The Lead Role vs the Star

[chinto1984]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 9:01pm

What are your thoughts that broadway has few stars. I mean like Audra McDonald, Kristen Chenoweth, Patti Lupone type caliber. Just their name draws an audience and that aura of their performance is kind of essantial in certain roles. There are good, talented leads on Broadway but star quality adds something to a show that can't be denied. Hope this wasn't too confusing.

[Pippin]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 9:09pm

oy.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 9:16pm

Broadway has a number of stars in this modern era. Among them, as you mentioned, McDonald, Chenoweth, LuPone.

Add Bernadette Peters, Liev Schreiber, Brian Dennehy, David Hyde Pierce, Michael Cerveris, Donna Murphy, Norbert Leo Butz, John Lithgow, Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick.

[musicaltheater1]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 9:22pm

Star: add to that...Ms. Lea Salonga. :)

[theaterkid1015]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 9:32pm

I'd love to see the name Tonya Pinkins on that list.


And, we can never forget our two reigning grande dames: Elaine Stritch and Carol Channing.

And, of course, Ms. Chita Rivera.

[ashbash1990]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 10:01pm

I wouldn't put Cheno even close to Patti and Audra... CHita belongs in that spot without a doubt...

[TabooPhan1]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 10:26pm

I think Cheno definitely qualifies, and is much more pleasant to watch/listen to than Patti Lupone. I do like Patti, but if you've ever listened to Glitter and Be Gay, I really think it's no contest...

I think Raul Esparza is well on his way to being considered a broadway star as well.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 10:28pm

Whatever you think of Chenoweth, she has star quality to spare. She isn't just a leading actress, when she is on stage (even if you find her to be untalented, annoying, one-trick pony, etc) she demands attention and she owns that stage.
I feel Donna Murphy, Audra McDonald, Tonya Pinkins (who I feel has yet to find the status that McDonald and Murphy have), and Christine Ebersole are the musical stars of their generation (and I'm thinking of LuPone and Peters as belonging to a different generation, which may be an error).
Of the younger crowd, I believe Sutton Foster (even if I find her lacking at times, i.e- FUNNY GIRL concert) has such a natural star power that she goes beyond being a simple lead. She is another one of those actresses that have star quality to spare.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 10/19/07 at 11:31pm

I don't know. For me to call someone a star, in addition to having a unique and wonderful talent, they HAVE to also be able to sell tickets on their name alone, which is something only a tiny handful of "names" can do. Even when the reviews are mixed to mediocre, people like Lane, Broderick, Jackman, LuPone (though she's hit-and-miss; GYPSY certainly was nowhere near a sellout hit), Lithgow (sort of -- RETREAT FROM MOSCOW lost its entire investment), David Hyde Pierce, Glenn Close, Ralph Fiennes (even FAITH HEALER recouped), and Vanessa Redgrave (maybe?) can usually carry a show to recoupment.

Audra (though it may not be fair to include her since she's rarely been the name-above-the-title star of a "for-profit" show), Chenoweth, Ebersole, Foster, Pinkins, Peters, Murphy, Esparza, Cerveris, Butz are all extraordinary talents, but have ANY of them ever starred in a show that wasn't a flop (or at least a show that ran successfully financially because their name was above the title for over a year)? I mean yeah, Butz and Chenoweth were IN WICKED, but few people bought tickets JUST to see them (and as the show continues to sell out year after year, they haven't been missed).

Plus folks who are primarily movie/tv/music stars like Julia Roberts, Denzel Washington, Harry Connick, Usher, P Diddy and Billy Crystal all proved that they had huge drawing power (while Julianne Moore, Christina Applegate, David Schwimmer, Angela Lansbury proved they didn't).

I mean think back to the golden age. Ethel Merman starred in 13 different shows and every one of them was a hit. And not all of them got the best reviews, but simply having Merman's name above the title was enough to guarantee a hit. There isn't anyone anywhere close to that record today (though Lane, at only 50, has a shot of maybe one day breaking it -- if you don't count the flops he had early in his career). Mary Martin, Carol Channing, Zero Mostel and few other also had several hits to their credit.

Anyway, yeah there are lots of wonderful actors who are talented enough to fill a lead role on Broadway, but very few of them can also fill a theater or create a line at the box office like stars from the past routinely did.

Updated On: 10/20/07 at 11:31 PM

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 10/20/07 at 4:05am

^^
"Anyway, yeah there are lots of wonderful actors who are talented enough to fill a lead role on Broadway, but very few of them can also fill a theater or create a line at the box office like stars frm the past routinely did." Margo

Do you think some of it is because Broadway has lost it's love affair with the Press Corp? It is rare when a new show can gain real stand-out Movie Cameras at its Premiere if at all? It didn't use to be the case years ago. Not any mainstream Magazines on the Supermarket shelves that give us articles about what is lighting up Broadway. A few have broken the mold but still even Wicked can draw a blank stare from your everyday Grocery Clerk.

I wish some of that would change. If anything to take the focus off of fading stars or "flash in the pan" performers. I still see some of the Glamor but most of that isn't around much anymore.

[Daniel2]

Posted: 10/22/07 at 5:56pm

I have to agree with you Margo. The business has changed in a major way since the 50s and even 60s--people don't really become "stars" on Broadway--they become stars on television and in movies. If Chenowith and McDonald's current TV shows take off they may be on their way to becoming stars but I don't think they're there yet--and it hurts me to say it because I do love them.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 10/22/07 at 6:31pm

It's funny. Bebe Neuwirth (another "name" who can usually cause a bump at the box office when she stars in a show) is a textbook case of what you talk about DanielM. She was a respected, but unknown triple threat back in the 80s, replacing in featured parts in shows like A CHORUS LINE and DANCIN', before getting a Featured Tony for playing Nicki in the Debbie Allen revival of SWEET CHARITY. She was certainly known and respected in theatre circles, but, since she was still unknown for the most part to the general public, that wasn't enough for her to secure lead roles on Broadway. Around that time she got an offer to go out to Hollywood to audition for the minor ensemble role of Lillith in the hit show "Cheers." Loving Broadway and dancing and singing, she had no desire to go and had to be convinced by her agent to take the gig.

Fast forward about seven years and all those years playing a small part on a hit tv show pay off. She returns to Broadway, this time in a starring role -- Lola in a revival of DAMN YANKEES. The ironic thing is that had she stayed in new York, paying her dues and building her stage resume, chances are that when it came time to cast that revival, her name wouldn't have been considered because in the eyes of the producers she probably wouldn't have been famous enough to entrust with such a big show. Doing "Cheers" allowed her to be able to sell tickets on her own name and as a result, come back to Broadway as a star and pick her own vehicles.

The opposite side of that coin is the story of the respected stage actress Elizabeth Ashley. She began her career on Broadway in the early 60s, winning a Tony for her debut in TAKE HER, SHE'S MINE and the next season creating the female lead in BAREFOOT IN THE PARK opposite Robert Redford. She continued having success on stage but eventually wound up out in LA, trying to achieve success in film and television. Although she worked constantly, she found a lot of her roles nowhere as fulfilling as her stage work and decided in the early 70s to move back to New York and focus more on the theatre (though she did pop back for tv work in between plays to pay the bills).

She did acclaimed revivals of CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF, as well as revival of Shaw and the hit AGNES OF GOD and again developed quite a reputation for her stage acting. However, in an interview she gave a few years ago, she complained that her focusing on NY theatre to the detriment of her film and tv work had actually hurt her ability to star the revival of several major plays on Broadway. She noted that she was no longer a "name" to the national public and as a result, producers were casting bigger names from film and tv in major roles (from Williams, Albee, O'Neill, etc...) that she felt she had paid her dues for and in order to play those roles she's had to go to regional houses around the country where being a "star" isn't quite as important as it is on Broadway. Ashley has said that, ironically, had she stayed in Hollywood back in the 70s and 80s and built up her national profile in tv and film, she'd have a much easier time of it now, landing the stage roles she's coveted playing all these years.

It's a tough business.

Updated On: 10/22/07 at 06:31 PM

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 10/22/07 at 6:54pm

Yeah, when I saw Ashley in Enchanted April, my mom got very excitedwhen she saw her name in the Playbill, and I had no idea who she was.

[Sandy in Sable]

Posted: 10/24/07 at 9:19pm

I'm still mad at myself for missing Elizabeth Ashley in Sweet Bird of Youth at the Shakespeare Theatre in D.C. There was an interesting interview with her on YouTube where Lucille is busting her Balls.