TAMMY FAYE Previews — Page 4

This is not a public workshop. This is a Broadway production selling at Broadway prices, and one that desperately needs word of mouth on its side to get its sales up. “Oh, don’t go for a few weeks because I think they’re still fixing it” is not a solid foundation for success.

Nobody here is trying to “kill” this show- and it looks like the negative reactions are not confined to this board. People have a right to share their negative reactions to it."

Actually, previews ARE a bit of a public workshop. Producers cottoned on that audiences would still pay top dollar for seats whether it was a preview or not so they charge full price. Period. Yes, it is a gamble to try material that might not work and deal with negative word of mouth, but that is the risk taken when mounting a big-ass show.

And yes, I, and many others, have looked at this board long enough to see the haters that lurk waiting to pounce on any new show that doesn't interest them and spread negative reactions, many of which are likely either made up or second hand from something they 'heard from a couple on the subway'. They aren't fooling anyone.

Maybe the show won't work on Broadway. But given what I and a lot of other posters saw in London, this show had a lot of promise with a cracking score, a more than decent book and a unique angle of telling a story. On that merit (and the fact that it had several positive notices including the NYT) it deserves a fair shot and a chance to find its legs. With only 2 previews under their belt, the creative team likely know they have work to do.

And yes, others have hated it on other boards but many have liked it as well. Either way, its really too soon to make conclusions on the fate of this or any other show that has only just began a months-long preview period.

I've read every report so far, and I have a broader question about the subject's suitability for a lavish Palace-ensconced musical in the 2020s: Is Messner all that compelling a figure in today's culture? Yes, the film offered a revisit of her life and times. But it made less than $4 million at the box office and is notable mostly for Chastain's Oscar-winning performance. (The documentary is generally considered superior, Chastain aside.) Musical comedies have captured many real women, from St Joan to Rose Hovick to Eva Peron and Princess Diana, and in the plus column, Tammy Faye was all show biz in self-presentation.

Yet arguably, that ready-to-sing-and-dance aspect is a potential trap. How do you make a woman who already sang her heart on her sleeve perform with freshness? She was almost self-parody when she arrived, and though her cause mitigated her buffoonish profile and had great nobility - finding empathy for the AIDS afflicted during the Reagan era - her story has a sad trajectory and is filled with soft targets for ridicule. By now, the world of televangelicals has been parsed, exposed, mocked. Everything about the world feels like an already overextended SNL sketch. It's hard to fathom how a musical can excavate an evening's entertainment. Is that a problem with this show? My post is a question, not an indictment.

Updated On: 10/22/24 at 09:33 AM

Since I bought my tickets back in March, I sent an email to Broadway Direct customer service regarding the change of casting from Andrew Rannels, and received a refund for my full priced ticket.

I like the songs I have heard so far, but I trust the comments of people here who saw the first previews. From reading their comments over the years I know thst they are theatre lovers, and if anything try to be as kind as possible in their assessments.

If I'm fortunate, I make one trip a year to New York, so I want to try to see the best shows I can.

With all the time & trouble tech rehearsals take these days, I don't have much faith in shows improving over previews.

You sound delusional. Previews are to work out technical kinks, get pick up cues, adjust pacing, etc. They are not for overhauling the show. Maybe a song gets cut or added or moved to a different place. That's it. It's not a workshop."

You sound rude and a bit mis-guided. Songs get cut during previews. Songs get added during previews. Scenes get cut during previews. Scenes get added during previews. Cast members get replaced during previews. Basically, ANYTHING can happen during previews which is what makes them interesting. True, it's not a full workshop per se, but until the show is 'frozen' it remains a work in progress.

I don't understand the negative responses here. Can it be so different from the show I saw and loved in London? On the other hand, I wasn't crazy about that campfest, Sunset Blvd., either in London or on Broadway, so I guess there's just no accounting for taste.

Looking forward to seeing Tammy Faye here in New York, to see if/how it differs from the Almeida production.

bway1430 said: "
You sound delusional. Previews are to work out technical kinks, get pick up cues, adjust pacing, etc. They are not for overhauling the show. Maybe a song gets cut or added or moved to a different place. That's it. It's not a workshop."

You sound rude and a bit mis-guided. Songs get cut during previews. Songs get added during previews. Scenes get cut during previews. Scenes get added during previews. Cast members get replaced during previews. Basically, ANYTHING can happenduring previews which is what makes them interesting. True, it's not a full workshop per se, but until the show is 'frozen' it remains a work in progress."


lol you literally just repeated what I said then added that actors get replaced during previews which is extremely rare

lol you literally just repeated what I said then added that actors get replaced during previews which isextremelyrare"

It may be rare but it can and does happen. A preview period is meant to correct whatever isn't working and that includes more than just a lighting cue or a bad wig.

Not sure why this is an issue to you but ok.

Mr. Wormwood said: "bway1430 said: "

2) Don't underestimate the Andrew Rannells fans who have had it out for the show as nauseum ever since he got canned. They have done a fine job and schlocking their poison around but while some of the negative comments might be authentic, many are smoke from a wholly different fire....

"

While Rannells may have sold more tickets than Borle if he was in it,I don't think a few angry Rannells stanson social media are a reason at all for sales not being strong"

Given that their average age likely puts them right at or just past puberty, I doubt they could afford a ticket. :-)

Strange Lupone said: "bway1430 said:

2) Don't underestimate the Andrew Rannells fans who have had it out for the show as nauseum ever since he got canned. They have done a fine job and schlocking their poison around but while some of the negative comments might be authentic, many are smoke from a wholly different fire....
"

Speaking of smoke, what, exactly, are you smoking?

If only.

But nice try.

Updated On: 10/22/24 at 02:44 PM

Saw Tammy Faye last night 10/21.
I really enjoyed the show in London. Personally I think this situation needs a little tightening up. But, I’m well aware it’s previews so we will just have to wait and see. Now, don’t shoot the messenger as I know this isn’t a review spot for The Palace. BUT! Beware of the side Orchestra seats, we were K seats 4,6,8,10 and seats 8 and 10 were extremely obstructed partial view seats and should be sold as such. I was honestly shocked. I was in seat 4 but my friends in 8&10 missed half the stage!!! Anyway, that’s my two cents on that. And then there are the bathrooms…..they can literally raise the palace theater 30 feet and yet they couldn’t add bathrooms on the orchestra level? And worse yet I used the bathrooms downstairs and upstairs and they were ridiculously tight. It’s impossible to get in and out not bumping into other guys in the bathroom.

That's hyperbole.


When AR made his announcement on the Tony's red carpet, there were a fair few angry comments on Reddit taking the line that Tammy Faye had done something terribly wicked and underhand towards poor wronged victim AR: that they'd announced AR's casting without his knowledge (even though he was an active participant in the launch event); that they'd announced his casting as a tactic to try to force him into being in the show; that announcing an actor while the final Ts and Is are still being crossed and dotted is unheard of deviousness; that AR quit of his own volition; that the production were mean cheapskates; that he was being badly underpaid; and generally that AR is 100% the innocent wronged party and TF 100% the villain.


Anyone defending the production or taking a more balanced view got downvoted and accused of being haters. I noticed at least two posters (who both had years-long comment histories showing they live in London and appear to either work in London theatre or be keen theatregoers) making comments indicating more went down behind the scenes and that AR perhaps wasn't completely the wronged innocent, and both were quite viciously accused of being liars with a vendetta against AR. Even posters saying TF was wrong to announce him without a contract but AR blurting it out on the red carpet and shading his former employer was also not the most professional behaviour, received hostility.


So clearly there are at least a few passionate AR fans who go off the deep end and type up a storm whenever he's even mildly criticised. Surely anyone who's been on the Internet longer than 5 minutes knows how Extremely Online actor fandoms can be? Is fandom being a bit nutso online really a shock to anyone?



Are they responsible for the low ticket sales? Of course not, but no one has suggested that.


Is it possible that the AR superfans flooding Reddit with downvotes and hostile comments in support of him, might possibly also have made a couple of the online comments slating the show?


Unless your worldview is "no one on the Internet ever lies ever", I fail to see what's so outrageous about the idea that people who post on the Internet might... post on the Internet.