Will Iceman cometh to Broadway?

[jon5202]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 8:43am

Chris Jones of the Chicago Tribune with thoughts on The Iceman Cometh which closes Sunday in Chicago.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/theater/theaterloop/ct-ott-0615-jones-loop-20120615,0,1342631.story

[anmiller07]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 8:47am

Not likely. Updated On: 6/15/12 at 08:47 AM

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 9:04am

The New York Times in today's paper paints a somewhat rosier picture about the possibility of a transfer to Broadway of the acclaimed Chicago production of THE ICEMAN COMETH, despite producer Rudin's bowing out of the picture. I hope it happens. I would pay top dollar to see it.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 9:22am

"Producer Scott Rudin, who holds the rights to produce the show on Broadway, has decided not to stage the Goodman Theatre production on the Great White Way"

Scott Rudin appears to be a complete idiot. He had a hissy fit and pulled out of producing "Clybourne Park" all because he felt personally insulted by the playwrite. I hope he choked as it won Best Play of the year. His credibility as a producer should be seriously questioned after that.

[anmiller07]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 9:28am

If Rudin hold the rights to any possible Broadway transfer, how could it happen without him? This is not me being snarky, I really don't know. Would he be able to sell those rights or something?

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 11:25am

I know the likelihood of this happening is slim, but just the IDEA (however slight the potential...) of Iceman (with Lane and Dennehy) AND Long Day's Journey (with Metcalf and Suchet) coming to New York next season brings me incredible joy


Crossing my fingers!

[Jon]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 11:38am

Besides the size of the cast, I assume with the over-4-hour running time, there are no two-performance days, limiting the run to six shows a week. Almost impossible to make a profit.

[dreaming]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 11:52am

I noticed that Disney musicals have a 1:30 start time. I wonder if such a time could be done for Iceman. (And then an earlier second performance.)

Also-they could just make ticket prices higher, which is what I assume they'll do, coupled with a 'strictly limited' engagement-which will make it a very hot ticket.

[defyinggravity2]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 12:52pm

I saw it in Chicago. I didn't really like it much, but Nathan Lane, as always, was fantastic.

[Huss417]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 1:18pm

@defyinggravity2

Im curious to hear what you didn't like about the show?

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 1:28pm

I think the only way it could happen is if Lincoln Center does it. The show will never be a moneymaking venture. It would have to be done by a non-profit with sizable overhead and sizable space. Lincoln Center's really the only place I can think of.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 1:35pm

^ or Roundabout.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 4:43pm

I agree with defyinggravity. I think the main problem with the production was the staging. There was so little movement on the stage (actors would be in one position for up to twenty minutes at a time) that everything just felt incredibly slow. Acts two and three were the most entertaining (there was the most movement here) but in acts one and four, most of the supporting cast hardly moved a muscle for the majority of it. Also, some of the lighting was particularly annoying. In the opening scene, the lights come up very slightly on the scene and get brighter ever so slowly during the course of the first act, but the end of the act is still fairly dim. For the first five minutes, it was impossible to see anything other than the faint outlines of the people on the stage, so I (and several others, too) could not focus on the play at the beginning because it was so hard to see anything. It was a very bad opening that did not exactly draw me in.

That said, I thought all of the actors, especially Nathan Lane, were very good. The set design was also beautiful. However, the play felt so slow that I couldn't get into it.

[vegas2]

Posted: 6/15/12 at 5:39pm

I agree about Acts 1 and 4. My eyelids drooped a few times. But I was fully engaged in Acts 2 and 3. Overall, I thought it was fabulous. Excellent cast. I'm not sure whether a 4-1/2 hour depressing drama will be a sufficient draw to pay its way on Broadway. Serious theatregoers will be thrilled, but I don't know about the tourists.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 6/16/12 at 1:52am

I agree that this might have trouble finding an audience in New York. This was a huge hit in Chicago, but so was Chinglish last summer (also at the Goodman), and that show found little success in New York. I'm sure that Nathan Lane and Brian Dennehy will draw in some fans, but New York has such a different audience that it's hard to tell if they will go see the show. Before Chinglish, wasn't the last production from the Goodman that went to Broadway Desire Under the Elms? That didn't do very well, either.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 6/16/12 at 8:29am

The last revival, with Kevin Spacey, was a hot ticket and sold out its limited run. However, to my knowledge, it didn't turn a profit.

[AC126748]

Posted: 6/16/12 at 12:03pm

^ That could have something to do with the fact that there were only six performances a week, and it was a limited run of less than 100 performances. Even though it was the first play to charge $100 a ticket (if I recall correctly), it would have been hard to turn a profit in such a short period of time on only six performances a week.

The Lane production is only doing six performances a week in Chicago, but given the jump in ticket prices, it could probably turn a profit (as Salesman did only having seven performances a week). But I guess that also depends on how much of a draw Lane is in a straight play, especially a five-hour straight play. Something that's an event in Chicago doesn't necessarily mean it will be an event on Broadway.

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 6/16/12 at 12:30pm

This makes me very sad It would be a shame if this did not transfer. It deserves it and more-over so does Nathan.