Was The Revival of Miss Saigon Considered a Failure?

[Dallas Theatre Fan]

Posted: 1/16/18 at 9:53pm

Miss Saigon is one of the most well known shows in the world and this revival never took off.

Throughout its run the grosses hovered between $550,000-$800,000, in fact the show only broke $1,000,000 four times and three of the times it happened it was this past holiday season.  It can probably be concluded that the show was rarely in the black and all the money invested was lost.

I know it was always was advertised as a limited run then it would embark on a national tour.  But, wouldn’t you think Cameron Mackintosh was planning on making the show an open-run once the show started to succeed in the box office.  I think that was the plan because there were never any rumbles of stop-clausing the show when the grosses started to fail in the BO in mid-summer.  

The tour is still on according to Dallas Summer Musicals new season but, will it sell well? If tourist didn’t see the show while it was on broadway why would they want to see it at their local touring theater?

I was in New York off and on for business throughout its run and on my free nights and I was in the mood to see a show Miss Saigon never crossed my mind when trying to find a last minute ticket.  That’s just my experience.  

Do y’all think the revival succeed or like me failed?

[nealb1]

Posted: 1/16/18 at 11:23pm

Yes, like you said, when this revival was first announced, it was for a limited run, prior to going on tour across the US - which is what happening now.  It was never planned to be an open ended run.  When large shows tour, many people already are subscribers in big cities such as Dallas that you listed - it's part of a season package that you buy.  Sure, people who don't subscribe to an entire season can see the show once single tickets go on sale. 

I saw the show twice - in May of last year shortly after it opened and just this past Friday night.  It was a fantastic production. 

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 1/16/18 at 11:47pm

I don't think CamMac was ever thinking it would turn a profit on Broadway. It playing on Broadway was more likely a marketing point for the tour. He can now tout it as "Direct from Broadway." This will likely help sell tickets to those who are not subscription holders. Miss Saigon and Les Mis are the type of shows that sell well to middle America, and that is likely where CamMac is planning on making his profit; if it is true that that is his goal, then it is too soon to call the revival a failure, because it has not yet served its purpose. That being said, the revival was most likely a flop, which is not really the same as being a failure.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 12:23am

It was awful across the board. But Eva was great. But these directors need to stop. 

[chernjam]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 12:32am

I think overall it was considered a failure.  Unlike Les Miz which was well received - did huge business on broadway, recouped on broadway (not sure if it was announced as limited run and then extended or what) but after all that then it went on tour, that was not the case here for Miss Saigon.  Which is bizarre considering Cameron Mackintosh is usually a much savvier producer.  To pick the Broadway Theatre for the revival - that massive house where the original production ran - just begged people to compare it to the original.  And if you've designed the revival for an economically viable tour, it's going to pale in comparison.

On top of that, I think the popularity of Miss Saigon is a bit over hyped by Mackintosh and his company.  

[Princeton2]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 12:42am

Failure seems a harsh word, disappointment maybe more accurate. The London production was expected to run for years but sales quickly dropped off. And although publicly Broadway was a limited run when they were first planning revival you can bet Broadway was in it's sights for a longer run. When London disappointed they played safe. No way would Cameron have pulled it if the show has been a big hit on broadway

I think Miss Saigons issue is although it has a loyal fan base, once you get past that it just hasn't broken into the wider public conscious and pop culture like les mis has

[HogansHero]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 12:48am

It was an unmitigated flop. And it was an unmitigated disappointment. Whether it was a failure is TBD.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 12:55am

Yes, it was a financial flop, but I thought it was a truly wonderful production. People who say the show looked like it was "made to tour" don't know what they're talking about; it was a massive, full-scale, lavish Broadway show. Eva Noblezada's performance was arguably the greatest of a musical actress in the 2016-2017 season. If Bette wasn't doing her thing, I think Eva would have had a real shot at the gold. She was that good. Jon Jon Briones' performance was also wildly overlooked this season. Was this revival artistically innovative or game-changing? No. But it was a top-notch mounting of a fantastic show.

I think it'll do well on tour. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 1:37am

Wholeheartedly disagree. The entire thing was a massive bore and a mistake. It was a bomb. Eva was good, but I wouldn't give her a Tony. Everyone was incredibly forgettable. And the direction/design was awful. The entire thing was a mistake.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 6:41am

chernjam said: "On top of that, I think the popularity of Miss Saigon is a bit over hyped by Mackintosh and his company."

I think the popularity of this show worldwide is a bit underestimated by you.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 6:53am

BroadwayConcierge said: "Yes, it was a financial flop, but I thought it was a truly wonderful production. People who say the show looked like it was"made to tour" don't know what they're talking about; it was a massive, full-scale, lavish Broadway show. Eva Noblezada's performance was arguably the greatest of a musical actress in the 2016-2017 season. If Bette wasn't doing her thing, I think Eva would have had a real shot at the gold. She was that good. Jon Jon Briones' performance was also wildly overlooked this season. Was this revival artistically innovative or game-changing?No. But it was a top-notch mountingof a fantastic show.

I think it'll do well on tour."

I agree. The problem lies in the marketing of this show from the past 20 years. Although the show has a huge fanbase world wide, a whole new generation has no idea what Miss Saigon is. They have done a great job at hiding this show since the year 1999. Especially in the USA.  It's only since the London revival that people get to know the show again and for the first time in history, around 2014, actually (quality) video clips started to surface on the internet and in the world. Before that it was always kind of secretive. I only had my vhs bootleg and 2 cd recordings since 1989.

Shows like Phantom have the opposite. They are really out there. That's what the tourists choose. 

I do think the director should not make it too speak/talk-ish, because that feels like a style clash with the material. I also think the director of the London revival and the Broadway production did not understand many scenes in the 2nd act.

 

 

 

Updated On: 1/17/18 at 06:53 AM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 7:09am

You are comparing apples and oranges. People know Phantom because it's still running and still touring.

I think it has far more to do with it being unproducible at colleges, high schools and community theaters since, under most situations few of them have the necessary people to cast. That's what kept Oklahoma, West Side Story, etc alive.

Updated On: 1/17/18 at 07:09 AM

[Gizmo6]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 7:21am

I saw it in London I don't understand why Connor is directing all these revivals. His work is below par. 

[Rainah]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 7:28am

People just don't want to go see Miss Saigon. That's it. The grosses were ridiculously low

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 7:34am

If it’s announced as part of the Pittsburgh 2018/2019 season I most definitely plan on seeing this. Depending on the lineup for the rest of the season I may buy season tickets as well, as the shows already announced at some of the other venues, and the ones mentioned in the “2018/2019 shows that may be touring thread”, have me VERY excited!

Updated On: 1/17/18 at 07:34 AM

[Lot666]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 7:55am

BroadwayConcierge said: "People who say the show looked like it was" made to tour" don't know what they're talking about; it was a massive, full-scale, lavish Broadway show."

Agreed; I thought the staging was very impressive. I saw the revival once in London and three times on Broadway and my only real complaint was the tendency of several characters to continually switch back and forth between singing and talking.

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 8:46am

Well, not everyone can afford to go to New York, let alone see a Broadway show. I think part of the reason why the most recent revival of Les Misérables did better was because they were just coming off the success of the film version, where more people got some exposure with the property.

Miss Saigon on the other hand, all it had was the Fathom Event from the fall of 2016. While it did do really well there, it was a little more limiting given that it was a Fathom Event.

[Babe_Williams]

Posted: 1/17/18 at 3:45pm

I always thought that they made a mistake in not casting a bigger name to play Chris. someone who would attract younger audiences. 

[Dave28282]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 7:48am

Lot666 said: "Agreed; I thought the staging was very impressive. I saw the revival once in London and three times on Broadway and my only real complaint was the tendency of several characters to continually switch back and forth between singing and talking."

This is a real problem and can't be mentioned enough. There seems to be this misunderstanding that that makes it more raw and real. It does not. Raw emotion lies in the opposite in this artform.

The London revival was already pushing this, the Broadway revival went too far and became unwatchable at times.

This rule applies to the arform in theatre as well as on film. Look at what they did with Les Mis in the filmed version on a set, also called movie. "Speaking 5 words, now.......come.....on.......ladies....settle.....and then use a 7 second vibrato on the word "doooooooooown" is NOT raw and real. It's fake and not sincere. Singing the line in a natural and organic way with the exact right emphasis on certain words, and just as important, no emphasis on the wrong words, feels much more organic and truthful. "Now come on ladies, settle down" should be sung organically and the word "down" should be kept short of course, because that feels more natural in this line, as any person who understand this language could tell, except Hugh Jackman and Tom Hooper) in this case is the way to go. (10th anniversary and 25th anniversary film).

Sabotaging the project by desperately diconnecting spoken words from sung words constantly is a disgrace. It makes it a Broadway parody.


 

Updated On: 1/18/18 at 07:48 AM

[MannPhan24601]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 9:21am

Didn't the Les Mis revivial close just to open this?(Even though TGC was the Imperial's next tennant). I saw  the LM revival on Broadway and I just saw it on tour in Philly a few days ago!

[evic]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 10:38am

Like the flop that was the revival of Cats, no one was interested in seeing it.  Originally, it received huge publicity because there was a helicopter on stage.  Imho it is a very boring show.  Both shows are head scratchers on how long they originally ran. I would say that combined , they lost 20 million which is a drop considering how much they have made over the years..  .

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 10:44am

No, but like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory Miss Saigon captivated the children, thus making it a success in another way......

[newintown]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 10:46am

I, too, never understood the enthusiasm for Miss Saigon, an inert pop-operetta in which two-dimensional characters tend to stand still and sing inane, soppy lyrics set to Composition 101 music, and with a book that has less insight into human relationships and the politics of the Vietnam situation than a Hallmark greeting card. This solemn bore of a show is interrupted from time to time by a cardboard yet showy villain who embodies much of the same disgusting vices as our current President; strangely, audiences mindlessly and inexplicably seem to identify most with this grotesque, driven solely by greed and love of material consumption.

[Lot666]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 10:48am

evic said: "Like the flop that was the revival of Cats, no one was interested in seeing it. Originally, it received huge publicity because there was a helicopter on stage. Imho itis a very boring show. "

I'm always amazed when people make absolute, declarative statements like "no one was interested in seeing it", and then say "imho". There's nothing "humble" about your opinion as written, evic. Your assessment is obviously incorrect, as I (along with many others, just on this board) was very interested in seeing Miss Saigon, and not just because "there was a helicopter on stage".

Updated On: 1/18/18 at 10:48 AM

[Dave28282]

Posted: 1/18/18 at 11:33am

newintown said: "I, too, never understood the enthusiasm forMiss Saigon,.............

....less insight into human relationships than a Hallmark greeting card.....

This solemnbore of a show is interrupted from time to time by a cardboard yet showyvillain who embodies much of the same disgusting vices as our current President;strangely, audiences mindlessly and inexplicably seem to identify most with this grotesque, driven solely bygreed and love of material consumption."

It's clear that there is a lot you don't understand. I would suggest to watch the show first before you talk. If you miss all these points and layers if you have seen the show, then our worlds are too far apart to even start a discussion.

 

Updated On: 1/18/18 at 11:33 AM