What went wrong for Little Women?

[Rentaholic2]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 2:03am

I just got the CD and the score is beautiful--yes, there are several slightly dull, forgetable songs, but there are also several wonderful songs. I find the music more or less as original as DRS and other larger successes. What went so wrong for this show?

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 2:05am

It's boring as hell.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 8:21am

Already discussed.

[Broadwaylady]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 9:17am

It was cute. Sutton was the whole show.

[bwayfan3]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 10:57am

Boring. Boring. Boring. When I saw it I wondered that very thing, might the songs sound better if you were listening to them on a CD in the comfort of your own home. But in the context of the show, they just screeched it to a grinding halt. It had no momentum and I know it's not a glitzy,show-stopping number kind of production, but still...

[My Fair Lady]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 11:15am

Bad marketing.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 11:21am

Poor marketing and not stellar enough for great word of mouth.

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 11:47am

Ugly tacky logo too.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 12:03pm

It's already been discussed, but it's a long, drawn out story that's really dull compared to some of the other shows.

I personally feel that Broadway musicals have become more about the spectacle than about the plot (re: WICKED). I think, in so many ways, this is what DRACULA tried to accomplish and it failed miserably: a juicy, thriller plot but with great spectacles. However, the plot failed as did the effects leaving the show to be a flop.

LITTLE WOMEN, while being a beautiful story with a nice score and some fabulous performances, is an old-fashioned story leaving no room for spectacle. It's not a tourist-attraction and not a commercial hit.

[riv]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 12:15pm

This argument about spectacle killing other shows has been going on forever. Similar to the Jerry Herman vs. Stephen Sondheim debate. There's room for all of it on Broadway.

For partisans of Little Women to feel the show they love died because Wicked or anything else is TOO BIG and takes business away from them is rubbish. Little Women died because it wasn't very good and came across as old-fashioned. The old-fashioned aspect in itself in not a bad thing, but for a work with as undramatic a plot as Little Women had, it needed to knock audiences dead in the score department with strong, melodic songs. I'm talking about "take home tunes" here. It didn't deliver. Which is why the CD will sit for ages on many of our shelves at home, unlistened to for long periods of time.

Updated On: 5/29/05 at 12:15 PM

[Katecab99]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 12:42pm

i still thought it would have lasted until sutton and maureen were gone.

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 12:59pm

What didn't?

[neocomposer]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 1:06pm

It could have been way better- music, book, etc. And that is what is so sad, because Louisa May Alcott's story deserves more...as does the fabulous and fun cast...

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 1:14pm

It did well enough to get a tour.

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 1:17pm

Oh yes Bronx, I'm SURE it was the LOGO that made the show close.

That was sarcasm.

[Social*Dynasty]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 1:18pm

they'll put ANYTHING on Tour. Esp. After it's already been on broadway-half the costs are already taken care of, because upon closing they usually just take the same sets and costumes and throw 'em on the road. Little Shop didn't do well and there's was a dress rehearsal for the tour a week before it closed. Hell, even Bombay Dreams got a tour (early next year). Audiences outside of NYC tend to be much easier to please.

[442namffug]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 5:32pm

Why did it close? Because no one (outside of these boards) wants to see a musical version of Little Women. What's next? A musical version of Clifford the Big Red Dog?

Little Women is just such a random choice to make into a musical when there are SO MANY untold stories out there that could have represented the talent in better light.

[LucilleAndLeoFrank]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 5:38pm

I really am starting to believe that I am the only person who was dissatisfied with Sutton Foster's performance? The day I saw the show, she was pitchy and screeched her way through all of her numbers. She could barely make it through Astonishing, and I thought for sure that she would leave at intermission (she didn't). Anne Kanengieser, Maureen McGovern's understudy, seemed to be acting like she was in a totally different show. Danny Gurwin came off so gay as Laurie. No offense, but it was just really wrong for this show. I wanted to ring Amy McAlexander's neck after about 5 minutes. I have not bought the cast cd, and I probably won't.

[Akbar-n-Jeff]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 6:55pm

"Little Women", sad to say, sounds like an old-ladyish, lace curtains and doilies musical. It conjures up images of prim little maids in crinolines.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 6:57pm

Bad marketing. If the marketing was better, this couldve been a pretty big hit, IMO.

[Luke0827]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 7:25pm

Lucille - I was very disappointed with Sutton's performance as well. She was trying mighty hard, but I just didn't see how the hammy, slapstick, physical comedy approach to role made any sense whatsoever. She also struggled with "Astonishing" a song which is needless taxing on the singer's upper register.

Also, none of the sisters' love interests were convincingly masculine. The plot was confusing and uninteresting - the Operatic Tragedies were tragic for the wrong reason. Maureen McGovern's character was under-developed. The lyrics and songs were largely not worth remembering.

The marketing had nothing to do with the show's failure in my opinion.

[OrdinaryJukebox1]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 7:46pm

Lucille and Luke, I agree. I was not impressed by Sutton at all. The way she's built up on this boared, I braced myself when she started to sing. Then I let out a sigh and went, "that's it? That's what everyone has been raving about?" It just didn't work for me.

-Vincent

[LucilleAndLeoFrank]

Posted: 5/29/05 at 7:47pm

I totally agree with you, Vincent.

[Luke0827]

Posted: 5/30/05 at 9:24am

Lucille and Vincent - did you see her in "Mille"? She was superb in that show (and that show was superb as well).

[OrdinaryJukebox1]

Posted: 5/30/05 at 10:10am

Sadly, I did not see her in "...Millie." Maybe that would have changed my view of her, but after seeing her in "Little Women," it left much to be desired.

-Vincent