It lookes like they had some great tix sales.. (TONY WINNING MUSICAL PLAYS 100% CAPACITY GROSSING $712,088 FOR THE WEEK ENDING AUGUST 3)
yes, but then those figures sunk fast, and could not keep the show afloat!
It was one of the worst shows I've ever seen on Broadway - terrible score, awful book, and even worse "special effects".
It's a shame that it closed when it did, although it was in danger of closing a couple of times during its Broadway run. I thought it was a very good show, with some excellent music. The opening and prologue (sp?) still give me chills.
Broadway Star Joined: 7/20/04
I always wanted to know how they did all the special effects. Like the boat sinking. Did they have water on stage at all?
Someone care to fill me in.
The boat was actually 3-tiers that were raised and lowered with hydraulics. What was amazing was that when it came time for the Titanic to sink, the set literally leaned steeply to one side. It was quite effective.
There was also a point where some of the 3rd class passengers were looking down a stairwell and to this day I can't figure out how they did it (I know my description is fairly lame).
I saw the show a total of 9 times (including the final performance) and it always brought tears to my eyes. With a cast that size I was always surprised that I never saw any understudies in major roles throughout my various viewings of this show.
Hope this helps.
Understudy Joined: 9/6/04
The show never caught on with audiences because ultimately it was about the boat and not about the people on the boat.
I felt the exact opposite. I think the actors gave compelling performances. The way the audience cheered for some of them was quite wonderful (i.e., the 3 Kates, Brian D'Arcy James, etc.) If a story doesn't move me, there is no way I would see it more than 1 time.
It was a wonderful production. A beautiful score.
Go Maury...2 for 2!!
I liked the show too, though I thought it wasn't directed very well. The ending of act 1 alone , with the tiny, cheap looking model rolling across the stage was sobadly concieved it was laughable.
I don't know, Beaverhausen - didn't seem to hurt CHICAGO any...
I believe the stage version came out first. People seeing the movie, expected the same story line, etc. on stage. They obviously were 2 completely different interpretations. I preferred the stage version. Technically the movie was magnificent, but I didn't feel for any of the characters.
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/20/04
There was not a drop of water anywhere on stage. There were cheap looking painted flats on a three story stage that tilted.
It was fun to watch a group of men come on as crew members, then exit up the gangplank, then come back in new costumes as third class passengers, who exit up the gangplank, change costumes, come on as second class passengers, exit up the gangplank, change costumes, and come back as first class passengers.
There seemed to be about 25 people in the cast. In the final scene, there were about 20 survivors on the boat that picked them up from the life boats. So, I guess five people died.
Oh boy am i ever looking forward to this revival of the stage musical opening hopefully April 10 2012.
I have to agree with you about some of the flats. I was surprised it won the Tony for best set design, but I figured it had to do with how it "sank" above anything else.
And from what I hear, the set on the tour didn't even "sink". I didn't see it, so I don't know how the emulated it.
Because Brian D'Arcy James is just one man!
i think it's one of the best broadway musicals there is. i love the show, the music, the story, everything about it...probably one of the most touching shows i have seen i think. but every show has to come to an end..it's sad it's time had to come it did run 26 previews and 804 shows..thats not to bad really :)
Updated On: 9/21/04 at 05:30 PM
Never saw it. Like the music. But I can remember David Letterman always commenting on the problems they were having with the boat sinking. He even called the theatre one evening during his show for one of his audience members from out of town who was seeing the show after his and asked if the boat would sink that evening. I thought I would die laughing. Oh, the answer was yes!
I enjoyed this show, but my question is what else was nominated that year for Best Musical? I can't remember, perhaps it was not a very strong year? Also, when I saw it all of my friends(I was 12 at the time) thought that it was like the movie and that Leonardo DeCaprio was going to be in it. HAH! But I know that had they known that it was not the movie they wouldn't have seen it.
The absolute WORST play Ive ever seen. It was painfully bad.
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/20/04
The other main nominees that year were The Life and Steel Pier. All three were mediocre, but Titanic was mediocre on a grand scale. I guess they chose to vote for the flawed epic over two flawed medium sixed shows.
The biggest "hit" of the year, financially, at least, was Jeckyll and Hyde.
Yes. When compared to the intelligence of Wicked's music and book, Titanic sucks.
What the hell?!?! I didnt say that I just said I didnt like it. What is your problem?
The other nominees for Best Musical that year were:
Juan Darian
Steel Pier
The Life
EDIT: oops, must've posted at the same time Jon did.
Updated On: 9/21/04 at 07:34 PM
Understudy Joined: 9/6/04
Lots of movies with great special effects don't make much of a splash beyond the first weekend. Gazillions of people around the world went over and over again to see Titanic the movie because they loved the characters and got to cry their eyes out at the end of the movie. Nobody cried at Titanic the musical when I saw it. It was all about a boat sinking, and not about people we grew to know beyond the broad strokes provided by Mr. Yeston and company. Just compare the characers in Titanic with the characers in Nine. Big difference.
Videos