What went wrong with Dames at Sea ?

I was so excited for this show to have a Broadway production and it seems like it was poorly received which is weird because it is generally seen as a good all-around show. I think they got the casting wrong. I read Laura Osnes was originally going to do it and it needed her or more star power (no offense to the girl who played Ruby).

Laura Osnes would not have been a good fit for the show either. That part (just like all of them) calls for a Tour-de-force tapper.



It came at the wrong time, went to wrong theater. It should have been an off broadway production, it would have fared much better at new world stages. It should not have been "broadway" prices. I rushed for like $30, and I still felt cheated. On top of all this, it was not really advertised well, and ticket buyers had generally never heard of the title in the first place. As B'wayguy91 said - it just had no commercial appeal.

1) The whole show's essence/idea is that it's a tiny, shoestring spoof of big Warner musicals. Putting it on Broadway, no matter how cheaply produced, shows that no one at the helm understood the show at all.

2) Except for Lesli Margherita, the cast was, at best, merely adequate. Eloise Kropp, although an excellent tapper, has no star quality, an uninteresting voice, and only basic acting skills. If you're putting up someone to compete with the memory of young Bernadette Peters in a star-making role, you need to do better.

3) Randy Skinner has a great eye for old-fashioned tap routines, but as a director (or choreographer of any other kind of dance), he has no surprises to offer.

Isn't that enough to do in a show?

Well, I'll pipe in with my two cents....

If you are going to make Dames a Broadway show then make it a Broadway show. The physical production was a notch above college level - in fact, we had a better set back in the early 1980's when I did the show in college. There was too much dancing!!! Every freakin' number turned into a long dance sequence. Then, during the BIG NUMBER in act two, the dancing was only adequate, and it wasn't a big number. You're on a ship, right? you couldn't have some cannons shooting confetti? I mean, come on! Star Tar went no where.

While I agree the performers were technically excellent, they seemed to just miss bringing a sense of fun to the show. I will go on record as saying Lesli Margherita was not a plus for me. She overplayed and overdid so much that there was no way anyone else could have matched her. For my money, the only one on the mark was Mara Davi. Her Joan had the right attitudes , the skills and she got the style of the show. Truly, I was expecting better for Broadway but what we got was just not Broadway level.

A show that never belonged on Broadway that could not make a case for high-profile production in the 21st century that was also woefully miscast and terribly marketed.



What went RIGHT?

Well, the central gag of Dames at Sea is that it's supposed to be a big, splashy 42nd Street-esque musical, complete with huge ensemble dances... performed with a handful of people on a shoestring budget in a tiny space for an audience who's in on the joke.

An "old fashioned" musical with a small cast could work on Broadway. But Dames at Sea was pretty much conceived to be an anti-Broadway musical. Plopping it down even in one of the smallest Broadway houses just made no sense.

*checks to see if it's a Davenport production*

"If you are going to make Dames a Broadway show then make it a Broadway show."

Wrong. If you want to make Dames At Sea a Broadway musical, just do 42nd Street.

Elaine Stritch and Maria Karnilova?

Agree about Mara Davi.Loved her. She caught the style of the show. It needed more character actors. And it didnt belong in a broadway house. And the choreography was uninspired. As were the sets. While watching I constantly was saying: what's so great about this show? It belongs off Broadway.

I loved this show and had a great time. Personally I think Mara Davi should have been nominated for a tony. She's a true triple threat and I wish we could see more of her on Broadway. I just don't understand all the hate for this. And John Bolton was outstanding. Just stop.

Outside of show problem: They couldn't get enough people in the theatre on a regular basis.

Inside show problem: I don't think they understood how to make it work. There were moments that worked and things I loved. The pastiche songs are solid. The tap dancing was great. I'm surprised there isn't more love here for Danny Gardner. Lesli, Mara Davi, and John Bolton were also solid supporting players. Cary Tedder was fine as the equivalent of the male ingenue. But I think a major part of the tone problem was Eloise's performance. I'm not sure how much of it was her and how much of it was the direction but to me, she had all the problems of Karen Cartwright. At best, her Star Tar tapping was very capable. At worst, her character infuriated me through most of the show.

To those "analyzing" the material itself - the show is a classic, and the material isn't the problem. It's proven itself successful countless times over the past 40+ years.

"I just don't understand all the hate for this. And John Bolton was outstanding. Just stop."

"Just stop" what, exactly? Expressing opinions you don't like? Articulating constructive criticism? Princess, get a grip - that's not going to happen.

"Cary Tedder was fine as the equivalent of the male ingenue."

It has a name, Helen - a "juvenile."

Updated On: 11/18/16 at 07:57 AM