just revive Ragtime already

[422]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 6:44pm

[Huss417]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 6:56pm

THEY DID!

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 6:57pm

Wasn’t the last revival a huge flop even though it was well received? It closed early. Not sure anyone is chomping at the bit for a revival unless you cast megastars. 

[Huss417]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 7:00pm

Bettyboy72 said: "Wasn’t the last revival a huge flop even though it was well received? It closed early. Not sure anyone is chomping at the bit for a revival unless you cast megastars."

I still have my tickets for whenever they go forward with the Actors Fund Concert..

 

[ashley0139]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 7:10pm

Bettyboy72 said: "Wasn’t the last revival a huge flop even though it was well received? It closed early. Not sure anyone is chomping at the bit for a revival unless you cast megastars."

It was, but god it was so beautiful and well done.

[blaxx]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 7:23pm

Bettyboy72 said: "Wasn’t the last revival a huge flop even though it was well received? It closed early. Not sure anyone is chomping at the bit for a revival unless you cast megastars."

Yes, as amazing as it was this show doesn't need a revival anytime soon, at least from a financial perspective.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:22pm

The revival in 2009 was absolutely stunning. And dare I say better than the original. Yet it was deemed a major flop despite its rave reviews. Don't think a revival in the next few years would do any better.

[Kad]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:41pm

I think it's just a cost-prohibitively large show to produce. It has three ensembles, essentially, that can't necessarily double up much. The 2009 revival was pared down, and still quite large by today's standards. It would need to have a big star to guarantee sales to make it feasible.

[pmensky]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:52pm

It was too soon for the last revival. I don’t understand why any producer would revive an expensive show fewer than 10 years after its previous production. Other than Les Mis, I can’t think of any major revival in the last 20 years that was produced within 10 years of its previous run and made it to a one year run. Fifteen years seems like a sensible amount of time to wait. 

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 11:29pm

It was a marvelous revival. Was glad I got to see it. Unless they cast bankable stars it won’t make money. 

[stoptheworld38]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 11:31pm

THIS THIS THIS 

The last revival was over 10 years ago at this point, and only lasted for about a month. And I feel like a revival could be much more successful now due to the (sad) relevance of so many of the themes in the show in the world today. 

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 11:47pm

I’ve always dreamt about Lincoln center producing revivals of Ragtime and Parade in Rep with one another. That would be glorious. If another revival happens, I hope they don’t cheapen the orchestrations… that’s why I wouldn’t want it to get done by roundabout.

Updated On: 12/12/21 at 11:47 PM

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 12/11/21 at 8:07am

Call_me_jorge said: "I think Lincoln Center should produce revivals of Ragtime and Parade in rep."

I was about to say that I think it would make the most sense for a not-for-profit organization like Lincoln Center Theater or Roundabout Theatre Company to produce a revival.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/11/21 at 11:01am

As I recall, it also opened just after the financial melt-down, and people were really cutting back on theatre attendance.  Too soon and bad timing. 

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 12/11/21 at 11:13am

Can we get Anne Hathaway to play Mother?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 12/11/21 at 11:34am

Kad said: "I think it's just a cost-prohibitively large show to produce. It has three ensembles, essentially, that can't necessarily double up much. The 2009 revival was pared down, and still quite large by today's standards. It would need to have a big star to guarantee sales to make it feasible."

I saw a beautiful, thoughtfully directed production in Seattle that only had 12 cast members, but I don't think that would fly on Broadway.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/12/21 at 1:01pm

ashley0139 said: "Kad said: "I think it's just a cost-prohibitively large show to produce. It has three ensembles, essentially, that can't necessarily double up much. The 2009 revival was pared down, and still quite large by today's standards. It would need to have a big star to guarantee sales to make it feasible."

I saw a beautiful, thoughtfully directed production in Seattle that only had 12 cast members, but I don't think that would fly on Broadway."

Not necessarily.  That would allow it to operate in a smaller theatre, with a more manageable budget.  The original production was very massive, probably the reason it never made back its investment.  The second production, while less 'huge' than the original, still had a large cast and was in a large theatre.  Smaller could work...Think Sweeney Todd with Lupone or Nine revival or The Color Purple...of course, I have no idea if any of those returned their investment (was Nine a Roundabout production, though at the O'Neill?)

[Timon3]

Posted: 12/12/21 at 3:06pm

It was surprising the original production did so well (never recouped, other well known reason there) despite the show not winning the Tony and mixed reviews?

One of the greatest scores written.

Updated On: 12/12/21 at 03:06 PM

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 12/12/21 at 3:56pm

I saw the 12-person production in Seattle a few years ago as well, and it was nicely done, though paring it down only made it feel goofier than it already is. The score is written to be a barnburner from start to finish, including the solo numbers, none of which are what I would call intimate or understated - they only seem so in a full production because all the other numbers are so huge that they blow the roof off. Reducing it just made the big numbers small. It was a nice idea but it would have to be done exceptionally well to sell it, imho, because the demands of the epic scope are baked into the score.

[ashley0139]

Posted: 12/12/21 at 5:56pm

Charley Kringas Inc said: "I saw the 12-person production in Seattle a few years ago as well, and it was nicely done, though paring it down only made it feel goofier than it already is. The score is written to be a barnburner from start to finish, including the solo numbers, none of which are what I would call intimate or understated - they only seem so in a full production because all the other numbers are so huge that they blow the roof off. Reducing it just made the big numbers small. It was a nice idea but it would have to be done exceptionally well to sell it, imho, because the demands of the epic scope are baked into the score."

I agree that they couldn't do the big numbers as well with such a small cast. But in general I thought it was so well done that you barely noticed it was a small cast. Everyone played so many roles so seamlessly. It was really well thought out.

[pmensky]

Posted: 12/12/21 at 9:35pm

Charley Kringas Inc said: "I saw the 12-person production in Seattle a few years ago as well, and it was nicely done, though paring it down only made it feel goofier than it already is. The score is written to be a barnburner from start to finish, including the solo numbers, none of which are what I would call intimate or understated - they only seem so in a full production because all the other numbers are so huge that they blow the roof off. Reducing it just made the big numbers small. It was a nice idea but it would have to be done exceptionally well to sell it, imho, because the demands of the epic scope are baked into the score."

I share this opinion. Certain shows have elements baked in which lend the show to a large cast in a large setting in a grand style. You can take any big show and pare it down for whatever reason, but that doesn’t mean it’s effective. Years ago I saw a production of Sunset Blvd. at a small theatre in the UK in which the stage was the size of a postage stamp, and Norma’s mansion was depicted with a spiral staircase and some banana plants. I burst out laughing during “With One Look” because all I could think of was my alcoholic aunt in Boca twirling around her condo at midnight. 

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 12/12/21 at 11:46pm

Just chiming in, having seen the original Broadway production but not the revival (I was also in one of the first regional productions back in the day).

Even twenty years ago the show felt problematic to me. I sometimes refer to it as White Guilt: The Musical because its authors are so earnest in their storytelling but end up letting pretty much every white person in the audience off the hook. "Oh, well I don't use the N-word, and I was sad when Coalhouse got shot, so I guess that means I'm not racist! I'm one of the good guys! Phew! What a relief!" It's the same problem with the original play version of To Kill a Mockingbird (which has thankfully gotten a rewrite via Aaron Sorkin). Ragtime is grandiosely self-congratulatory and self-important, and given the events of 2020, I feel like a more nuanced look at race relations - written by BIPOC - is more of what we need right now.

That said...great score.

[Valentina3]

Posted: 11/27/23 at 12:38pm

The Distinctive Baritone said: "Just chiming in, having seen the original Broadway production but not the revival (I was also in one of the first regional productions back in the day).

Even twenty years ago the show felt problematic to me. I sometimes refer to it as White Guilt: The Musical because its authors are so earnest in their storytelling but end up letting pretty much every white person in the audience off the hook. "Oh, well I don't use the N-word, and I was sad when Coalhouse got shot, so I guess that means I'm not racist! I'm one of the good guys! Phew! What a relief!" It's the same problem with the original play version of To Kill a Mockingbird (which has thankfully gotten a rewrite via Aaron Sorkin). Ragtime is grandiosely self-congratulatory and self-important, and given the events of 2020, I feel like a more nuanced look at race relations - written by BIPOC - is more of what we need right now.

That said...great score."

I knew the music of the show, but this weekend was my first time watching it on stage and fully understand what you're saying. But... I do think the existing text does allow a lot of room for re-interpretation and it can be done by the right combination of performer & director.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 11/27/23 at 1:01pm

There is some "all sides"ness or white savior-ism to the show, but I think MANY problems could be addressed in the direction and maybe some very slight tweaks to the written material. And let's have white directors sit this one out for another decade or so.

I've always felt TIL WE REACH THAT DAY would be a much more appropriate finale reprise than WHEELS OF A DREAM. Less optimistic but more true to the spirit of the show.

Updated On: 11/27/23 at 01:01 PM

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 11/27/23 at 4:51pm

There was supposed to be a production directed by the original Houdini, Jim Corti, out here in the Chicago area. That was planned for 2021 and they have yet to reschedule it. The only production of ragtime I’ve ever seen was an incredibly done production at Northwestern. If I recall correctly it was the 2018 Dolphin Show.