|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 7:40:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 7:49:58 GMT
Apparently the cast were contracted for a year with the expectation for extension. I chatted to a woman who worked on the show at the 1st preview.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 8:27:33 GMT
Apparently the cast were contracted for a year with the expectation for extension. I chatted to a woman who worked on the show at the 1st preview. Ohhhhh okay. It's a shame that ticket sales weren't up as the cast were amazing! |
|
51 posts
|
Post by easilypleased on Apr 10, 2016 9:36:20 GMT
They've got it wrong, it was only booking until 18th June. This of course means that the show itself doesn't have to make any announcement at all because it was always a strictly limited season. I imagine the cast contracts have a break clause to enable them to close before the year is up.
By the way has anyone seen it in the past couple of days? I think Emma Williams' understudy has been on. Not sure when Emma is back.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Apr 10, 2016 9:46:42 GMT
It always intended to extend
|
|
51 posts
|
Post by easilypleased on Apr 10, 2016 9:50:46 GMT
It always intended to extend Yes I'm sure that's true, I meant that's what it said on the publicity |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 10:07:49 GMT
They were smart with the publicity by listing it as a limited run, it meant that people would not think it would flop if it closed on that date! Worked evidently.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Apr 10, 2016 10:16:30 GMT
Only to a limited degree. Plus it won't help the finances.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 10:26:15 GMT
Of course it won't help with finances, but now, if and when it plays next, people of the genral public wont look at the show like "oh, that is the show that flopped and closed early", they will look at it as "oh, that is the show that played in London for a season". No tickets were lost in the announcement of the closing date. I personally think announcing it as a limited run was a really smart thing to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 10:53:49 GMT
Of course it won't help with finances, but now, if and when it plays next, people of the genral public wont look at the show like "oh, that is the show that flopped and closed early", they will look at it as "oh, that is the show that played in London for a season". No tickets were lost in the announcement of the closing date. I personally think announcing it as a limited run was a really smart thing to do. Yes so do I! If I was a producer of a new show in the west end I would advertise it as limited then extend if sales were good. The Noel Coward is a small theatre so I'm surprised tickets sales weren't that good but to be fair the tickets for the show were quite expensive! |
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Apr 10, 2016 17:14:52 GMT
And you think people will say, "Les Mis has run for 30 years, Wicked for 10, and Mrs Henderson for... 4 months- that's fine"
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 17:24:30 GMT
And you think people will say, "Les Mis has run for 30 years, Wicked for 10, and Mrs Henderson for... 4 months- that's fine" Not at all what I am thinking. Those are incredibly rare shows these days.
Gypsy only ran 8 months... is that a flop? Funny Girl is only running 6 months... is that a flop too?
Photograph 51 ran at the same theatre for less than four months, was a limited run, was that a flop?
These shows that are listed as limited runs of course.
|
|
4,974 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 10, 2016 17:31:57 GMT
But the hardest part for any show is to gather momentum, look at both Once and Memphis, no one would suggest they are bad shows, but closed a lot earlier than expected.
So if this is to close and nothing has been confirmed yet, what could go in, in its place?
Suggested already on here is the musical The Girls, saying that if it did it would be ironic to play the same venue as the Calander Girls.
I suggested Long Day's Journey Into Night with Jeremy Irons and Leslie Manville.
Anything else could transfer from Statford Upon Avon?
Cannot think of anything that would come in from Barh?
Could be possible that Moderate Soprano might come in from Hampstead.
A Gentlemen's Guide to Love and Murder could be a possible from Broadway, but generally these transfers like more time.
Fun Home could be a very outside bet, again they like longer time, for marketing to kick in?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2016 17:35:15 GMT
I actually think Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder could work... Beautiful was only open on Broadway for under a year before it came over here, so it's possible Gentleman's Guide (from the same Broadway season) could head over!
The Girls is a possibility too.
I think Fun Home will find its stage somewhere where the in-the-round can really work.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Apr 10, 2016 17:40:15 GMT
I just saw A Gentleman's Guide in the American touring production and it feels like a show that could be very successful in the West End. The two male leads are great parts - the kind of parts good actors would kill for.
|
|
7,054 posts
|
Post by Jon on Apr 10, 2016 20:05:53 GMT
And you think people will say, "Les Mis has run for 30 years, Wicked for 10, and Mrs Henderson for... 4 months- that's fine" Not at all what I am thinking. Those are incredibly rare shows these days.
Gypsy only ran 8 months... is that a flop? Funny Girl is only running 6 months... is that a flop too?
Photograph 51 ran at the same theatre for less than four months, was a limited run, was that a flop?
These shows that are listed as limited runs of course.
Gypsy and Funny Girls are revivals though with big names that couldn't longer than 6-8 months. Photograph 51 was a play with an big name and that did very well in its 10 week run. |
|
51 posts
|
Post by easilypleased on Apr 10, 2016 20:46:14 GMT
I think what sets MHP a little apart from the shows mentioned is the fact that it was a brand new development, the sheer weight of names associated with it and the amount of time and money that must have been invested in it. John Reid, Michael Harrison et al certainly didn't do all that for a four month run at the Noel Coward! By that standard it has flopped in the WE, no other word for it.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Apr 11, 2016 7:43:02 GMT
Plus technically if it doesn't recoup, whatever the reviews, it is a flop. People will lose money. There's an interesting thread on the other chatboard about how British musical theatre is in crisis- I was shocked to actually think in the cold light of day how few British musicals have made back their investment over the past 20 years!
|
|
2,676 posts
|
Post by viserys on Apr 11, 2016 8:02:46 GMT
Have people been blinded by the mega-success of ALW perhaps? Take him and his monster hits out of the equation and truly successful British Musicals have been a handful perhaps - Blood Brothers has been seen worldwide, Billy Elliot has been a huge success in London and transferred abroad, but what else? Matilda is having a decent run in London, but that's all I can think of.
When I look at home-grown British Musicals in the last 10-20 years, I see a bunch of jukebox musicals and a string of lack-lustre movie adaptations. Billy Elliot might have been a little masterpiece with a story that works very well live on stage, a gripping subject and a fairly decent score. But beyond that, it looks to me like producers were skimming the back catalogue of British films and thinking "Hm, which could be stuffed with a string of mediocre musical theatre songs and plonked on stage?"
I did enjoy "Made in Dagenham" and I'm still looking forward to "Mrs Henderson" since I like the music, but none of this shouts creativity, originality or simply a work of inspiration by a composer/writer who is really keen on a subject that speaks to him personally. It's a huge difference from shows that come from the heart, whether it's ALW's older stuff like Phantom (written for his then-squeeze Sarah Brightman) or Evita (a subject Tim Rice was keen on) or now Hamilton (Lin-Manuel Miranda put years of work into this) or even Book of Mormon.
ALW himself meanwhile still churns out decent tunes but has made terrible choices with his books. There was a good musical lurking in the Stephen Ward-story but not what we saw on stage and the less said about Paint Never Dries, the better.
Stop thinking "what movie can be rehashed as a musical?" and really go with subjects that are intrigueing, fresh and inspirational and let the creative juices flow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2016 8:24:06 GMT
It was always a limited run to boost the tour later this year. They always had the option to extend; but a west end run sets up the tour and any international productions rather nicely.
Hope we get a play in the Noel Coward now. It's too small for The Girls.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by theatre-turtle on Apr 11, 2016 10:05:20 GMT
Have people been blinded by the mega-success of ALW perhaps? Take him and his monster hits out of the equation and truly successful British Musicals have been a handful perhaps - Blood Brothers has been seen worldwide, Billy Elliot has been a huge success in London and transferred abroad, but what else? Matilda is having a decent run in London, but that's all I can think of. When I look at home-grown British Musicals in the last 10-20 years, I see a bunch of jukebox musicals and a string of lack-lustre movie adaptations. Billy Elliot might have been a little masterpiece with a story that works very well live on stage, a gripping subject and a fairly decent score. But beyond that, it looks to me like producers were skimming the back catalogue of British films and thinking "Hm, which could be stuffed with a string of mediocre musical theatre songs and plonked on stage?" I did enjoy "Made in Dagenham" and I'm still looking forward to "Mrs Henderson" since I like the music, but none of this shouts creativity, originality or simply a work of inspiration by a composer/writer who is really keen on a subject that speaks to him personally. It's a huge difference from shows that come from the heart, whether it's ALW's older stuff like Phantom (written for his then-squeeze Sarah Brightman) or Evita (a subject Tim Rice was keen on) or now Hamilton (Lin-Manuel Miranda put years of work into this) or even Book of Mormon. ALW himself meanwhile still churns out decent tunes but has made terrible choices with his books. There was a good musical lurking in the Stephen Ward-story but not what we saw on stage and the less said about Paint Never Dries, the better. Stop thinking "what movie can be rehashed as a musical?" and really go with subjects that are intrigueing, fresh and inspirational and let the creative juices flow. Good post. What's the real basis for the lack of creativity in the British musical scene? There have been some excellent and highly original recent Broadway musicals, including the west end's best new musicals Kinky Boots and In the heights (it wasn't even a legitimate competition between these two and MHP and Bend it) Instead of focusing on what we're doing wrong, what are they doing right? |
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Apr 11, 2016 11:11:09 GMT
As was mentioned on the other board, New York has Playwrights' Horizon, the Public Theatre, all developing adventurous new musical including Giant, Caroline or Change and Hamilton. These places are supported by private donations and first-look deals with leading commercial producers.
Sadly, our leading musical producer- Cameron Mackintosh- isn't interested in offering more than a trickle of funding to a couple of prestige projects. Sonia Friedman also cherry-picks established work. It's these people who need to be investing to develop the dynamic new British musicals of 21st Century, rather than re-hashing old faithfuls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2016 11:17:09 GMT
As was mentioned on the other board, New York has Playwrights' Horizon, the Public Theatre, all developing adventurous new musical including Giant, Caroline or Change and Hamilton. These places are supported by private donations and first-look deals with leading commercial producers. Sadly, our leading musical producer- Cameron Mackintosh- isn't interested in offering more than a trickle of funding to a couple of prestige projects. Sonia Friedman also cherry-picks established work. It's these people who need to be investing to develop the dynamic new British musicals of 21st Century, rather than re-hashing old faithfuls. That's not fair. Cameron Mackintosh is probably the biggest single investor in musical theatre in the country, including new works. |
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Apr 11, 2016 12:48:06 GMT
I disagree
|
|
9 posts
|
Post by bedsmuso on Apr 11, 2016 18:36:04 GMT
So firstly the show isn't closing. It's playing its scheduled booking period and not extending. That's a very different thing to closing early and also more positive for the show/industry and people connected to it. Also there is no tour later this year, I'm not sure where people have got that from. There was a tour post bath that got pulled due to coming into London.
|
|
