This Years Revivals, history in the making?

[jagfkb]

Posted: 4/4/08 at 3:29pm

Could the three outstanding revivals this year become long running hits now that all except Sunday have open ended runs? If so, how long could they run? Could Gypsy move to a smaller theatre and live a long run? Is it possible for Vivian Beaumont to stay open for years on end? Could Sunday transfer to a smaller theatre such as 1776 and The 39 Steps have?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/4/08 at 3:30pm

I agree that this is a great year for revivals, but what, exactly, would be historical about the situation you're proposing?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 4/4/08 at 3:33pm

The things that will "go down in theatrical history" about this season's revivals (in order of opening):

1. GREASE being the first (and probably only) American production to utalize an American Idol-like contest to choose the winners. (Legally Blonde is not included, as the choice comes down to Jerry Mitchell, not the American public.)

2. Patti LuPone's performance in GYPSY.

3. SOUTH PAFICIC will get a brief mention, for its being the first Broadway revival in 50-odd years.

[markymatt]

Posted: 4/4/08 at 3:34pm

Are you talking the Roundabout production of 1776 that moved from the Criterion to the Gershwin--a theatre almost four times bigger?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/4/08 at 3:35pm

That's not what I meant. The original post is about open-ended runs.

[jagfkb]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 7:22am

Well, what I mean by history, is that they could possibly survive long runs, like Chicago, or other revival of that nature. And 1776 moving to the Gershwin? Sorta what I mean, but in no way a theatre that large. I would mean a place like the Helen Hayes, or the Longrace, or maybe even the Walter Kerr.

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 10:22am

I doubt Sunday could transfer to a smaller theatre, seeing as how Studio 54 is pretty small (capacity-wise).

However, if it were to transfer, I don't know how well it would do. Unlike South Pacific, it's not a well-known American standard. It is basically subsisting on subscribers right now, and is doing well, but I really don't think it would stand a chance past its run at Studio 54.

But I understand what you mean, in that this season is an excellent season for revivals- we have had three really top-notch revivals of classics.

[chinkie azn jai]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 10:32am

Could this year's Gypsy revival survive without Patti? I don't see her staying with this show for that many years.

Updated On: 4/5/08 at 10:32 AM

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 10:34am

"Could this year's Gypsy revival survive without Patti?"

No.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 10:34am

Patti is contracted through January 2009, so I doubt we'll have to worry about that for some time.

[zooxanthellae]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 11:33am

It could survive if they brought in a big "name" person to take over after Patti left.

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 11:37am

I say we Weissler this show up, and we get Nicole Ritchie to replace Patti.

Just a suggestion...

[RyToast1]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 11:43am

bette midler!!!!!

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 1:18pm

Wouldn't it be weird to see "Patti Lupone Gypsy" without Patti Lupone? Would they have to change the title?

Updated On: 4/5/08 at 01:18 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 1:54pm

No, love, they would leave her name while someone else plays the part :S

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 4/5/08 at 2:20pm

I definitely wasn't being sarcastic. Nope, definitely not at all...