can't same I'm surprised it struggled to find footing.

[brodynky]

Posted: 12/6/24 at 11:56pm

If the Telecharge seating availability is accurate (?) the rest of the run has sold extensively the last two days and most of the performances look like they will be close to sell- outs. Happy the cast will be able to play to full houses! 

[MezzoDiva47]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 3:31am

so lets sum up the blame game

lempicka - blame the critics

swept away - blame the audience

tammy faye - blame the producers

heart of rock and roll - blame the tonys

seems like the first three shows knew better than to announce a national tour that will never happen

 

[SingingEachtoEach]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 5:45am

BETTY22 said: "A guess a NYT CRITIC PIX doesn't mean much in ticket sales anymore - expect to see more big name movie titles on Broadway."

The interesting thing is that the review itself was mixed and I think the NYT critic decided to be charitable based on the show being a bit different. 

[Ravanne_1]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 8:17am

There are plenty of shows that open to mixed reviews from critics but manage to have successful runs. But there is something disconcerting about the plug being pulled on a show in just two weeks after opening. I recognize the hard business decisions being made, because if the producers lose confidence that the show will build an audience they're likely to cut their losses. That doesn't change the fact that actors and crew lost their jobs very abruptly right in the middle of the holidays. For some actors, this might mean that they didn't work enough to keep their health benefits with Actors Equity. The profession has never been one that offered any kind of security, but it does appear to be getting worse. No one joins a show with the plan of making a flop and the cast and crew clearly did their absolute best so I understand the frustration. Especially to be given a week before the lights go out and when the shows opening in the spring are already cast so their opportunities to find work in the next few months are tanked.. It's been proposed before that shows should should open with the plan of being a limited run (3 months) and not close before that run is over. This gives the cast and crew a small measure of security, at least in the short term and lets audiences know that they likely have a limited amount of time to see a show that might interest them. If the run is successful, they can extend the run for a few more weeks or even indefinitely if the numbers work in their favor. This will also force producers to be more responsible and go into opening with enough reserves to keep a show going while it builds its audience.  I don't know if any of this would have helped Swept Away or any of the new shows that have been struggling, but as I said before, the Broadway industry has reached a point that is unsustainable moving forward. It's expensive to stage a show, tickets are ridiculously expensive and seen as a luxury by the casual audience and shows either have to be hits right out of the gate or they open with vultures circling overhead.

[Theatrefan2]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 8:21am

Jordan Catalano said: "To the point made earlier about authors saying how important it is to preorder books, it’s a bit like selling physical copies of music now. There is a lot of times lately an incentive to do so, like a signed cd or lp or even the chance to get one if you preorder by a certain date. This shows first preview gift (which I’m sad I wasn’t at, to get)of a signed window card would be a good incentive for sales, maybe? A poster for every order placed by a certain date? Or a cast recording with every ticket sold (Singers have done this lately and counted those albums into their total sold).


I think if the goal is to get more people in early to build word of mouth then these shows need to start looking at incentive type giveaways to excite people and make them whip out their credit cards, when tickets go on sale. Who knows if it’ll work or not but it seems like it would be worth taking a shot."

So basically what decently discounted previews used to be for.

 

[JasonC3]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 9:09am

Theatrefan2 said: "So basically what decently discounted previews used to be for."

This may be a case of "yes and." For me, better discounted previews is all it would take.  Though I'd love to see other sales incentives like come to a preview and get a ticket discount for later in the run, value pricing on "bring a friend" tickets to a preview, etc.  Little things that some shows have done in the past.

But for a generation raised on the concert perks Jordan mentioned, it make take a better preview discount AND some sort of extra perk or exclusive ... early access to a digital file for one or more of the show's songs, special photos they can use on social media, something signed, et al.

I don't know if productions will want to go down that road or how performer would feel about it, but it certainly is commonplace with books and concerts/music right now.  I recently pre-ordered a new business leadership book and as a result of doing so, I now have access to a New Year's Day webinar with the author.

[BdwyFan]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 9:55am

I’m Guessing this show didn’t have a multi multi millionaire or billionaire producer/angel to keep it going and the losses just couldn’t be sustained each week so it had to shut quickly.  And to start going down the priority loan road just wasn’t going to be an option, which is smart IMO.
Wonder does MHE have such am angel person behind it?  DBH has Universal so that’s safe for a long while. Unfortunately this is where we’re at with productions.  Sad. 

[quizking101]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 6:11pm

The word swirling among the cast (as stated at the stage door) was that the response to the closing was overwhelming enough where they may add a week or two of additional performances if they feel there is true demand for it.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 6:37pm

quizking101 said: "The word swirling among the cast (as stated at the stage door) was that the response to the closing was overwhelming enough where they may add a week or two of additional performances if they feel there is true demand for it."

 

I suspected as soon as it was announced this was what they were always planning to do. They probably have an actual date in mind, but announced an earlier closing date in hopes of drumming up excitement to actually make money the last few weeks and end on a “win”. JGJ’s speech at curtain call felt very aligned with this and I think the cast, producers, etc probably planned out some of the verbiage—so many of them mentioned “glowing” reviews (which the show did not receive—but PR spin’s gotta spin).

 

Make it look like a tragic ending, spin it like this is some great piece of art closing too soon, get enough excitement to actually make some money in the past couple of weeks. A decent plan, honestly. 

 

[keen on kean]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 7:10pm

I was at today's matinee and it looked completely sold. The audience was very responsive, and the principals even teared up a little at the curtain call. This is my second viewing (saw it a month ago in previews) and while it has not changed, it seems much tighter and the ending feels totally earned to me. I appreciated it at my first viewing, and was (can't resist) swept away this time.If it were to stay open till year end, I would go back again.

[jkcohen626]

Posted: 12/7/24 at 7:13pm

BdwyFan said: "I’m Guessing this show didn’t have a multi multi millionaire or billionaire producer/angel to keep it going and the losses just couldn’t be sustained each week so it had to shutquickly. And to start going down the priority loan road just wasn’t going to be an option, which is smart IMO.
Wonder doesMHE have such am angel person behind it? DBH has Universal so that’s safe for a long while. Unfortunately this is where we’re at with productions. Sad."

Not really. This show has a Pritzker attached. I guess Gigi just doesn't want to pump Hyatt money into it. 

[jkcohen626]

Posted: 12/8/24 at 9:44am

BroadwayGirl107 said: "quizking101 said: "The word swirling among the cast (as stated at the stage door) was that the response to the closing was overwhelming enough where they may add a week or two of additional performances if they feel there is true demand for it."



I suspected as soon as it was announced this was what they were always planning to do. They probably have an actual date in mind, but announced an earlier closing date in hopes of drumming up excitement to actually make money the last few weeks and end on a “win”. JGJ’s speech at curtain call felt very aligned with this and I think the cast, producers, etc probably planned out some of the verbiage—so many of them mentioned “glowing” reviews (which the show did not receive—but PR spin’s gotta spin).

Make it look like a tragic ending, spin it like this is some great piece of art closing too soon, get enough excitement to actually make some money in the past couple of weeks. A decent plan, honestly."

The thing that makes me wary of that is that December 15th is SO close. They'll be selling brand new tickets for literally the next week. I would be much more inclined to believe this was the strategy if they'd announced something more like a December 29th closing and then could announce they're extending into January this week with a few weeks to sell those seats. 

[quizking101]

Posted: 12/8/24 at 10:58am

I mean - AINT NO MO had a similar thing happen, they ended up squeezing about 5-6 more performances out that were fully paid by others. (Yes, I realize that ending phrase is the key factor here)