The Graffiti on the Nederlander Theater- Page 6

[suicidalmickeymouse]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 11:38am

Okay, thanks. Still in disbelief.

THe sad part is its going to be filled back up with grafitti again very, very soon.

Thanks again for the pictures.

Updated On: 4/18/08 at 11:38 AM

[viola13]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 9:31pm

So the Nederlander stayed clean for a grand total of three days. Apparently people have started writing on it again, and when my friend asked them why they were writing on it, when the theater had clearly painted over the old graffiti, the people responded with, "well, the producers like it, and just painted over it because people were writing over each other's messages. They want the whole thing covered by closing." Or something to that effect. *HEADDESK* Why is there so much stupidity in this world?

[Mattt]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 9:37pm

Do they need a gaurd or something? I think they need to assign someone the babysit the children and prevent them from writing on the walls anymore. Armed with a gun and everything. I am just kidding, but it seriously, it's a thought...

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 9:40pm

Um. If they want the "whole thing" covered by closing, they would have just left it as is instead of making fans "start over" now.

Did your friend ask when they spoke to the producers personally to get this message? Because lord knows the producers haven't stopped by the Nederlander in months. The front of the house staff would never relay that message either. If anything, these idiot fans made up with their own conclusion to facilitate what THEY want.

[thatgirl712]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 2:39pm

I wholeheartedly agree. What a shame.

[verynewyorkcurious]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 2:46pm

They can't be stopped. Obviously it looks better without, but they can't monitor people at all hours, making sure they don't write anything. They should just leave it until they take the marquee/signs down.

[suicidalmickeymouse]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 2:48pm

Damn it. I like it so much better clean!

[Kasie]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 2:49pm

I agree newyork, it can't be stopped. They will just keep doing it.

Those rentheads will do anything to make sure people know that "ADAM AND ANTHONY ARE LIKE TOTALLY AHHHMAAAZING! LIKE OMG!YAY FOR MARIJUANA!"


Updated On: 4/18/08 at 02:49 PM

[broadwayrob]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 5:55pm

I just think it's funny because without Rent I think that theater would still be vacant like it was for SEVERAL years.

Desecrating a Broadway house? HA. I think it's more sad that a Broadway house sat empty for so long.

Food for thought

[WickedBoy2]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 6:00pm

Times have changed since Rent opened and i think after the re-fit the Nederlander will again be on the Broadway map

[winston89]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 9:46pm

Here is a logical question.

If the producers want the writing on the walls there don't you think that they wouldn't have paid money to clean it up?

It just amazes me that there are people that are that dense and just stupid to think that the producers wanted people to start from scratch so they spent the money to re paint the entire thing?? It just baffles me to no end.

I agree with Wickedboy. That 41st is no where near as sketchy as it was when Rent opened there. There is the new New York Times building and an NY sports club and a hotel and a couple of other things.

At times I do wonder if that theatre will get lost in the same drift as the theatres that are considered to be "on the wrong side of Broadway" are. (The Belasco, The Court, and the Lyceum) In that it is out of most peoples line of sight and no one sees them or knows where they are. And that is a factor that sometimes considered for a bad run at the three theatres mentioned.

Part of me thinks that if it wasn't for Rent then the Nederlander would still not have been used for an even longer time and who knows what would have happened to that theatre. And that Rent showed producers that you can produce a show with a good healthy run in that theatre.

Who knows what will happen. Only time will tell. I could be right either way.

[tonio]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 12:40am

A few points here.

The producers don't own the theatre-has it ever occurred to any of the people who are upset that the horrid graffiti is gone, that the owners of the building might have requested the stuff be painted over. They want to get the space leased out as soon as they can effect repairs and renovations. If i was shopping for a space with my new Broadway show then I might look askance at the filthy walls and look elsewhere.

Secondly, the writing started going up shortly before Adam and Anthony came back, and exelerated during their run. This is clearly not "Two and a half years ago". The Producers had decided to just let it ride, as long as it wasn't offensive, since it is nearly impossible to police the walls 24/7. Then, in the last few weeks, as space filled up, some stupid fools took it upon themselves to deface the photos of the OBC. This, more then the building, I find the most disturbing. The sense of entitlement here is just shocking.

The front of house staff can't be in front 24/7/365. The lobby folks running the lottery can't stand out front during the sign up period and stop everyone writing on the walls. I have seen people writing on the walls at all hours of the daytime and after the show. IS the theatre supposed to hire full time security to keep people from defacing the building?

Clearly, I hate the graffiti and I am so glad it s gone. I have hated the fact that people felt the need to deface my place of employment. Get over it folks, the new paint is,supposedly, graffiti proof and I am sure they will be far more vigilant about removing writing. Just stop. The show is closing, find some other creative way to display your grief.

[antiandrewx]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 12:49am

But the graffiti DID start during the Fall of 2006. It just became more apparent when Adam and Anthony were there people, like you said, more people were there to graffiti it. It wasn't out of control when it first started, but it did start sometime during Fall of '06.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 12:53am

Updated On: 5/8/09 at 12:53 AM

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 1:14am

tonio, did you even read the thread before posting? No one here is upset about the graffiti being painted over.


Secondly, the writing started going up shortly before Adam and Anthony came back, and exelerated during their run. This is clearly not "Two and a half years ago".

Not true. As antiandrew said, it started in 2006. I remember one of the first things written on the wall was "Roger was here" with a chibi face.

[tonio]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 9:23am

orangeskittles-I did, in fact, read the many posts prior to posting. I know that quite a few people are not at all worried that the graffiti is gone, they are happy as well. My post was directed at the folks who are upset...whether they posted directly on this thread or not.

I think we are splitting hairs about timing here. I work at the theatre and never saw a bit of writing on the theatre until shortly before A&A arrived. Those who do the lottery regularly and who sit on the steps I am sure could speak more clearly to the hidden nooks and crannies. We, at the theatre didn't notice until much later then 2006. An argument had been made as to why, if the Producers hated it, did they leave it up for 2 1/2 years-I was addressing that point.

As for not finding the house appealing if it is covered in graffiti-I stand by my statement there too. I know that the Nederlanders have had many engineers and architect types around the theatre for weeks now. Their intention is to completely overhaul the place and return it to "it's 1920's splendor". I truly believe that the removal of the writing is in direct correlation to that beginning endevour. The Nederlander will be a hot commodity once it is refurbished. It is the perfect size for a musical, so yes, it will be up for grabs constantly. However, in it's present state, I would be nervous about committing to rent it (no pun intended) for a future project.

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 12:22pm

"But the graffiti DID start during the Fall of 2006. It just became more apparent when Adam and Anthony were there people, like you said, more people were there to graffiti it. It wasn't out of control when it first started, but it did start sometime during Fall of '06."

well its not that it became more apparent... there was more of it. Sure there was a little note here and there and of course that was bad but it what they are wiping away wouldn't really be 2 and a half years WORTH of graffiti...

that's like me saying I've seen rent X amount of times in the course of 8 and a half years. Yes, I saw it in 2000 when i was 11, but i didnt see it again until 2006, so that wouldn't really be exactly accurate.

Updated On: 4/19/08 at 12:22 PM

[winston89]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 1:26pm

tonio,

it is up to the producers of Rent and not the Nederlanders to re paint the walls after the graffiti started. That is what the restoration fees on our tickets are for. When a producer rents a theatre for a show and alters the building in anyway it is the job of the producer to fix it up. So, in this regard it would be up to the producers of the show to re paint the wall and not the owners of the theatre.

[erinrebecca]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 1:32pm

Winston, it's probably best that you stop trying to give legal advice.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 4/19/08 at 1:33pm

Winston, I think what Tonio is saying is that, even if the producers had to pay to repaint the walls, the decision to repaint was the owners'. They are the owners, after all, and they can require the producers to use the restoration fees to repaint.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 4/20/08 at 1:09am

I was curious and walked by the Nederlander today. This is what I saw.

At least the walls are clean, I guess.

[winston89]

Posted: 4/20/08 at 4:21am

I know that when a producer gets a theatre for a show they just get an empty building and it is up to the producer to fill it up with the sets and all that. And, when a show leaves it is up to the producer to bring back the theatre to the way that they found it and the producers get the money for that through restoration fees that are attached to each ticket we buy. I don't understand how that would constitute as giving out legal advice erinrebecca.


I don't understand the logic in having the owner of the theatre force the producers to use their money for restoration fees to clean up the wall. It would be like an owner of an apartment building would want to re carpet the hallways on your floor and saying that you should pay for it with your money because you live there. As oppose to the producers using their money because they want to fix it.

[suicidalmickeymouse]

Posted: 4/20/08 at 9:54am

ICK. Why can't they stop?

If they posted a sign that said no graffiti, they'd graffiti all over it.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 4/20/08 at 10:26am

Winston, bad analogy. You don't rent the hallway of your building.

It would be more like the owner of the building demanding that you pay your own money (or, more likely, forfeit your security deposit) to fix a hole in your apartment wall because your idiot friend threw something at it. That happens all the time and is completely legal.

[winston89]

Posted: 4/20/08 at 12:23pm

I think that to prove my point it was a good analogy.

I was trying to say that if it is something that the producers have a problem with then why not let the producers not care about it until they have to pay to fix up the theatre. And if the owners of the theatre don't like it they as the owners can have it cleaned up without talking to the producers and using their money.

Yes, this happens a lot where the owners get money from the tenants of a building just because they don't feel like footing the bill on something that they should foot the bill for.