Why did Whistle Down the Wind Not Make it?

[Matt C]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:24pm

I saw the show in London and LOVED it why did it not come to NY?

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:27pm

I love the cast recording. I also heard from someone who went to school with me that it was a really good show. I have clue why didn't make it.

[Matt C]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:32pm

GREAT SHOW!

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:34pm

i really wish it would of came to broadway..would of love to have seen it..love the music!!

[Matt C]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:42pm

no one knows?

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:50pm

Nope. I have no clue. I don't think it did too well over in England, did it?

[Matt C]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:50pm

Not sure. I loved it.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:53pm

I am pretty sure it did very poorly in England and that is why it did not transfer to Broadway. But it has an amazing score........most def.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:56pm

The only thing I seem to remember about it (and please corect me if I'm wrong, because I never saw the show and didn't follow its fate particularly closely) is that it came to the Kennedy Center on its pre-Broadway tour, got killed by the critics and the decision was made by the producers close it there and not to bring it to Broadway and face even more hostility from the even tougher critics here (as well as potentially even greater financial loss). I could be wrong, though.

Updated On: 9/8/04 at 08:56 PM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:56pm

I never saw the show but I have the cast recording. I felt the score was hit or miss. There were 3 legitimate hits in the score (Vaults of Heaven, Whistle.. and No Matter What) but some of the other songs were really blah. Wasn't Sunset Blvd (financially speaking) the biggest Broadway flop of all time? Yes, yes, yes, I know it ran for a while, lots of people saw it, it won lots of Tonys but it lost a ton of money too. Maybe ALW didn't want to open another show in NY unless he felt it would be a smash hit? Maybe the receptions from the audience on its short-lived tour weren't so great and ALW and Co. feared another lukewarm response? I remember the critics were pretty harsh on Davis Gaines. I can't remember what they thought of the show in general. It's strange that they haven't released the amateur rights to the show yet. Maybe hope for a NY opening isn't all lost? Updated On: 9/8/04 at 08:56 PM

[Chrysanthemum62001]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 8:59pm

I'm sure this isn't the sole reason, but they had a lot problems with the set malfunctioning. If I remember correctly, wasn't there also a fire?

[Matt C]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 9:00pm

The set was a basic hydrolic lift?

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 9:01pm

The show had many dead moments that really dragged. The story was very dark with few scenes to lift the audience. The score was very erratic (probably due to the use of two composers). I liked the Steinman music more than Lloyd Webber's. A Kiss is a Terrible Thing to Waste was AMAZING on stage while Unsettled Scores sounded like a cut and paste job of three different ballads. If Only was quite boring and dragged on. It felt as if the staging was trying to cover up what didn't work in the book and the audience didn't quite know what to make of it. I also think the British audiences weren't quite involved in the American Bible Belt of the 50s (not to mention atrocious accents). Quite possibly, it just wasn't a story worth musicalizing. It was mildly interesting, but like Phantom of the Opera, was essentially about a murderer who goes free in the end. Phantom gushed romanticism with gorgeous sets and costumes which helped it draw attention. Whistle Down the Wind was much more bleak and its main set design (bilevel set that flys to the wings) had already been seen in a much more lavish design in Sunset Boulevard.

The Beautiful Game was a much stronger show, despite the simpler staging and smaller score.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 9:03pm

I remember reading that "Sunset" almost bankrupted ALW's production company. While it ran for some time, it was a very expensive production which apparently couldn't even break even unless it was nearly sold out week after week. Once Glenn Close left, the box office slipped and it started to hemorrhage money (even though some of her replacements were more accaimed in the role, they didn't sell tickets). You're probably right that ALW feared another box office flop in New York would hurt his reputation, so perhaps he's the one who pulled the plug on the show.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 9:49pm

it actually didn't make it because the director and ALW got in a fight.
I found this out from Dave Clemmons (the casting director), who was in it

[PB ENT.]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 10:59pm

Marcus Lovett who played "The Man" had some interesting insight on this, but I would decline on comments. I did not get to see this show but have some clips of him in the role. I do have the really cool big souvenier program with the pocket inserts. Guess some things are not meant to happen.

Updated On: 9/8/04 at 10:59 PM

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 9/8/04 at 11:42pm

THIS SHOW ROCKS! I ask this same question all the time. It did do very well in Londond it just wasn't a decade long hit. No one here seems to hate it. It really is what I think is Lloyd Webber most underrated show and deserves follow the same path to Broadway as his other but for some reaosn it's not happening. JIM STEINMAN ROCKS!!!. A Kiss . . was a great number on stage and the hydrolic set that went up and dow I though was even better than SUNSET. People actually climed through this one.

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 3:53am

Well, speaking as Steinman expert, it was initially conceived as a movie. After the Sydmonton reading in 1995, it was decided to make it a stage-play. This was going to be directed by Gale Edwards, who did the original and superior Australian production of The Boy From Oz (which, incidentally, sold on the basis of all its facets and not just one name). But when Hal Prince saw the reading, he urged to direct the show in her stead and make it a lavish Broadway premiere. Gale was replaced (typically) and a date was announced for April '97 (same year as the dreaded Capeman) with a December try-out in Washington. The production failed on the merit of its music, the songs being in the wrong places in the telling of the story, and the lack of integrity and depth of the characters. Steinman, himself, said that 80% of the production sucked, and Lloyd Webber was a less than impressed. He wanted to save the show, because he knew it would fail. If it had failed to everyone else, including him and the the creative team, then there was no point in investing a Broadway run. So they re-mounted it, revised and improved the score and storyline. Hal Prince was replaced in favour of the original director, because he had taken the storyline and tried to make it into a blockbuster. Unlike his genious work for Phantom and Evita, and Sondheim, this was one of his rare failures in conception and execution. Gale Edwards was brought back, without the showmanship of Prince, and it was remounted at the Aldwych in London. It was a tremendous success, and scored Lloyd Webber the single of the year with NO MATTER WHAT. I remember it, personally, as being a major event and critically-praised masterpiece. Problem was, with a modest director like Edwards, they would have needed Prince for the Broadway version. Unfortunately, with the blood under the bridge with those severed ties, it would never happen. Edwards just didn't have the power or the means to mount the Broadway show. Furthermore, for a London tour, to cap off the Aldwych production, Steinman and Lloyd Webber cut their ties over re-writes. They were working on another project at a time. (In the past, Steinman had almost written lyrics for Phantom). Steinman went on to open the cult German opera Tanz der Vampire, which was later slaughtered in Broadway by Michael Crawford and company, and he's allegedly been working on Batman the Musical. Edwards is back in Australia, and Lloyd Webber etc.

[Eastwickian]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 4:22am

Just to clear one thing up - Whistle made money. Not a lot - it was by no means a smash - but neither was it a financial flop. As for why it never reached the US; I think that ALW had been stung by the reaction of the American critics to the original US version and would have also had trouble raising the capital for the show after such a high-profile failure state-side (and the problems the plagued Sunset). I'm sure it could be mouted if Lloyd Webber wanted it to be without Gale Edwards or Hal Prince, but there are no plans to do so.

I personally agree completely with Mister Matts analysis of the show though, and ALW himself has said that he was merely 'treading water' when he wrote WDTW. The Beautiful Game was much better (although not without problems of it's own) :)

[Gothampc]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 8:42am

I saw this show in London, and I wasn't that pleased. It was ok, but there was not enough momentum at the end of Act 1. Margo is right in that after it played DC, nobody thought it should continue. But there were advertisements that had been placed in NYC, so there had been plans to bring it to Broadway.

The show that the musical is based on is a sleeper movie starring Haley Mills. It doesn't have enough punch to make a Broadway musical. ALW was also criticized for taking it out of its original context (England) and placing it in the American South.

Updated On: 9/9/04 at 08:42 AM

[JakeB]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 2:05pm

I saw this twice in the West End and on its far inferior UK tour, on which it was entirely redesigned and restaged with a new number called The Gang replacing the brilliant Annie Christmas.

I have to say - it was very enjoyable. It had some powerful ballads in, not least Unsettled Scores - perhaps one of the most underrated songs of the 1990s musical theatre scene. Michael Ball's recording on the 'celebrity' album is definitely worth a listen. The staging was a bit messy, due to it being a split stage.. try to picture this:

The entire floor rose up about 10 metres off the stage and scenes would happen above and below simultaneously. It could move up and down as and when it needed to. When it first happened, everyone was really impressed, but it did get a bit samey. But the design really accurately captured the feel for the deep South.

There was also live snakes in it. And a motorbike.

Everytime I've seen it it's had a roaring trade and people love it. I think it should give it a shot on a North American tour, but again with a new director and new designer - it changes dramatically with a different director's interpretation.

[tpdc]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 2:08pm

It opened at the National Theater in DC and Davis Gaines played the man. It got terrible reviews here and there were stories at the time about Prince and Lloyd Webber disagreeing about what to do to fix things.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 3:01pm

I think the score was very mediocre.

While I think "Annie Christmas" was an interesting song, I think it interrupted the flow between "When Children Rule The World" and "No Matter What". Those two songs side by side would have strengthened the energy going into the end of Act 1. The energy of "Children Rule the World" would have really lifted "No Matter What". But "No Matter What" has to regain the energy siphoned off by "Annie Christmas".

"A Kiss is a Terrible Thing to Waste" is wasted time. What a stupid sentiment for a song. I think only Sondheim has the brillance to make that sentiment work. There is no composer that could rescue "Tire Tracks and Broken Hearts".

[god_i_hate_you]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 3:35pm

Because it effin' sucks! Watched in London, grew up in the South, Webber is a musical moron. Die Webber!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 4:46pm

Fascinating post, hate. Really insightful. I also saw it in London and was raised in the South, but I certainly don't consider Webber a moron (his international success would prove otherwise) nor do I wish death on him because he wrote something I personally don't like.

So how is sixth grade? Judging from your post, you haven't grown up at all.

Updated On: 9/9/04 at 04:46 PM