Weinstein in Secret negotiations with Morrison — Page 4

Outside of those involved in the spring workshop nobody has seen Matthew in the role. How do you know that he " adds little or nothing from an artistic standpoint" ?

Whoever is cast in the part will have the challenge and responsibility to perform well and entertain the viewers/critics. If the initial reviews and audience word of mouth is good than any previous bad biases that potential ticket buyers will have towards the actor ( eg disliking Will Schuester) will be subverted. Showbiz is incredibly fickle after all.

Updated On: 9/4/14 at 01:41 PM

Perhaps Jeremy just wanted to do the show in Boston, then move on. He hasn't done any Broadway since Newsies two years ago, and he left that show in less than six months. He does concerts occasionally, but he might want to focus on television and movies. That's how it seems, anyways.

Matthew is much more suited to the part, and much more age appropriate. He will attract big crowds due to Glee. I think people still watch that?

Also, the NY Post is sh*t and anyone who writes things like "Given the number of bodies floating in this show’s wake, I’ll be the guy wearing the inflatable-ducky swimming float." I mean.... I doubt any of this is true.

LOL. I'm not nitpicking anything. He left Newsies in less than six months. That's a fact.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Morrison takes over for Jordan, if for no other reason than that Weinstein is a big Hollywood producer, used to pushing big films for award season (practically winning Streep and Lawrence, among many others, some of their Oscars). Of course he's going to go for the starpower element. Not that Morrison is a "star," but he sure is closer to being one than Jordan. Not to mention, I think he'll do everything in his power to make sure this show, his first, will succeed. And maybe he thinks someone with a semi recognizable name/face will help.

I'm always fascinated with the "fairness" posts here, i.e. the appalling idea that someone replaced is treated unfairly, or an understudy must be granted performances (see Burns, Jackie) because they "deserve" a chance. Little in the live end of show business is as high stakes/high risk as a big musical (See Broadway, Bullets Over; Madison County, Bridges of). Whenever risks can be minimized, they are. The issue here is box office sales for a show without a built-in "it" factor. The title? Not really. Not without a Depp. So this show could use any help in the casting department that can be mustered. Jordan entered this project knowing full well he is expendable. That's a neutral biz reality, not a comment on his performance. Even if he's wonderful, he hasn't been associated with ticket sales, and in one case, "Bonnie and Clyde" proved his name was no help. Having seen Pasquale and O'Hara fail to pull in buyers -- and they are certainly as well liked as any stage performers working today -- one must assume this production is looking for something to make the first 6-9 months of the run profitable, even SRO. I don't know anyone who likes GLEE, but I also know it's made Morrison a semi-bankable actor, for a return to B'way. It's fair to this show to place the biggest draw in the leading role. If it's Morrison, great.

---

If Weinstein feels that he needs a "star" to push this show over the top, shouldn't he be aiming his sights a little higher than Morrison? It seems that there would be bigger stars available if he thought it was that important.

I'll have to admit that I find this whole soap opera intriguing but I have no idea what has been promised or not promised, or who is or is not being treated unfairly. I just find the chess game being played by Weinstein to be interesting. I thought it was interesting that he he chose to let Jennifer Hudson diva up his title song on the Tonys rather than let his leading man sing it in the context of the show. I thought it was interesting that opening night photos showed Weinstein posing with everyone but Jordan. I think it is interesting that Weinstein has not yet responded to Riedel's latest story about Morrison. And I think it is interesting that after more than a year of trying to find a distributor, The Last Five Years (starring Jordan) is suddenly snatched up by a Weinstein company for distribution and targeted for release shortly before the scheduled Broadway opening of Finding Neverland. I don't know what any of it means. I just think it is intriguing.

Updated On: 9/5/14 at 05:39 PM

Would Julian Ovenden who played the role here in the UK be considered a draw thanks to Downton. That's big in the States isn't it?

How about Jake Gyllenhaal ??? He's not afraid of Broadway and from the link below can carry a tune. Change up the whole dynamic and sell more tickets!
Jake Sings !

---

Would Julian Ovenden who played the role here in the UK be considered a draw thanks to Downton. That's big in the States isn't it?

It is, but I honestly don't think Ovenden made enough of an impact or had a big enough part on the show to be considered a draw, though I'd love to see him in the role. If Michelle Dockery were to replace Laura Michelle Kelly (I'm not suggesting by any means she should or would), that would be more of a draw to Downton fans, I think.

I think most people would concede that Morrison, as one of the stars of a popular TV show, has a higher profile with the general public than Jordan does, although Jordan's more recent expereience as a leading man gives him a solid Broadway fan base. But is Morrison enough of a draw to make a significant difference in ticket sales? There are certainly bigger TV stars out there, and bigger movie stars, and bigger Broadway stars. If Weinstein has determined that the show needs that kind of boost, why would he settle on Morrison without even exploring other options?

My own feeling is that everything that has happened up to this point has been orchestrated to put Weinstein in the strongest negotiating position, regardless of who he chooses. For that reason, I don't think anything is a done deal yet. And, the whole Morrison - Jordan debate may just be a smokescreen while Weinstein goes after a bigger star. Say what you will about Weinstein, but he is a shrewd businessman. Whatever is going on behind the scenes is designed to put Harvey in position to make the most money. Weinstein's behavior on this project thus far seems to indicate that loyalty or perceived obligation is not part of his thought process as he tries to make this show a hit, so if either Morrison or Jordan is counting on either of those things giving them an inside track for the part, they are pretty naive. But both of those guys have been swimming with these sharks for a few years now, so I doubt that anything catches them by surprise.

Why would any actor with a career of value want to a join a show whose prospects are questionable? It's not as if the actor in the role got amazing reviews even from the press that liked the show. This show is going to be sold on special effects and kid appeal not the performers. It might be a case of you just can't say no to Harvey. But I would weigh very heavily the thought of joining this ship in the shape it's in

---

Smash never got the ratings of Glee, but that being said, most people know Morrsion as "that guy". And if you thing The Last Five years is going to be a mainstream hit, you'd be seriously wrong.

The vast majority of the audience has LOVED FN. I've seen it twice where the audience erupted several times, and know at least 2 dozen people that have seen it, and out of those, only ONE has only thought "meh".

WILL it be successful on the Great White Way? I have no idea, but to assume it's going to tank is a bit premature.

---

If you showed the average person a picture of Matthew Morrison and a picture of Jeremy Jordan, Morrison would not be recognized by name, but would be accurately identified as "that guy from Glee." Jeremy Jordan, however, would be incorrectly identified by most people as being their cousin Judy's son-in-law, Todd.

People recognize Morrison to some degree. Jeremy Jordan doesn't have that yet. If this was being viewed with those two as the only people for the role and strictly as a business decision, Morrison would be the smarter financial choice.