why did millie close? — Page 2

Yea Urinetown made there money back but i feel like you could be comparing Apples and Oranges. Urinetown's set were pretty cruddy and run down while Millie's where huge and stylish. I think Production cost is something that should be looked at when comparing these shows.

I regret that I didn't see Millie. But I thought it was a bad idea for a Broadway musical.Foster's Tony win didn't make it a good show any more than Menzel's made Wicked a good show

i never saw millie on broadway but we had the same production here in the west end (with amanda holden as millie)and it diddnt do well here at all.The show really struggled to find an audience even though the west end diddnt have many new shows around then.When the show closed it went out on a national tour and was playing to 500 to 800 people a night in 2000 capacity theatres like the manchester palace.
I saw the show and whilst had a good night out i had totally forgotten any of the songs 5 mins after i left the theatre so never wanted to go back and see it.
And words in the pubs and bars in london after the show was people saying it was all glitz and dazzle but with not much else to offer.
since the national tour its not been seen since

lol

Soooooo wish we would get urinetown in the uk

So, where do touring companies factor in when calculating the financial return on investment?

Because the show wasn't very good. Sutton Foster was - the show itself wasn't.

It was a very mediocre show that ran longer than it desreved to.

---