Who Has Better Theater, Broadway or the West End?

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:18pm

I say the West End because:

1) The West End has a rich theater tradition stretching far back CENTURIES before the advent of Broadway.

2) As a rule, West End Theaters tend to be smaller and more intimate.

3) The West End has a reverence for Broadway Classics that sometimes Broadway itself lacks. For example, the Broadway revival of Carousel (1994) was a product of the West End Royal National Theater revival (1993).

[bythesword84]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:25pm

Well when I was in London this summer I saw 3 west end productions...Suddenly Last Summer, Blood Brothers, and Les Miserables. While SLS was only mediocre the other two were fantastic.

However, I was utterly annoyed that at SLS they actually sold food and beverages IN the theater. It wasn't in the lobby, it was in the orchestra where all the seats were. I also found that the people were a lot sloppier (if that's possible) than the people here and the theater looked worse than a movie theater afterwards.

It was fine but I wouldn't ever say I prefer it over Broadway.

[JakeB]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:26pm

Simply because we have the National Theatre (national-theatre.org.uk), I'd say London beats New York. The value for money is incredible and production values unbeaten. It scoops so many awards and off the top of my head has 3 Broadway tranfers planned; Jerry Springer, Democracy and The Pillowman.

Also, London is cheaper, but is pricing itself out of the market.

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:33pm

Hi bythis... :)

They sold food IN the theater? NO WAY!!! Did they also have an organist and a Seven Inning Stretch? :)

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:34pm

I know in England, theatre is something different than it is here. I mean, here if you like theatre and you are male 9 out of 10 times you will be asked if you are gay. In England, it is not really like that.

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:44pm

The downside to West End theatres is that the seating is even more cramped than Broadway seating. Squished into a seat in the stalls is difficult for 2+ hours of wonderful theatre...

[umgeoboy]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:46pm

As for you direct comparison that is difficult.

2) the theatres are smaller and are actually much easier to compare to off-broadway theatres/productions by many people

3) but that is true that shows like chicago, millie, and many others have transfered from broadway to london.

I think london has the longer tradition besides that I think they are two very different production types. There are positives and negatives about both.

[magruder]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:53pm

London has us beat with the National and other subsidized theatres that can take greater risks than our own non-profits. But I do think New York still has London beat on the musical front. Jerry Springer is singularly audacious, but I'm hard pressed to think of another decent musical to come from London since Miss Saigon.

[G]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:56pm

The Brits can do plays much better, but they suck at doing musicals.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:57pm

At a time where Broadway was in trouble, London theatre gave us CATS, Phantom of the Opera, Les Miserables, and Miss Saigon as well as others.

Right now the London theatre is filled with musicals based on pop songs (We Will Rock You, Mamma Mia, the Elvis Musical, the Rod Stewart Musical, etc.) But, they also have WOMAN IN WHITE which I want to see right now.

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 5:51pm

G,

The brits s**k at doing musicals?

Oh yeah, I guess:

OLIVER!

STOP THE WORLD--I WANT TO GET OFF

and

THE BOY FRIEND

were real stinkeroos! :)

[magruder]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 6:02pm

Well, the most recent of those shows is 40 years old. (And Stop the World, despite some very very fine songs, is almost deadly in revival these days). Really, beyond the songbook shows and Lloyd Webber, is there anything going on in British musical theatre?

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 6:23pm

Magruder,

You make some good points. The examples I used were all kinda middle-aged, like. . . NO! I WON'T GO THERE!!! :)

My point was that over the years, the West End has produced musicals every bit as good as Broadway has. Maybe not in quantity, but think of shows like ME AND MY GIRL and HALF A SIXPENCE and I think you'll get a better idea of the what I was trying to say (perhaps a little on the unclear side.)

Posted: 10/12/04 at 8:47pm

In my opinion there's more theatre to be found in London, and more variety of theatre than in NYC. One reason is that London is the entertainment center for the UK, so you find a larger pool of actors, all of whom are filming televsion and/or film who are also available for stage work. Its much easier to cast with a larger pool of wonderful talent all living in/around the same city. The nationally subsidised theatre in the UK also allows for more theatre with recognized talent at affording prices. There is also a tradition of theatre/music hall attendance in the UK. We come nothing near to that level of traditional while gowing up in the States.


NYC still wins out in creating musicals. The Brits are hard pressed to write and direct musicals at the calibre and thefrequency of the Americans. (Please, keep Trevor Nunn away from musicals, after what I saw that he did to MY FAIR LADY.)

Still, the list of musicals originating in London/UK through the years is darned impressive.

Anyone else see SPEND, SPEND, SPEND?

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 8:50pm

BRAVO, Jose'!

Your post was like "reading my mind"!

Do you do card tricks too? :)

Posted: 10/12/04 at 8:54pm

Do I do tricks?

My tricks might just surprise you, Mary-Ethel.

[JakeB]

Posted: 10/13/04 at 5:47am

I definitely agree about the musicals, though the following are impressive:

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
Mary Poppins
The Woman in White
Billy Elliot
Jerry Springer the Opera

and definitely Broadway possibilities. But on the whole, we're not great at them, no. The reason we're so good at plays is because new writing is greatly encouraged at a whole host of venues accross Britain.. so writers are nurtured from quite a young age.

[jo]

Posted: 10/13/04 at 6:42am

London also has a tradition of classics - who can better stage a production from William Shakespeare's pen than where it was originally written?

Also, it is my impression that children in the UK are encouraged very early to appreciate the theatre. I have seen a lot more of them watching shows in London ( school field trips), even at a very young age.

But the staging of shows, particularly musicals, seem more precise on Broadway. The triple threat talents seem to abound more on Broadway than at the West End.

Just my impressions.