What Is The Cheapest Broadway Musical Ever?- Page 2

[itsjustmejonhotmailcom]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 2:11am

whatever2 said: "surely the original 'Titanic' has to be a contender?? The recent revival at DC's Signature Theatre did full justice to the gorgeous score, but my high school theatre department turned out better sets than thatBroadway production-- and i graduated in 1979!!!"

Titanic was many things, but cheap it was not. With a cast of 42 (!) and an orchestra of 30 (!) and a high-tech and complicated-for-its-time set that tilted and "sank", Titanic must have had a large weekly operating cost. It was capitalized at $10M, which was substantial in 1997.

[whatever2]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 9:14am

@itsjustmejon: you're right; i was focused on the overuse of underwhelming drops in place of actual sets, not the total nut. i do also remember the tech was supposed to be ground-breaking for its time, esp the final sinking; the night i saw it the audience giggled. like i said, gorgeous music, but the physical production just didn't do it justice -- hence, in my mind "cheap."

i remember it did well at the Tonys, too, so what do i know ... but when i saw the DC revival i couldn't help thinking how much better-served the music was by the (more) compelling production. maybe "cheap' isn't always about money??

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 11:59am

Title of Show had that fun moment at the end where the set was brought up into the rafters. That might have made it slightly more expensive to run than Story of My Life.

Come From Away is deceptively small. Still a sizable cast and a turntable.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 12:06pm

SouthernCakes said: "Title of Show had that fun moment at the end where the set was brought up into the rafters. That might have made it slightly more expensive to run than Story of My Life."

 

I would guess that an effect like that would have only a small impact on the weekly running cost, but a more noticeable impact on the capitalization (and when I say "noticeable impact" I mean that only for this context, where we're deliberately looking at relatively minute costs and comparing them against other minute costs) 

 

[Tag]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 1:01pm

SouthernCakes said: "Title of Show had that fun moment at the end where the set was brought up into the rafters. That might have made it slightly more expensive to run than Story of My Life."

Just because you aren't flying something doesn't necessarily make it cheaper.  There are still IA house crew minimums and they may still have to pay a flyman, regardless of if he's used. (similar to orchestra size minimums, you still have to pay the musicians even if they don't have a part for them) 

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 2:39pm

You always need a flyman. Just because something doesn't move during the show you still need someone there for any maintenance that needs to happen during preset, such as when a lamp blows on the lighting rig.

[Wee Thomas2]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 2:41pm

Mike Tyson: Undisputed Truth

 

What did they pay Iron Mike?

 

or Shatner's World.  Or one of the Birbiglia shows that didn't have all that stuff falling from the "rafters"

[JBroadway]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 2:49pm

Wee Thomas2 said: "Mike Tyson: Undisputed Truth



What did they pay Iron Mike?



or Shatner's World. Or one of the Birbiglia shows that didn't have all that stuff falling from the "rafters""

 

I don't believe any of those were musicals. 

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 6:06pm

Once Godspell transferred uptown in '76, it couldn't have been that expensive.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 6:17pm

This is kind of a silly conversation if inflation and the union rules of that specific year are not being factored in. There's also development costs and advances. But TITLE OF SHOW would probably make the list after inflation is adjusted.

[Wee Thomas2]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 7:15pm

Oops. That’s why they were so cheap?

 

didn't Shatner sing?

[bwaylyric]

Posted: 10/16/20 at 9:21pm

In Transit?

[itsjustmejonhotmailcom]

Posted: 10/17/20 at 2:17am

We may have a winner: Lightning Thief was $1.7M.

[DramaTeach]

Posted: 10/17/20 at 7:55am

Hands on a Hardbody? The only set pieces I recall were a truck and a desk. Yes, a truck is a bit pricey, but that's literally it.

[blaxx]

Posted: 10/17/20 at 7:57am

DramaTeach said: "Hands on a Hardbody? The only set pieces I recall were a truckand a desk. Yes, a truck is a bit pricey, but that's literally it."

It had a much bigger cast than other Broadway shows.

I think it's definitely between The Story of my Life and TOS.

[sittingovation]

Posted: 10/17/20 at 8:54am

What about THE BLOND IN THE THUNDERBIRD?

[Synecdoche2]

Posted: 10/17/20 at 11:45am

The answer to this question is some musical that was produced in the 1920s. Inflation, folks!

[Alex Kulak2]

Posted: 10/17/20 at 1:06pm

DramaTeach said: "Hands on a Hardbody? The only set pieces I recall were a truckand a desk. Yes, a truck is a bit pricey, but that's literally it."

Was it even a real truck? A fiberglass frame would probably be cheaper.

[Demitri2]

Posted: 10/19/20 at 3:04pm

TRIUMPH OF LOVE's set was on par with most off-Broadway musicals (I take that back since LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS far excelled it). It consisted of geometric blocks placed around the stage and little else. Add to that a large amount of bright green astro turf. 

LITTLE WOMEN didn't look that expensive  to mount either. I recall looking forward to the big ball scene listed in the program. What we got instead  were the principles standing outside the door leading to the grand ballroom. 

 

[JSquared2]

Posted: 10/19/20 at 3:28pm

The bottom line is that this is an unanswerable question (unless you happen to have the actual Production and Operating budgets for every show that has ever been on Broadway)  -- and then you adjust each one for inflation)!  Small sets aren't necessarily cheaper than big sets if you have an "A List" creative team and stars on the smaller show who receive higher fees and salaries.  

[blaxx]

Posted: 10/19/20 at 4:05pm

JSquared2 said: "The bottom line is that this is an unanswerable question (unless you happen to have the actual Production and Operating budgets for every show that has ever beenon Broadway)-- and then you adjust each one for inflation)! Small sets aren't necessarily cheaper than big sets if you have an "A List"creative team and stars on the smaller show who receive higher fees and salaries."

Obviously, but it isn't wrong to conclude that a musical with a cast of four and a piano is a great contender.