Today's Riedel: Scott Rudin pulls plug on Clybourne Park

[theatreguy]

Posted: 1/31/12 at 11:43pm

Scott Rudin has pulled out of producing Clybourne Park due to a disagreement with playwright Bruce Norris.

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/the_wrath_of_rudin_2FsRNIorYvtJGww4L432tK

Updated On: 1/31/12 at 11:43 PM

[CapnHook]

Posted: 1/31/12 at 11:51pm

I'm betting this will either be resolved or a new producer (or set of producers) will swoop in and take this one (surely the latter). It's a Pulitzer-winner, it already has a theater (key!), it already has a cast...I'd say it wouldn't be too difficult to get investors to quickly say "yes."

It's a shame, but based on what we know from Riedel's article, you can't blame Rudin. (Then again, there are always two sides to the story...)

[Jonwo]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:02am

I imagine either a new producer or producers come in or it's resolved with an apology from Norris. It's a little drastic to pull a production to spite the playwright especially as people's livelyhood will be affected.

[PlayItAgain]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:44am

thats so so so wild

[RUkiddingme]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:45am

The show isn't on sale?

I wonder what color they will paint Blair Underwood's dressing room?

[Smaxie]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:59am

Streetcar already has the Broadhurst.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 11:06am

This is so dissapointing. The show is smart, wickedly funny and thought provoking led by an extraordinary ensemble cast. It belongs on Broadway

I do hope that an equally smart producer picks up the show and brings it to Broadway.

This could win the Tony for Best Play

Anyone have any add'l inside word on how this all happened?

[RippedMan]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 11:20am

Yeah that's crazy. I was really looking forward to this one.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 11:29am

Paging Sons of the Prophet. Would Sons of the Prophet please step forward?

[Brick]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 11:57am

Wow.

What's a bit strange is how he pulled the plug because of a pull-out from another project. BUT I've done many a project simply because it was not the time to be saying 'No' to that person. That is, if I wanted them to keep me on a later project I coveted.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:02pm

Well, at least the way Riedel puts it (which might be inaccurate), the issue also has to do with the way in which Norris left the project. It sounds like a real shame, as someone who dreams of being a working writer, it seems crazy to imagine having Scott Rudin on your side and doing something like this. There's probably more to the story though.

[AC126748]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:09pm

Bruce Norris is known for being something of a loose cannon. See the linked article. If we're judging from past behavior, Riedel's scenario doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility.
http://nymag.com/arts/theater/features/63769/

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:15pm

Thanks for the link, AC. Part of me wants to give him credit for such an unapologetic persona, but in my line of work I come across a lot of people like that, and at the end of the day, they usually just tend to come off as tools (and he doesn't even get points for being so very attractive in the picture).

[Wildcard]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:31pm

Well, the articles from NY Post and NY Mag have been enough to dissuade me from wanting to see Clybourne Park. I don't care how good the play might be, I don't want to add to the playwright's ego.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 12:47pm

Once again, Reidel writes a "piece" slamming creative people and, once again, people are led like sheep into buying what he sells without so much as one thought to the contrary.

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 2:12pm

Just curious, but what are the odds of finding new producers/funding at this stage of the game? I feel for everyone involved with the production who are waiting for a Broadway angel to rescue them, basically. from rC in Austin, Texas

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 2:28pm

I'm always surprised at how many people keep bringing up sons of the prophet every time there could be a chance of an empty theatre. I thought that show was one of the worst and most boring shows I've ever seen. Couldn't wait to get out of the theatre when I saw it. It was like a poorly written sitcom that would have been cancelled on tv after the first episode had aired.

Updated On: 2/1/12 at 02:28 PM

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 2:40pm

If Reidel is to be believed (big "if" IMO), I don't see that Rudin has behaved any better than Norris. Rudin is worse, actually, because he KNEW he was potentially putting people out of work; Norris was merely withdrawing from a role and incidentally providing work for somebody else.

Now it may be that Rudin just found Norris so impossible to work with that he (Rudin) couldn't figure out how to produce the play. But since as usual Reidel couldn't be bothered to do any serious reporting, we don't know.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 2:50pm

I would love to be in one of Norris' plays.

And I could also imagine screaming at him 'ALL PLAYWRIGHTS SHOULD BE DEAD FOR 300 YEARS!'

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 4:11pm

Gaveston2:

Who the hell cares which was "acting any better"? Norris had a lot more to lose than Rudin, and if Riedel was right: Norris was the loser in the end! The collateral damage for both parties was "potentially putting people out of work." Neither was worse in that regard. Put simply, Norris looks more the fool by (potentially) losing out on a Broadway transfer of his play and the production of his other plays by Rudin's company.

...his bad.

As for Riedel not doing any "serious reporting": the man is not Bob Woodward and has never claimed to be. He is a Broadway news correspondent who barely rises to the level of a feature writer. That said, he IS entertaining and generally accurate. Let's see what type of distinguished reporting you could do, in 700 words or less, two days a week, on a subject dismissed by most media outlets.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 4:17pm

And not to sound too much like the thread A-H0le...but if the story is true, I don't blame Rudin in the least. Contract negotiations are contract negotiations: they inevitably affect more than the parties to the agreement. Both knew what was at stake when making their respective decisions.

If Norris' conduct was, as described, I would have done the exact same.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 5:39pm

Play Esq., I don't think you're the "thread A-hole", as you put it, but the last time I checked, either party in a negotiation is free to withdraw for any reason until a signed agreement is reached.

Was it stupid of Norris to piss off somebody with Rudin's power? Probably, but that remains Norris' right.

My point was that Riedel and other posters seem so quick to blame Norris, when we know for a fact that Rudin's behavior was childish (if Riedel's report is at all accurate). Why Norris dropped out of the TV show isn't reported. For all we know, the protracted negotiations made it clear to Norris that he is ill-suited for the rigors of series television. Maybe he was doing everyone, Rudin included, a favor.

[AC126748]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 5:44pm

Here is Norris' statement as to why he left The Corrections:

Jonathan Franzen, Noah Baumbach and Scott Rudin are three of the most talented people working today, and I was honored to be considered for ‘The Corrections,’ which I’m sure will be a fantastic and successful series. At this moment, however, I feel my priority needs to be writing rather than acting, and so I’ve declined, regretfully, to join them on the project. I wish all success to all the various parties involved and hope to cross paths with them again in the future.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 5:47pm

^^^

Gee, what a jerk!

(Seriously, maybe Norris is. But I would think Rudin would rather a candidate for a recurring role decide to drop out BEFORE the pilot is filmed.)

[winston89]

Posted: 2/1/12 at 9:07pm

I can't believe that anyone is taking anything Ridel says with any grain of truth. This man is not at all close to accurate in anything that he reports and does a great job of back peddling when he gets egg on his face.

Remember how he said that the revival of Hair was never going to end up opening? Or how Spider-Man wouldn't open either? What about the time that he had said that the revival of Porgy and Bess was going to drown in Boston Harbor and not see the light of day on Broadway? Clearly, as we all know, those are things that Riedel was incorrect about. Things that he said wouldn't happen and did.

Sure, if he was wrong on a couple of things here and there then I would not think anything of it. However, considering that he was wrong on at least three big events, then I am not sure if I can trust him. Also, considering that he works for The Post makes it hard to trust him as well.