THE QUEEN OF VERSAILLES To Close December 21, 2025 — Page 14

ACL2006 said: "Jarethan said: "joevitus said: "Matt Rogers said: "
In all seriousness, can someone please explain what is happening here. Now this person is catfish. Yesterday she was fireplace. Before that, all sorts of names. Does she get banned and then immediately create a new name or is she just completely mentally insane and has seventeen million names floating around??"

Yes?

I am thinking that we should probably feel a little sorry for this person, who is either nuts or has absolutely no life outside of this board...or both.

"

It is disturbing. Now this person is creating a new account/profile/username almost daily. We've gotten no response from the moderators here about this."

I don't understand why the mods don't IP ban. It's been a thing on every forum I've ever used

A big thanks for Inception for getting me a ticket to this so I could see it with Kristin. Thank you very much, so sweet!

Kristin sounded great and I was able to sit back and take in the show without the huge thrill of Sherie's first night overpowering the time in the theatre. If I'm being honest, Sherie's performance was just so much better for so many reasons. Seeing Kristin, I was reminded of how good of an actress Sherie is. It makes me think of seeing Joanna Gleason play the Baker's Wife on tape and then never being able to forgive any other actress in the role for not being Joanna Gleason. Once you see someone wring out every drop of subtext and humor and add so many layers to a role it's hard to watch someone less savvy do it.

Sherie found humor, truth, and irony in this character. Kristin's jokes fell flat by comparison and the satyrical bite was removed. It made for a much less satisfying performance. She was in flats for the whole show as well and had some tape on her knee. I am sure she and the whole ensemble are worn out. I commend them for their hard work.

Most of the negative critiques have already been expressed repeatedly and I don't want to kick a show too hard when it's already down. I just don't understand why this show, why this story, and why now. Seeing it again made me realize just how hard this ensemble works. The costume changes are endless. I feel for them being in this show that is limping its way out of the massive St. James. I feel a bit glad they will soon be free to spend the holidays with their loved ones. The show is just not good enough and doesn't make sense for this day and age.

TotallyEffed's take is so useful at this late date, the comparison with Gleason's je ne sais quoi attributes informing her Baker's Wife the perfect illustration: some actors inhabit roles, creating an alchemy of character and artist that's impossible to frame with words. Acting is both a science - craft - and a mysterious art, the morphing into another via an almost chemical synergy. Here, we see a gifted musical comedy star tackling a role outside her resume's catalog, a woman who has no buried ingenue to excavate, a Chenoweth specialty. Arguably, Jackie is the opposite: she was always a tough broad, even as a teen. That seems to be what the Scott take delivers: this hardened creature who self-presents in guileless Barbie drag but cannot camouflage an inherent ruthlessness. Chenoweth may aim for that push-pull in the woman, yet we mostly see her effort. To Effed's point, the show doesn't succeed with Scott, but we do grasp the character being dramatized.

Reading between the lines here I have to assume one of those companies is Seaview. Multiple high profile flop musical productions that they’ve developed or lead produced can’t be ignored.

Ensemble1711444445 said: "Rumors swirling that this show's collapse is having ramifications at several companies and is the final straw for one and changes are coming. "

…huh?

Kad said: "Reading between the lines here I have to assume one of those companies is Seaview. Multiple high profile flop musical productions that they’ve developed or lead produced can’t be ignored."

Updated On: 12/12/25 at 10:33 AM

ColorTheHours048 said: "Seaview needs to stick to celebrity-led plays. Their track record of producedmusicals is pretty abysmal: Illinoise, Lempicka, Queen of Versailles, Once Upon a Mattress, The Last Five Years. All flops; financially, critically, or both."


FWIW, I'd heard a while back that Seaview IS focused on plays almost exclusively now, but is "finishing what they started" with the new musicals that they've spent a few years on. QoV should not have a huuuuge impact on their ability to raise money for plays with stars. My understanding on QoV is also that the "buck stopped" with Bill Damaschke as the originating producer and the one who had the most creative input. His stage track record is mixed-to-negative and he also has a day job running Warner Bros Animation.

Few producers have had success controlling Michael Arden's expensive imagination. He's never had a lucrative Broadway show (MHE likely to be the outlier) and has another costly gamble in the spring.

ATG also deserves a good deal of scrutiny. They sunk a bunch of money into this, Cabaret, Sunset, Last 5 Years, and New York New York - and upcoming Dolly Parton - and they have to answer to their Private Equity owners.

Producing a musical is a special and unique skill, and some people like Jeffrey Seller and David Stone make it look easy. And even they've had their stinkers.

Updated On: 12/12/25 at 02:48 PM

I know for a fact Seaview has another high profile musical in very early development

To my knowledge, Seaview’s last 5 lead-produced plays on Broadway were all quite profitable (GN&GL, All In, Romeo & Juliet, Stereophonic, Enemy of the People). Plus they’ve had some off-Broadway hits.

TLDR, much better than most producers working today.

They've had a better success rate than most producers in deciding what shows might be hits vs flops. Whether they were picked up from a nonprofit, or partially packaged by an agency, or some other combination of forces to bring the shows to life. I am not suggesting that Greg and his colleagues are at a Scott Rudin or Oskar Eustis level of "creative producing"/nurturing new ideas. Each show's development pipeline is different.

Seaview didn't develop Slave Play- it originated during Harris' time at Yale, was developed further at the O'Neill Center, landed at NYTW and transferred. Sidney was also a transfer they marshaled (and a pretty rushed, under-the-wire transfer, not unlike with Illinoise). But Seaview's track record with plays has largely been quite good, thanks to their ability to pack them with names. But in terms of developing new work, I just don't think they quite have it together- and thus far they've proven totally unsuccessful with musicals.

Updated On: 12/12/25 at 04:44 PM