Top Broadway Stars — Page 2

This whole thread confuses me...aren't Nathan Lane and Bernadette bigger box office draws on Broadway because of their outside work? Of course they are both huge theater stars with illustrious stage credits, but wouldn't the average tourist catching a show know Nathan Lane because of "The Birdcage" and Bernadette from her movie and tv appearances (or hell, even her Breyers commercials from back in the day)?

Updated On: 7/8/05 at 12:25 AM

Nathan Lane! He doesn't need movies anymore! He just needs Broderick to make $100,000 a week!

---

Updated On: 7/8/05 at 12:28 AM

The Frogs was a sold out engagement because of the Lincoln Center subscribers.

---

shneb...I know.

"All right - I give on the "non-Hollywood" - but I still say then that this disqualifies Bernadette because she HAS done Hollywood. Or are we not putting that qualifier on it?"

Both of you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm saying Broderick and SJP are mostly known because of their hollywod work, while Peters is known because she is a theatre star.

Be nice when I say this, but would anyone agree with me if I said, to an extent, Brian Stokes Mitchell? I mean, he's done minimal Hollywood stuff (Trapper John and Fresh Prince, that's about it), but in the theatre, he can just say "I'd like to do Man of La Mancha sometime," and it happens. And I know the first thing that comes to mind when I hear his name is, "I see his face..."


Of course, the second thing that comes to mind is, "What in the world ethnicity is he?" :)

---

The Frogs had attendance in the 80s and 90s for most of its run. Had it wanted to extend, because of another show booked at the Beaumont, it would have had to move to a commercial house which would have been a very expensive proposition.

Simply looking at the salaries that Broadway producers are willing to pay for them based on their perceived box office impact (all make at least $25 to 50K per week plus a percentage of box office), Bernadette Peters (who has never had a real film career), Nathan Lane (who is NOT a Hollywood star -- The Birdcage is the only film of his that did anything at the box office), Matthew Broderick (who's days as a Hollywood "name" are 20 years in the past -- put him above the title of a major film now and watch it flop immediately), and Bebe Neuwirth (a minor, but memorable player on "Cheers") are some of the few non-Hollywood stars who have a bit of clout at the box office. Simply looking at the insane advances that Lane and Broderick have generated for the "Odd Couple" revival ($20 million and counting) verifies this.

Man of La Mancha was a major flop at the box office, running only 9 months and losing its entire advance. Mitchell has no box office power at this point.

Perhaps the story would be different now after all those years on "Sex and the City" but the last time Sarah Jessica Parker headlined a show on Broadway -- "Once Upon a Mattress" -- it flopped after about six months.

---

Updated On: 7/8/05 at 02:55 AM

Just to give him his fair due, Nathan Lane was also in The Lion King, so he has a fair career in Hollywood, though no, he's not a "Hollywood star," but people know him. Of course you might have to come back to that argument after The Producers movie.


TO BE CONTINUED...

---

And just how many people out there in the hinterlands (that make up most of the Broadway ticket buyers) do you think know that Lane did a voice in "Lion King" and as a result of that and that alone are willing to pay $100 to see him do a show live. 10? 15?

Lane has paid his dues in over a dozen plays in the last 20 years and, like Peters, has done just enough tv guest spots and a couple of movies that non-theatre fans have a general notion of who he is. That's why they've become the rarest of rare creatures these days -- performers who's careers are 90+% devoted to stage work and yet have over the course of many years and several hit shows have gotten well enough known that they have actually developed a following who's willing to pay to see them on stage. God bless 'em.

---

Scuse me Kyle, but Nathan Lane was a stage performer way before he did film. And many people outside NY still don't know him that well from film. His primary career has been on the stage, as has Bernadette's.

There aren't many performers who are still focused on the stage, who do the little plays in the 100 seat theaters and the big plays and musicals and hearken back to the old days of stage stars like Merman. You can count them on one hand...and the new kids have a ways to go before they earn the title of Broadway legend from the volume and quality of the work they've done.

---

The reason Nathan Lane appeared in Lion King is the same reason

-Angela Lansbury and Jerry Orbach appeared in Beauty and the Beast

-Eddie Murphy appeared in Mulan

-Gilbert Godfried (sp?) appeared in Aladdin

-James Earl Jones appeared in The Lion King

Once again with The Lion King it would appear that Matthew and Nathan only have had their biggest film hit when working with each other.

---

They're all yesterday's news compared to Brooke Tansley.

WHEN CHITA RIVERA LEFT "KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN" AND VANESSA WILLIAMS TOOK OVER THE LEADING ROLE,DIRECTOR HAROLD PRINCE SAID THAT THE TICKET SALES WENT UP A 20%.
BROOKE SHIELDS ALSO RAISED THE BOX OFFICE SALES IN "WONDERFUL TOWN".

---

Ummmmm, Daly's and Lansbury's production certainly did flop. Lansbury's only ran for three months (Peters ran for over a year), in fact and Daly's never recouped. Merman's is the only production of Gypsy to return its investment (and according to sources, it only made a modest profit).

Gypsy has NEVER been a really big hit box office-wise on Broadway.

---

Updated On: 7/8/05 at 03:13 PM