WATER FOR ELEPHANTS Broadway Previews — Page 2

First preview fun tidbits:

-Isabella McCalla gave a short speech/ after curtain shout out to the cast and crew making their debut tonight.

-A hilarious mishap occurred at the very end of the show when an ensemble member entered too early loud and proud with their line announcing the cab was here. Everyone in the scene just looked at him and just kept talking and he ran off. My husband didn’t even catch it was weird until 45 seconds later when he came on again to announce the cab was here. Audience lost it, in a good way and the actors played off it so well.

-There was a sequence where a knife was supposed to stab a cauliflower, but it failed twice before it was stabbed in a joking way. If it weren't for the reactions of the employees around me I would have thought it was written to go that way.

Overall thoughts:

-I sat furthest house right, first row of Rear Mezz. Marked partial view, nearly perfect view.

-The circus stunts and ensemble dancing make the show worth seeing. Some of it was truly unbelievable.

-Paul Alexander Nolan elevated the show every single time he was on the stage. He is the only person, save Isabella McCalla, who felt like they were irreplaceable.

-I wanted more from the set. My husband made the comment it needed to pick between “artsy sparse” and a spectacle because it felt kind of between the two. The lighting and costuming I really liked. And when the set worked, it really did. I just wanted a little….more

-the solos go on way too long. They stopped the show in its tracks, were not thrillingly sung or well written. They needed to be shortened at the very least.


-The comment above where it said the show was missing its emotional core sums up how I feel. I just didn’t care enough about the characters or even the animals to feel affected or moved. I saw the Notebook at 2pm and felt so many feelings. This left me feeling “meh”.


Tourists will enjoy it. Anyone will enjoy the stunts, the lighting, the dancing. It was a nice night out but it didn’t leave a strong impact of WOW. I may be in the minority because the audience was crazy for it. I am interested to see what changes they make in tightening it up and to hear more thoughts!!

Updated On: 2/25/24 at 11:55 PM

I was there tonight and loved it. I came in as a big fan of the book and left a big fan of the show. I liked everything about the show, the performers, the dancing, the creative staging and really loved the music too. Maybe knowing the story made it easier to appreciate. The audiance seemed to be loving it too - lots of applause throughout - and at one point, I realize I was sitting there watching with a smile on my face - happy to be watching and listening to something new and wonderful. I am not a professional in the business or a critic - Just a theatre lover who had a great time tonight. I think it will be very well recieved.

Updated On: 2/25/24 at 12:33 AM

If even Jordan didn’t like this, then it’s *very* doomed. Not a knock on your tastes, but when enthusiasm for the art form can’t even elevate a show, there’s not much hope.

NYTimes: ‘Water for Elephants’ Brings the Circus to Broadway

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/25/theater/water-for-elephants-circus-broadway.html?unlocked_article_code=1.YE0.NsjW.7pINsCv9OYQ9&smid=nytcore-android-share



From today's 2-part NYT A&L Spring Preview

It was the first preview. so let's give it a chance.

I'm certain there will be lots of changes and adjustments. However, the score will still be the score - and that unfortunetly is the weakest link.

I think we will see a few big changes in the book........

Sounds like the autograph hounds have been getting really aggressive at the stage door RE: Grant specifically

TicketBoy said: "it did not LOOK like $25m on stage. I think it could have a life in smaller productions."

Just to put things into perspective...

That $25M isn't just the physical production. It includes ALL the development work on the show and pretty much all costs incurred prior to the start of previews: workshops/readings/work sessions, rights acquisition, authors fees, enhancement for the Atlanta production, rehearsal & tech costs, any advertising/marketing that occurred prior to the start of previews, legal & admin expenses, $1M+ of contingency...etc. All that could easily account for 35-50% of the capitalization. Not to mention costs of goods & services & union labor for scenic & costume construction rising significantly compared to 10 years ago.

Something like the SWEENEY revival can cost $13M because, relatively speaking, the physical production isn't massive, they didn't take it out of town, didn't workshop it extensively, and the presence of a major star makes the advertising costs go a lot further.

Updated On: 2/25/24 at 12:25 PM

I was at Saturday’s first preview. Let me get this off my chest first. I for one am sick and tired of greedy producers in this post-pandemic world trying to pawn of their half-baked theatrical soufflés on a public that for the most part wouldn’t know a good musical from a pile of trash. “W4E” most decidedly is in the latter category. There are plenty of problems with this show. Chief among them is Pigpen Theatre’s score, which in no way rises to the level of great theater music. It’s folksy and forgettable for the most part — helped in no way by the fact that the greedy producers couldn’t pop for more than 12 musicians in the pit of the reported $25 million bomb. There isn’t a breakout great number in the entire affair. But boy, whoever had the bright idea to keep “Wild” in the second act aught to be put before the firing squad. It’s overlong and brings the show to a crashing halt. There really isn’t a decent song in Act 2, and unless that changes the show is doomed. And let’s talk about casting. Grant Gustin is a mistake. There’s no polite way to put it. He’s got no presence on stage and a weak singing voice. Isabelle McCalla is better but she’s got nothing to work with, including that ghastly “Wild” number. Gregg Edelman, god bless him, seemed to be having senior moment for the entire duration of the first preview. He needs help or else someone should politely show him the door. Sara Gettelfinger has presence galore, but she seems to have escaped from a production of “Gypsy” and landed in this turkey. I’m sure there will be tweaks and such to the show in the weeks to come. But nothing the creative team can do will fix this show at this point. The best they can do is hope that gullible audiences they are looking to lure will show up in sufficient numbers to keep this show on the boards for at least a few months. The good news is that a number of acrobatic cast members may have a future in Cirque de Soleil long after the final curtain has fallen on “W4E.”

I forgot to add that there was an opening night gift taped to the seats in an envelope. A cute beaded elephant bracelet!

The thing about the score that's a problem for me isn't the style or the catchiness (or not) of it, it's that multiple songs just say the same thing. It feels like there are 6 songs about "the traveling life!" and 4 songs about "The circus life!" and 7 songs about "I love the traveling circus life!" and then 3 songs about "I remember how much I miss the traveling circus life that those other people sang about 17 times". The guys who wrote the score are probably amazing songwriters. It just feels like these producers went looking for a group or band that they could sell in the same way Waitress was able to sell Sara - a pop writer making the move into theater - to appeal to the under 30 demographic. Problem is Sara worked her ass off to learn the craft as she went along - and talks all the time about how hard it was and how many songs she threw out because they didn't live up to the standard of how theater songs need to work - not just sound.

Also... the puppetry is a no-win situation. It's like what we can look forward to when Lion King rights get released to schools. After Lion King and War Horse and Life of Pi, you have to really reinvent your approach. And they just didn't with this. Maybe also the same with the circus stuff. It's like today the general public has seen at least one Cirque show and so everyone's eyes are adjusted to difficult tricks. It's how you present them and how you frame them and make them feel special that makes it work. Those two elements just feel like the creative team did not spend time searching for puppet designers and circus designers who understood theater and how to make their art feel worthy of the uniqueness of a musical.

But the cast is working hard and having fun - it seems. Gettlefinger looks like the one who rises to the level the creatives are trying for.

Shubert should use their leverage to get shows to have larger orchestras. If they don’t want to have 18 musicians in the Pitt, then they can’t have the theatre PERIOD. and they will get some other show in there. Bad Cinderella I believe had a small 6 piece combo in London, and then came in to the Imperial with 18.

Why would the Shubert Org care? They just want tenants, preferably long running. I agree with Ermengarde - the numbers are arbitrary. While I understand them, that many producers look for ways to save money instead of protect artistic integrity, it's arbirtray and based on house size - which means nothing for the variety of shows that exist.

Do I love a large and lush orchestra....yes, indeedy - but there are plenty of shows that don't need that.

Couldn’t they have gotten a show with a bigger orchestra to accommodate the union? Yeah Shubert put in Here Lies Love which was prepared to have 0 musicians obviously they don’t care but why go against The rules.