I actually didn't hate the show, saw it with both KC and SRS, and I also don't think Kristin said anything "wrong." But similar to the show itself, if people are mass-misinterpreting something, it's best to get ahead of it and make your stance painfully, obviously clear. She didn't do that. Which is certainly her prerogative. I know she's not MAGA, but because she hasn't done any work to really make that clear to people, others won't. C'est la vie.
The bottom line is that the real Jackie Siegel made money off of this, and she would have made more had it been a hit, which should tell you everything you need to know.
The production made an active choice to very publicly embrace Siegel. It also chose to do their press event and Versailles-themed opening at the Plaza, which certainly sends mixed signals about what you’re trying to say. Those weren’t decisions by the creatives, of course, but rather the lead producers- who are conspicuously not quoted or even named in that NY Times piece.
Broadway Star Joined: 7/18/11
FolliesCabaret said: "I actually didn't hate the show, saw it with both KC and SRS, and I also don't think Kristin said anything "wrong."
She eulogized a white supremacist on social media. If you can look at that and still shrug, the problem isn’t everyone else’s outrage, it’s your own broken moral compass. This isn’t normal, it isn’t defensible, and pretending otherwise just advertises how low people’s standards have sunk.
this has to be one of the biggest flops of this decade [so far]:
pmensky said: "FolliesCabaret said: "I actually didn't hate the show, saw it with both KC and SRS, and I also don't think Kristin said anything "wrong."
She eulogized a white supremacist on social media. If you can look at that and still shrug, the problem isn’t everyone else’s outrage, it’s your own broken moral compass. This isn’t normal, it isn’t defensible, and pretending otherwise just advertises how low people’sstandards have sunk."
If you can honestly look anybody in the eye and tell them that you earnestly believe Kristin Chenoweth knew who Charlie Kirk was before all of this, you're already in your own social-media made psychosis. The dude was most famous for being a Jubilee commentator troll. The far right has pushed this narrative that he was much more famous and influential before he was shot, and you bought into it. You're quite literally using far right talking points to demonize someone with a blue voting record. But ok.
Broadway Star Joined: 7/18/11
FolliesCabaret said: "pmensky said: "FolliesCabaret said: "I actually didn't hate the show, saw it with both KC and SRS, and I also don't think Kristin said anything "wrong."
She eulogized a white supremacist on social media. If you can look at that and still shrug, the problem isn’t everyone else’s outrage, it’s your own broken moral compass. This isn’t normal, it isn’t defensible, and pretending otherwise just advertises how low people’sstandards have sunk."
If you can honestly look anybody in the eye and tell them that you earnestly believe Kristin Chenoweth knew who Charlie Kirk was before all of this, you're already in your ownsocial-media made psychosis. The dude was most famous for being a Jubilee commentator troll. The far right has pushed this narrative that he was much more famous and influential before he was shot, and you bought into it. You're quite literally using far right talking points to demonize someone with a blue voting record. But ok."
Whether she personally knew his résumé is irrelevant. She chose to publicly praise someone whose rhetoric is widely documented as harmful. That’s the action. That’s the impact. Trying to spin this into “you fell for far‑right talking points’ is just a distraction from the basic reality: she posted it, it landed exactly the way it landed, and people reacted accordingly. Accountability doesn’t vanish because you wish the context were different
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/12/09
FolliesCabaret said: "
If you can honestly look anybody in the eye and tell them that you earnestly believe Kristin Chenoweth knew who Charlie Kirk was before all of this, you're already in your ownsocial-media made psychosis. The dude was most famous for being a Jubilee commentator troll. The far right has pushed this narrative that he was much more famous and influential before he was shot, and you bought into it. You're quite literally using far right talking points to demonize someone with a blue voting record. But ok."
This is revisionist, he had a daily show that had millions of viewers. That's just the objective truth of it.
TheatreFan4 said: "FolliesCabaret said: "
If you can honestly look anybody in the eye and tell them that you earnestly believe Kristin Chenoweth knew who Charlie Kirk was before all of this, you're already in your ownsocial-media made psychosis. The dude was most famous for being a Jubilee commentator troll. The far right has pushed this narrative that he was much more famous and influential before he was shot, and you bought into it. You're quite literally using far right talking points to demonize someone with a blue voting record. But ok."
This is revisionist, he had a daily show that had millions of viewers. That's just the objective truth of it."
And you know what, I literally had no idea about that, so I apologize. Certainly not my intention to contribute to revisionist history.
Swing Joined: 6/10/03
Adding one more title to the list, another St. James disaster with a longer run: "New York, New York," 110 performances
Updated On: 12/23/25 at 09:41 PM
altonido said: "Adding one more title to the list (and the longest running title): Another St. James Theatre disaster, "New York, New York," 110 performances
"
I drew the line at any show failing to do less than 100 regular performances. there's quite a few that barely hit 100.
Swing Joined: 6/10/03
Good point. I only bring up "New York, New York" because it was one of the most expensive disasters of recent years.
I am a huge Kristin Chenowith fan. I have seen her one woman concerts and hermLily Garland/ Mildred Plotnick in On the 20th Century which blew me away. I first heard her ( not seen) here on the Steel Pier CD and her voice jumped out at me.
I heard she had said something about Charlie Kirk but I don't think that that much bearing on the outcome of Queen of Versailles. I did not pay it much mind.
I was looking so forward to Queen of Versailles.
I accidentally bumped into the documentary on some streaming service and watched and my first thought was how are they going to make this a musical?
I think Michael Arden had a good idea juxtaposing;Jackie Segal with Marie Antoinette in that bourgeios "I want I want" mindset. I think he was on to something. Unfortunately it did not work.
But the main problem remained; You can't care about a main character whose only drive is to be rich rich rich at any cost. Let's face it. Jackie Segal is a bourgeios bore and it is impossible to care about her. Her husband was a bit of a tyrant with a trophy wife so it was hard to care about him.
Kristin gave it her all. it just wasn't enough to cover the main flaw that Jackie Segal is not likable or anyone to root for.If you can't root for someone in a musical... well there is not musical. Think of any really good musical. There is always someone to root for. Oliver, Annie, Hamilton, Princess Winnifred, The Mormon Boys. etc
Don't blame Kristin. No one could make this work. And she almost did.
Don't blame Arden. No one could make this work. And he had some good ideas. I do think he needed to be a better editor of Schwartz's music.
And the score by the wonderful Steven Schwartz was a total disappointment. Some of those songs needed to be cut but no none dared cut them cause he was Steven Schwartz
Arden had an idea juxtaposing it with the French Marie Antoinette and Louis the XIV and it was a good idea but it was just did not pan out and was not enough to make Queen of Versailles sail.
Kristen is a blessing to musical theatre. She did not make this show fail It failed at its core; the likability of its main character. Arden is also a blessing as a director. They all can't be homeruns. And Schwartz is a blessing but he missed the boat on the music.
It's a musical that just didn't work. Stop beating up our wonderful creatives.
Arden and the rest of the team are absolutely to blame. Arden is the editor - something he was incapable of . It’s part of the job.
Updated On: 12/24/25 at 11:49 PMBroadway Star Joined: 3/29/25
goldenboy said: "It's a musical that just didn't work. Stop beating up our wonderful creatives."
It was a musical that didn't really work in Boston, yet these "wonderful creatives" did little to change that before bringing it into a much more critical and costly environment. That's on them; hence the strong criticism they have received. Past achievements doesn't get them a pass on this.
Featured Actor Joined: 10/8/18
Broadway Star Joined: 12/9/23
Our wonderful creatives?
Sounds like a cast member or producer just made themselves known...
Noted Harmony on that list of recent flops. That failed to connect with a wide audience, but I wonder if they lost too much momentum by waiting about 15 ior 16 months to move to Broadway? After so many years of development maybe they should have tried to open directly on Broadway in 2022? Though there was a backlog of shows that had waited out the pandemic trying to open then.
Where does Paradis Square land on that list of flops?
"Don't blame Arden. No one could make this work."
Arden was involved almost from the outset, one of the first tier creatives. The show had a high profile out of town engagement with mainstream reviews that proved prescient in their diagnostics. Arden shepherded the piece through every step, the artistic team leader tasked with finding solutions to problems identified by consensus. We can lose the word "blame," but to pretend his hands-on input was irrelevant in shaping the final product is to misunderstand the role of a director. In every possible sense he shared responsibility for what opened on the St. James stage. And his direction lacked focus - he could not make a central stylistic conceit - Versailles and McVersailles parallels - organic, to me one of his biggest assignments. .
Stand-by Joined: 8/19/22
Goldenboy said: ""Don't blame Arden. No one could make this work."
So then why’d he burn through $22M+ in an attempt to do so?
Girl, stop.
FolliesCabaret said: "I actually didn't hate the show, saw it with both KC and SRS, and I also don't think Kristin said anything "wrong." But similar to the show itself, if people are mass-misinterpreting something, it's best to get ahead of it and make your stance painfully, obviously clear. She didn't do that. Which is certainly her prerogative. I know she's not MAGA, but because she hasn't done any work to really make that clear to people, others won't. C'est la vie.
The bottom line is that the real Jackie Siegel made money off of this, and she would have made more had it been a hit, which should tell you everything you need to know."
Actually KC embraced a hatemonger, racist, homophobe, sexist, gun worshiper by "appreciating some perspectives" of his. Which ones? So yeah, she did say something wrong. Either she is woefully misguided or of the same mindset as CK. One cannot be for someone and against them at the same time.
I find it odd that nobody is laying any blame with the lead producers. They are ultimately the bosses of a production, not the director or any other creative. If a production is going over budget or necessary changes aren’t being made, they need to step in and get their employees- and that’s who their directors, writers, and designers are- on track. The fact they didn’t suggests they either were hands off or they did not see the problems- either is a total failure of producing.
Arden had a much bigger role in shaping this show than shaping MHE.
While he does deserve a good deal of blame, I don’t know that anyone else could have turned this into something better if the goal was always to make it a “big” musical (as opposed to like an 8-person character study that leaned into the darkness).
Agree with Kad that the producers deserve a lot of blame. But as with most flops, you cannot place the blame on one person. It’s a collaborative failure.
What exactly does she need to apologize for? As awful as Kirk was, him being assassinated was a terrible moment. Chenoweth grew up in a divided political household in the Bible Belt so her reacting how she did is not a surprise to me particularly as she herself was a swing voter until right after Obama was elected. All of this is in her book.
Broadway Star Joined: 7/18/11
Soaring29 said: "What exactly does she need to apologize for? As awful as Kirk was, him being assassinated was a terrible moment. Chenoweth grew up in a divided political household in the Bible Belt so her reacting how she did is not a surprise to me particularly as she herself was a swing voter until right after Obama was elected. All of this is in her book."
Her upbringing and voting history aren’t the issue. She publicly praised someone whose rhetoric is harmful to the very communities she’s long aligned herself with. That’s why people expected clarification or an apology. When a public figure posts something that contradicts their stated values and then chooses silence, the message is simple: she meant it. The excuses you’re listing don’t change that.
Soaring29 said: "What exactly does she need to apologize for? As awful as Kirk was, him being assassinated was a terrible moment. Chenoweth grew up in a divided political household in the Bible Belt so her reacting how she did is not a surprise to me particularly as she herself was a swing voter until right after Obama was elected. All of this is in her book."
Kirk seemed to be okay with the concept of gun deaths:
“It’s worth it. I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. Nobody talks like this. They live in a complete alternate universe.” — Charlie Kirk
Videos