Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London
Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London
Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#1
Posted: 8/7/07 at 8:25am
Interesting article from "The Globe and Mail":
Unlike the Americans, or even the Canadians, the Brits are very stingy with their standing ovations. If you want it, you have to work for it, and work hard. But on Saturday's closing-night performance of The Drowsy Chaperone in London, a sold-out house gave the cast the best parting gift they could have hoped for: a rapturous standing ovation the likes of which I don't recall seeing in the West End for a decade or more. They cheered, hollered and stamped their feel in approval and appreciation.
Such a warm reception for a such a resounding commercial flop. What gives? Why did The Drowsy Chaperone – the multiple Tony Award-winning Canadian-penned show with music and lyrics by Lisa Lambert and Greg Morrison and book by Bob Martin and Don McKellar – not catch on in London as it did in New York?
It couldn't have been the reviews. When it opened at the Novello Theatre in June -for an initial planned run until February, 2008 -, almost all major British critics cheered its wit, intelligence and heart. The producers cast Elaine Paige, London's “first lady of musical theatre,” in the title role.That way, they could at least count on her star appeal to keep the show running for the first few months. (Paige is the original star of both Evita and Cats in London.) But to close after less than two months with these glowing reviews and Paige's name says more about the current state of commercial theatre in London in general than it does about The Drowsy Chaperone in particular.
In the two days leading up to closing night, both The Guardian and the Evening Standard ran very different analyses of the West End by, respectively, critic Michael Billington and columnist Johann Hari. The one thing the two agree on was the inexplicable fate of The Drowsy Chaperone. Billington was one of the few critics not to be taken by it when it opened in June, but even he couldn't hide his surprise at its early demise. Hari, on the other hand, is decidedly effusive, calling it “the best musical in the West End.” The Drowsy Chaperone, he continues, is “not only a great musical, but also a great defence of the blessed-out, laughter-packed musical as a genre.”
Among London's musical-theatre community, this Canadian show has also triggered some soul searching. At the closing-night party, the mood was of defiant celebration and quiet resignation to the prevailing laws of the West End – awash as it is with cheesy jukebox musicals ( We Will Rock You), stage adaptations of films ( Footloose) and revivals cast through call-in TV shows ( Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat). An original like Drowsy with no brand recognition stands little chance of surviving in a theatrical landscape where musicals are sold with the same marketing smarminess of package holidays. The show's lyricist, Lisa Lambert, its director and choreographer Casey Nicholaw and lead producer Kevin McCollum were all mystified by its short run. They all agree that the West End just didn't get this one.
I have no qualms with that theory. With very few exceptions, London's West End is a cultural wasteland. The heart and soul of contemporary London theatre is in the subsidized section and venues like the National Theatre, the Donmar Warehouse and the Royal Court. But, to me, Drowsy's fate underlines the different meanings of camp and irony between Broadway and the West End – particularly as they apply to musicals.
While retaining all the cleverness and warmth of the Broadway show, the London production has been retooled for British consumption. Not only have the setting of the show and its jokes been changed, but its very texture is now a lot similar to an English pantomime than a frothy Broadway musical. In the title role, Paige is, theatrically speaking, closer to a Dame in a panto than the lush, Dorothy Parker-like figure from the roaring twenties she's meant to be. It's a delicious turn from Paige, but ultimately, this version of camp feels more like pandering than cultural acclimatization on the director's part.
To me, the show is and always has been about the golden age of the American musical. To succeed, it has to deliver the show within a show (the fake 1928 musical, “The Drowsy Chaperone,” that comes to life as the narrator simply known as Man in Chair plays the cast recording) with all the “gaiety” of the real thing. The London production attempts something different and succeeds on these terms but you can't help wondering if this Canadian show should have kept its Americana intact in Britain? The three countries may share the same language but cultural differences between each side of the Atlantic are huge and, as The Drowsy Chaperone learned the hard way, sometimes unbridgeable.
Still, there's no reason to think of the London production as anything other than a bump in the amazing journey of The Drowsy Chaperone. I suspect the show will revert back to its Broadway sensibility when it launches its massive North American tour with a stop in Toronto's Elgin Theatre as part of the brand-new Dancap Productions subscription season. What a homecoming that will be: back to the city that gave it birth and the theatrical milieu that made it thrive.
Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/26/05
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#2
Posted: 8/7/07 at 8:50am
Maybe it's just me, but I didn't think that article helped explain why the show failed in London at all.
The Globe and Mail writer mentioned that almost all of London's critics "cheered its wit, intelligence and heart". But while it had its partisans, I thought the critical reaction in London was more mixed or muted than that.
One possible other reason... the Brits have their own '20s musical parody, Sandy Wilson's The Boy Friend, which is never too far off from a revival, and which is really the gold standard of that particular genre.
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#2
Posted: 8/7/07 at 8:57am
I thought the article explained very well why it failed in London, especially when looking at the overview of shows playing there now.
And it depresses the hell out of me.
Broadway is only one tiny notch away from that same exact cultural wasteland described above.
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#3
Posted: 8/7/07 at 9:33am
The West End has been in a rut for a couple of years now and the shows that play well here are the mega musicals or the fun musicals.
Drowsy would have done better at the National etc, it entered a market it could not compete in.
Many people over on the West End Board predicted that Drowsy would not last long with the Way the West End is at the moment.
Don't get me wrong here in the UK we are still producing some amazing theatre but its been overlooked as people would rather have a fun night out at shows like Mamma Mia , WWRY or Footloose.
I don't see anything wrong with this, theatre is supposed to entertain and its great that these shows are pulling people in but we do need to start giving as much attention to the new works.
That article isn't correct either , drowsy received a lot of average reviews here, critics said they liked it but were not that enthused by it.
Broadway is pretty much the same as the UK , it has its new original interesting works (broadway Grey Gardens and London Coram Boy) and then a lot of kitch camp musicals to.Broadway also suffers from Disney overload (big sets and a show what plays to kids and tourists etc) as much as the West End suffers from what we call hen night shows (Dirty Dancing etc).
So much discussion has been had about Drowsy failing in London, why?
Coram Boy tanked on Broadway but no one said a thing.Its all down to tastes and people here in the UK just did not care about the Drowsy Chaperone.The advertising was awful and limited, the show crept in almost un announced and Elaine Paige puts a lot of people off.
Drowsy s failure in the UK does not mean UK theatre is dying, it does not mean that Broadway shows don't work over here (90 percent of the west end is Broadway shows) and it doesn't mean that us English did not get it(we got it) it just wasn't meant to be.
As for the reporters ridiculous comment about how thunderous the applause were on it's closing night and how that was so rare, RUBBISH.
Every time a show closes here it gets a huge applause or standing ovation etc, most of the fun shows here get a standing ovation every night and get a much louder applause than what Drowsy had.
The reporter was a little over dramatic lol
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#4
Posted: 8/7/07 at 9:58amMy friends in London, who adored the show, also said the producers did very little to promote or market the show. Quite simply, people just didn't know about it.
Featured Actor Joined: 1/8/07
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#5
Posted: 8/7/07 at 11:08am
I agree with Smaxie. That article really didn't say much. It attributes Drowsy's failure to lack of brand name recognition, which certainly is not the only cause for its demise. Broadway is just as bad when it comes to a need to rely on brand name recognition to sell tickets in a tourist driven industry, and yet Drowsy and other shows have succeeded here.
I believe the reasons are more cultural. I have a feeling that Drowsy was too fizzy for British audiences used to well crafted stories.
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#6
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:18pm
Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London?
Simple answer, the British have good taste.
Leading Actor Joined: 3/13/07
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#7
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:21pm
Think up an original insult instead of stealing them from the dearly departed
Wicked 63
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#8
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:23pm
I have never read any posts from that person, but you're right, I didn't have to think hard for that one!
=)
Broadway Legend Joined: 10/1/06
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#9
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:26pm
Simple answer, the British have good taste.
Yeah...with stuff like Footloose and We Will Rock You... Great taste guys.
LIVE THAT LESSON!!!!!!
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#10
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:26pm
Don't forget the ever popular FAME.
Yeah, GREAT taste...
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#11
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:40pm
The Footloose production here in the UK happens to be a great production, a hell of a lot better than the rubbish they managed to produce on broadway.
And dont go insulting us brits theatre taste , we didnt produce Good Vibrations, Lestat, Dance Of The Vampires, All Shook Up, The Wedding Singer,Wicked, Times They Are A Changin,etc etc etc lol
They are nice list of assorted flops or artistically bankrupt productions.XXXXXXx
Featured Actor Joined: 1/5/04
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#12
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:46pm
I saw it in London and I have to say I can see why it didn't quite work. Bob Martin was phenomenal, but most of the cast seemed to lack the energy/charisma/something that the show needed. It seemed very "phoned in" (for want of a better word). Elaine had a hard time hitting her top notes. Summer Strallen was ridiculously bland and boring (like she was the understudy's understudy ... a copy of a copy of a performance) she had nothing worth noting other than that she wasn't abismal! John Partridge was also very boring... good dancer but his voice was grating and didn't do much with the part. There were some exceptions to the rule, Joseph Alessi as Aldolpho was particularly good, but on the whole the production was not great.
And also the sound quality was terrible - really tinny. This is a general complaint that I have about West End Theatre at the moment. I've seen a number of big budget productions recently where the sound has been diabolical! Tinny, muffled and flat - pumped out of 1 speaker next to your ear. I had the same problem with Into The Woods, Porgy and Bess and Avenue Q. Seriously, with the ticket prices so high, surely they can afford some better quality sound systems or egineering. Really ruins an experience for me. In Into the Woods I was in Row B of the stalls and had to strain to hear their muffled words out of the speaker! I was like 10 ft away!
Having said all this, I think the material still held up well in London. The audience seemed to enjoy it. I think one of the main problems was the way that it was marketed. For one, the marketing itself looked cheap and horrid. Also they sold it as a 1920s romp, when actually it's not really that. It wasn't really publicised beyond those posters and so I don't think word really got around about it.
Featured Actor Joined: 1/5/04
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#14
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:55pm
I hope Hairspray does better there. I think Britain recieved the movie very well, which is a plus.
BTW, How is Drowsy of bad taste?
Broadway Legend Joined: 10/13/05
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#15
Posted: 8/7/07 at 12:56pm
You have got to admit, this poster is very funny:
(from Stacy's Musical Village)
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#16
Posted: 8/7/07 at 1:08pmI saw that as your avatar, but never bothered to enlarge it. That is too funny.
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#17
Posted: 8/7/07 at 2:24pmI agree that the London cast was vastly inferior to the Broadway cast and that the ad campaign was poor. But let's face it, The West End IS a wasteland right now apart from the subsidized theatres. A quick scan of the current roster of shows only confirms this.
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/15/05
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#18
Posted: 8/7/07 at 2:34pm
It seems like marketing is always the reason for a show's failure.
Also, I trust a place where a brillant revival of Sunday in the Park with George can win a few Oliver Awards even after closing months prior to the actual awards. You know that would never happen at the Tonys!
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#19
Posted: 8/7/07 at 2:43pmI liked the article and agree that Broadway is on it's way to the same fate. If a LEGALLY BLONDE runs longer than a GREY GARDENS, all artists and composers who do not pander to cross marketing and instant name recognition will be buried alive. So sad.
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#20
Posted: 8/8/07 at 12:23pm
"And dont go insulting us brits theatre taste , we didnt produce Good Vibrations, Lestat, Dance Of The Vampires, All Shook Up, The Wedding Singer,Wicked, Times They Are A Changin,etc etc etc lol"
No, but you did produce Bernadette, Behind the Iron Mask, Jean Seberg, Murderous Instincts, The Beautiful and the Damned, Out of the Blue, Boyband, Great Balls of Fire, Peggy Sue Got Married, etc etc etc
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#21
Posted: 8/8/07 at 12:41pm
I think mistermatt if you look at Broadways disasters or artistically bankrupt shows they will far outweigh The West Ends.
Beautiful Game also happened to be a great show which was recieved well but unfortunately closed early like many others due to tourism falling because of threats on the city
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/17/03
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#22
Posted: 8/8/07 at 12:43pmThe audience did not get it for whatever reason
Swing Joined: 3/27/06
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#23
Posted: 8/8/07 at 1:26pm
"Beautiful Game also happened to be a great show which was recieved well but unfortunately closed early like many others due to tourism falling because of threats on the city"
It was not a great show and the reaction in the audiences was lukewarm at best. It could almost be an attempt by ALW and co to be serious and go for the political approach. It had one or two pleasant songs but was a turgid affair; insipid characters about whom it was hard to care, dull attempt at drama and thoroughly cliche-ridden. Oddly enough, it was entertaining despite all that.
Both the West End and Broadway have had spectacular failures. To suggest one is more prone than the other is ridiculous and very much like childhood tit-for-tat games in the playground and suggest something approximating to immaturity; indeed, there is a tendency for that in one of the two squabblesome posters in this thread so perhaps that should come as no surprise.
The West End will keep some dross going (Fame, WWRY). The West End will also accept some of the Broadway dross (Wicked, Legally Blonde and the like) and Broadway will reciprocate. Some dross on one side of the pond might take well on the other side. It might not.
As for Drowsy, it is a perfectly charming show and it does the trick nicely. The London version, however, did suffer from some of the casting: Elaine Paige proved that she did not quite have the stage presence from years gone by, nor did she have the vocal chops she used to have. Indeed, the 2 occasions I saw it, her "As we Stumble Along" merely tottered to a damp squib of a somewhat low-key finish. Summer Strallen was good but her encore of "Show off" was equally lifeless and lacked anything like the belt needed there. Still, it was a shame it ended in London; the West End deserved a hit with that show.
Updated On: 8/8/07 at 01:26 PM
re: Why Drowsy Chaperone failed in London#24
Posted: 8/8/07 at 2:05pm
Legally Blonde inst playing in the UK, also we were joking about with west end flops and broadway flops(not everything is soooooo serious)
Also the audiences were very enthusiastic about the Beautiful Game as were a lot of the press..i was there every night , i heard them lol
Videos
