WSS past revivals flop?

[C is for Company]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:43pm

I was bored and looking at IBDB credits for WSS and stumbled upon a fact I had never known of the 3 revivals or so it seemed of the show and noticed each had ran like less than a year, more like half a year. Does anybody know more on the matter? Perhaps bad choreography, bad something or other that kept audiences away from such a beloved show?

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:44pm

Perhaps they were limited runs and not open ended?

[chinkie azn jai]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:47pm

I don't think bad choreography would be a factor since [I think] they have to use Jerome Robbin's original choreography

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:49pm

I'm only aware of TWO revivals: the one at the NYS Theater at Lincoln Center that starred Victoria Mallory and Kurt Peterson. The other was at the Minskoff that starred Josie DeGuzman. Both were limited runs.

Wait a minute...the original production toured and then came back to Broadway. Could that count at the third?

[C is for Company]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:51pm

Ok lol thats what confused me. They had 4 runs listed and the first two said [Original cast] and it threw me off. So yeah I guess there were only two official revivals. I guess they could be limited runs but darn who the hell makes WSS limited run!

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:56pm

The first "revival" wasn't really a revival but just a return engagement of the original production for a few months. Shows would often tour the country for a while right after closing and then return to Broadway for a few months in those days. It wasn't a flop.

The second "revival" was at City Center which was known for limited engagement revivals of Broadway hits back then. Revivals on Broadway were still a rarity in those days (and continued to be until the 80s), but City Center did them in short runs. It ran for less than a month which was typical for City Center shows (and realize that the previous production was only 4 years before).

The only real revival the show has ever had on Broadway was the 1980 one starring Debbie Allen. As I recall the reviews were mixed for the leads (who were criticized for being too bland), raves for Allen and the score and choreography. I suspect it didn't help that the show was booked that barn the Minskoff. It only ran the better part of a year so it probably didn't recoup.

Updated On: 12/1/05 at 07:56 PM

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:57pm

I saw both revivals. The Lincoln Center version was quite good, but another musical was booked into the theater (it was part of the now defunct Music Theater of Lincoln Center). The Josie DeGuzman version wasn't well cast. There was no chemistry between Tony and Maria and the male dancers looked too gay to be members of street gangs. It deserved to close early.

[C is for Company]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:07pm

Thats sad when revivals shame their predecessors, despite the fact that almost all revived shows arent as good as the original. Such a good show disgraced is a shame. Thanks for the rundown margo and the other comments provided on the subject

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 10:33pm

The revival of NO, NO NANETTE was much better than the original--and ran longer. IRENE was also a terrific show (for its ilk) and CABARET was sensational. Don't put down revivals.

[C is for Company]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 11:34pm

I personally have not one thing against them, but it seems that that is the current and most common perception of revivals, usually people are disappointed becuase they either saw the original which left them with an irreplaceable memory or that it was not what they had pictured it to be like. However, I mostly wind up seeing great shows because of revivals:pacific overtures, chicago, assassins, sweet charity, sweeney todd, and la cage. I loved those productions very much(except chicago) and without them I would not have had the pleasure of seeing some legendary musicals.