Why does the CHORUS LINE revival cost 10 million dollars?- Page 2

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 11:13am

I'm sure Charlotte is making decent money - but it's not like they had to pony up the Broderick/Lane bucks to get her to sign. Berresse as well. I agree that the rest of the cast is probably making just a bit more than minimum.

Even though the costumes look sparse and minimal, you can guess that the designer is charging a fortune to get them that way. And on down the line...(no pun intended).

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 11:18am

I have read the initial production cost for Wicked were 14 Million. That was before it incurred tour costs or the Chicago Sit-down costs.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 11:19am

Thinking back, when Via Galactica tanked, it lost ( I believe ) its entire investment of about $ 750,000. It was a big show with sets, costumes ,cast, full orchestra. It was not good show mind you but look what $ 750,000 bought you back than

[jjoey076]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 11:57am

I'm missing something. Grey Gardens and Spring Awakening are 75 mil each? You've got to be kidding...if Wicked opened in 2003 with 14 mil, then how did prices jack up so quickly? Maybe that was another joke post, but it just doesn't seem right to have them 75 mil EACH.

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 12:07pm

It wasn't a joke. It was 100% serious.

[jjoey076]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 12:14pm

How is this possible?!

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 12:37pm

Oh, god...

[FosseBoi]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 12:55pm

I'm with jjoey on this, that can not be possible! HOW?lol

[popular_elphie]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 1:05pm

Wicked cost 14 million.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 1:44pm

Sorry, guys. I REALLY thought you knew that was a joke.

Maybe I'll have to start putting these: " " or "" or LOL! or (joke!) after everything that's intended merely for fun.


*ponders*

Naaaaaaaahhh...

My (apparently vague) point and POV here, is that 10 million for ACL is ridiculous. First of all, I didn't think the marketing costs were included in the show's production budget. I would think that is a separate budget. At least it is for film production and TV production. (And believe me, people get really "creative" with those bottom line numbers.) If a movie costs $100 million to produce, this does NOT include the marketing and advertising costs. You can usually add anywhere from $50 million to $100 million MORE for those. It's a very gray area, and has to do with creative accounting, since so many people these days get "points" and percentages of profits. Studios pay accountants big bucks to cry "poor" as often as possible.

So... back to Broadway...

If this $10M number includes the marketing and advertising costs, as does all other budgets posted for Broadway shows, then none of these published costs really make sense to me. Marketing is an ongoing thing for theatre, during an open-ended run. As is the weekly overhead for a show. The 10 million (or whatever the reported fixed amount is) has to do with mounting and opening the initial production, right? Not how much it will cost to run the show for the next twenty-odd years.

Or are these numbers just "smoke and mirrors" and we should all stop speculating about these random fairy-tale scenarios?

Updated On: 9/3/06 at 01:44 PM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 1:45pm

I vote for stop speculating.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 2:33pm

I really don't understand how those finale costumes can cost thousands of dollars each.

I do think the rest of the money is right up there on stage, however. When Charlotte finishes Music & The Mirror and the giant chandelier flies down and crashes on the stage, it can't be cheap. When Val finishes Dance: 10, Looks: 3, and the giant inflatable ladies they bought from the Rolling Stones pop up on the sides of the stage, it can't be cheap. The flashback scene of Cassie floating in the swimming pool in LA, using the Sunset Blvd technique, can NOT be cheap.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 2:43pm

"I really don't understand how those finale costumes can cost thousands of dollars each."

Because they are made with 14K solid gold thread... and real diamonds, too. Of course they use a Bedazzler to attach all the stones.

Well, they HAVE to cut corners SOMEWHERE.
The secret revealed...

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 3:19pm

Too funny!

Could royalties, or using rights for Broadway, have anything to do with the cost? I mean, if Taboo and Boy From Oz cost 10 mil, Bombay Dreams cost 14 mil, Sweeney and Chicago were 3 mil or so...I just don't get it!

By the way, I saw some ACL loading in was going on the other day...very excited!

[phantom8019]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 3:37pm

I am really, really sorry, but am I the only person who hates this show? I don't like to be negative, but surely I cannot be the only one?
I find it terribly dated, self-obsessed, pretentious, drawn out, and uncompelling. In addition, the music does nothing for me. Some of the songs almost sound like commercial jingles, in my opinion. I do not understand how it ran so long in the first place, but again, I guess I am in the minority here. Does anyone else at least meet me half way?

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 3:55pm

"I find it terribly dated, self-obsessed, pretentious, drawn out, and uncompelling."

Yeah, it's no RENT, that's for sure.

[phantom8019]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 4:38pm

Oh my, who said I like Rent?
Actually, those are pretty much my thoughts on Rent too.
Although I think Rent does have a few nice songs.

[phantom8019]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 4:42pm

By the way Best12, I read your posts often, and I think you are pretty smart and well-informed. I also usually agree with your opinions on stuff.
I am curious why people like Chorus Line, and if you think my criticism is completely off or even just a little accurate.

[clarkstallings]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 4:47pm

I'm quite certain that there has yet to be a musical with a 75 million capitalization. With the case of Wicked, I've heard 14 million as well. I happen to know from a higher up Wicked crew member that a Wicked set, lights, costumes, sound, basically the physical stuff costs about 12 million bucks. So, add a couple of million more to that for development and 14 million sounds about right.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:30pm

phantom8019---Sorry for the snarky comment. It's hard for me to be objective about A Chorus Line, because I saw it back in its heyday. It was a current and modern show, and it revolutionized Broadway, and I "got" all the various references (even if I was a bit young when it first opened).

Do I think it's possible that the material will come off "dated" to modern audiences who didn't experience the show in any form 20-30 years ago? Of course I do. I think this is a "given," based on the material. The show became dated during its original run, in fact. It was very much tied to the world of the mid-1970s, as seen through the eyes of these auditioning dancers.

I DON'T think it's self-obsessed or pretentious in any way though, as you have said. Not remotely. These dancers are asked to "open up" by Zach at his audition. They didn't show up that day thinking they were going to spill their guts and personal history on that stage. And some (like Sheila) get into the proceedings very awkwardly, and ultimately are upset that they were pushed to discuss such things. But this is the concept behind the show. Hey, you want the job? Then the director needs you to stick around and talk about yourself a bit. And as a result, we as an audience, get a look inside the heads and hearts of these chosen aspiring performers for 2 hours.

I think so many people on this board could answer your question of "why they like A Chorus Line." I've already posted in several ACL threads just how much it meant to me. (...MEANS to me.)

I would be curious as to a reason why you DON'T like it, instead. That would be more refreshing, and certainly against the general reaction. Is it (gulp) too old-fashioned for you? Can you not get past the funny clothes and the '70s guitar riffs and orchestral arrangements? Is Michael Bennett's "turn-turn-out-in-touch-step..." becoming as corny and cliche as the Jitterbug or Fox Trot? Underneath all the "old-fashionedness" of it, there is a tale of humanity. Of people gathered in a theatre together who all WANT something. And they're willing, and have been willing, to make sacrifices to get it. And the great love of their chosen profession is displayed and expressed on stage in many ways. With many stories to tell. That's the universality of this show. It's neither pretentious, nor self-obsessed for people to show real passion like that. It's inspiring... not just to other dancers or wannabe dancers... but to any human being who has wanted to better themselves, and reach a seemingly unreachable and illogical goal, merely for the love of it.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:48pm

Oh, Tana! America's missed you!
Updated On: 9/3/06 at 06:48 PM

[AshleyBrownFan123]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 7:22pm

Tana was in an infomercial for the Bedazzler. She even Bedazzeled her clothes she wore on Fear Factor with Craig. Does she get paid to bedazzle herself?

Back to ACL....

That mirror in the back must cost $50. 00 a minute to turn! And the part where Morales falls off a swing in Chanel and be caught by Gary Coleman did cost alot, due to Nicole Kidman not being Morales.

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 7:50pm

wait...i saw on my "broadway: the american musical" dvd, and it had a segment about WICKED, and said it cost $40 million
im confused...

[AshleyBrownFan123]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 9:01pm

bwayondabrain, you heard wrong. It was 14 million. How much did Sunset Blvd. cost?

[phantom8019]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 10:51pm

Hey Best12, thanks for taking the time to answer my question.

I really can't give a concrete reason as to why I dislike it so much. It's sort of like if you don't like a certain food. I just don't like broccoli. I don't know why. It's the taste. I guess the show leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

With certain things, ie, the movie Crash, I can tell you 100 very intelligent reasons why I hated it. I definitely respect and understand that A Chorus Line was revolutionary at its time. And I would never think we should discard it because it is dated. I just think certain shows... hold up differently and thus should be treated differently.

I can start I guess with the music. I really dislike it. For me, a musical is all about the music. If the music is not good, the show really has no legs. I mean, why not be a play instead? And there is nothing worse than sitting through bad music. The reason musicals are musicals is because they attempt to do something with music that you can only do on the stage and that is needed for the story. I look at my favorite shows, Sweeney Todd, Cabaret, Evita, Ragtime, and Caroline or Change, and I say "yes, those shows used music to its fullest and gave me something incredible." I can't tell you why I dislike the music from A Chorus Line other than, as I said, a lot of it sounds like commercial jingles, is bland, and lacks that feeling, in my opinion.

I love the theatre, but I, myself, have no interest in acting or being an actor. Maybe deep down I could care less about A Chorus Line's message. I mean, to me, it always just came off as whining. We all have jobs, but we deserve a musical about them? I work in publishing... where is my musical documenting my travails with comma faults? I have always been uncomfortable around those "drama personalities" who I perceive to exaggerate everything and always be the center attention. I went to high school with a lot of people like that, and my thoughts are... "yawn."

Lastly, I am gay and for my own psychological reasons I did not like the gay aspect of the show one bit. I know it is dated, but again, for my own reasons, I found it insultingly trivial. But, let's not psychoanalyze that. Let's just say it was no Brokeback Mountain. :)


Updated On: 9/2/06 at 10:51 PM