Why did Douglas Sills drop out of Spamalot?

Anybody know? I saw the show last night, and he would have been perfect as Sir Galahad. Was he having trouble with the bit as Dennis' father? I just think it's a shame.

My guess is that they cut down the size of his part.

This topic has been discussed at length in other chatrooms. Beyond the usual statement, "creative differences", I don't think we will ever know the reasons for sure unless we were there. Most speculation seems to be that Sills wasn't happy with how small the role ended up being which led to a mutual parting of the ways. Now I'm wondering how many other stars have dropped out of a show before/during rehearsals due to similiar circumstances but I'm coming up with a blank?

Ella Logan in KELLY
Anne Rogers in BILLY ELLIOT

Is it truly worth it to drop out of a show that had HIT written all over it? Changes are part of the creative process. I believe I would be disappointed, but still want to be associated with a hit Broadway show. Play through your contract, get the credit, pay your bills, get your Tony nom (hopefully), and THEN leave if it's really so difficult to not be onstage as much as you'd hoped.

---

He also dropped out of something here in DC last year, I can't remember what it was, it think he was to star in a Shakespeare play.

Since no one knows exactly why he dropped out, it's pointless to speculate. Even more ludicrous to make judgements based on speculation.

As for having integrity and not wanting to "just collect a paycheck" whether you agree or not, is not something to mock or criticize. It's great that you would take a job just for the dough and credit. Some people are not in it for the money per se but for the roles that challenge themselves and to create work they are proud of.

Why did Douglas Sills drop out? Who cares? Go and enjoy Chris in the role and if you like, go see Douglas in Moonlight and Magnolias.

we'll always have the Pimpernel. and that Secret Garden tour where he was Neville. I also agree that it's unfair to make judgements about the career motivations of any working or trying-to-find-work actor, except for maybe that tiny fraction of a percent who really can have whatever role they want. In a world where George Hearn and Ben Vereen can find no better work than Wicked, I applaud Doug for remaining consistently employed.

And I thought he was supposed to be getting raves for his work in Moonlight. Or was that another play this year? And really, who is to say what is a smart career move? Maybe playing a fun part in a huge musical smash would keep his paycheck secure for the forseeable contract period, but what about the possible long-term value of keeping himself sharp by taking more challenging roles in plays? He could gain a greater reputation for his legit acting chops, and eventually find himself poised for the kind of stardom and respect that will keep him at the top of the profession for decades to come, until he finally retired and does Wicked in Europe for a year. Hell, if they're going to keep letting Michael Hayden sing in front of people because he acts well, think what a gift Doug's voice will be when the money people realize he can act with the best of them. And even if he's not quite at that level yet, he's surely doing his talent a greater service by acting in plays than if he were being adored nightly in SPAMALOT.

---

I had the chance to meet John Du Prez (the composer of the show) a few times. He was implying that it wasn't Doug's decision to 'leave' the show.

QM

---

". . . or anything in LA, but it bugs me no end to see him writing for the real public."

That's quite a statement. I guess his affected snootiness is nothing compared to your own very real version.

DGRANT: I'm in a hurry, so I won't make a big fuss about the way you just gave me a huge swig of own medicine and knocked me down a peg, but I do want to say how horribly wrong I was to suggest that LA's entertainment culture and community are at all different from what you'd find everywhere else in America. To say that LA isn't THE American public was just silly of me. What better snapshot is there of the average American newspaper reader than the LA industry employee mulling over his Variety issue?

---

Someone mentioned that Sills decided not to do Assassins because he wanted to do LSOH. That is not true. He was supposed to play Booth when they were bringing Assassins to Broadway September 2001, however (due to obvious reasons) the production was shelved. Sills was then out of a job and, like any other actor, he had to find work. He got the LSOH gig before Assassins even announced it was coming to Broadway and playing Studio 54.

---

I always thought that was a shame about Doug Sills and "Assassins." Booth is one of the greatest musical theater roles ever, and it sucks that he ended up having to do LSOH instead, especially since the production was so poorly received. I really would not have wanted to be him when Cerveris won the Tony either.