490 posts
|
Post by bimse on Nov 13, 2017 21:00:36 GMT
I wonder how well this will sell when it tours eventually (hopefully soon), do the general public know much about it ? very well I suspect, or at least that will be the hope of the producers. It's a well-known show and I would expect them to chuck a huge marketing spend behind it, as with when it first opened in London a couple of years ago. It's doing long sit-down runs in some of the bigger venues, which tends to suggest producer confidence. I’m not so sure it’s a well known show, it’ll take an awful lot of marketing outside of London , as was the case for the London opening. I’ve seen very little about this show on TV or in the media generally , beyond actively seeking information on it . |
|
4,974 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 13, 2017 21:17:12 GMT
It has very strong positive word of mouth and excellent brand recognition because of the composers. It has ran in London for near to 5 years with mostly sold out audience. It isn't an elaborate show, so therefore cheap to run.
Some local advertising is needed, but this will also get picked up by local radio stations and publicised that way.
If that doesn't work you can stick your arm in the air and say 'Hasa Diga Ebowi" and curse his rotten name.
|
|
490 posts
|
Post by bimse on Nov 13, 2017 21:21:59 GMT
It has very strong positive word of mouth and excellent brand recognition because of the composers. It has ran in London for near to 5 years with mostly sold out audience. It isn't an elaborate show, so therefore cheap to run. Some local advertising is needed, but this will also get picked up by local radio stations and publicised that way. If that doesn't work you can stick your arm in the air and say 'Hasa Diga Ebowi" and curse his rotten name. Is that phrase something from the show? I wonder if runs outside of London have time and money to rely on word of mouth to gain an audience ? Brand recognition ? I doubt the average theatre goer outside London would recognise it or name the composer . |
|
834 posts
|
Post by stuartmcd on Nov 13, 2017 21:51:57 GMT
I think this will do immensely well on a UK tour. Most people I speak to seem to know about it even if they aren't massively into theatre. Push the advertising as "from the creators of South Park" and it will do just fine.
|
|
3,426 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Nov 13, 2017 22:45:16 GMT
And Frozen...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2017 23:02:37 GMT
I’m not so sure it’s a well known show, it’ll take an awful lot of marketing outside of London , as was the case for the London opening. I’ve seen very little about this show on TV or in the media generally , beyond actively seeking information on it . I think people who like going to see musicals, generally tend to know something about musicals on in London, so i would be very surprised that people wouldn't have heard of it elsewhere. It will be a huge hit in every theatre it goes to. They will spend big money on it in every city, They can use reviews from London which were raves, it's won numerous Olivier Awards, it's created by the guys of South Park.... I'd say it will sell out in most places. I'd presume the tour will do the usual No.1 venues like the other big hits that tour. |
|
4,974 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 14, 2017 13:16:19 GMT
It has very strong positive word of mouth and excellent brand recognition because of the composers. It has ran in London for near to 5 years with mostly sold out audience. It isn't an elaborate show, so therefore cheap to run. Some local advertising is needed, but this will also get picked up by local radio stations and publicised that way. If that doesn't work you can stick your arm in the air and say 'Hasa Diga Ebowi" and curse his rotten name. Is that phrase something from the show? I wonder if runs outside of London have time and money to rely on word of mouth to gain an audience ? Brand recognition ? I doubt the average theatre goer outside London would recognise it or name the composer . You could apply that exact theory to the recent announced tour of Kinky Boots and Matilda and even the current tour of Wicked. |
|
490 posts
|
Post by bimse on Nov 14, 2017 13:43:08 GMT
Is that phrase something from the show? I wonder if runs outside of London have time and money to rely on word of mouth to gain an audience ? Brand recognition ? I doubt the average theatre goer outside London would recognise it or name the composer . You could apply that exact theory to the recent announced tour of Kinky Boots and Matilda and even the current tour of Wicked. I’d venture to say the titles you mention could already have a somewhat higher profile in the public eye, being derived from films or books that have been around for a while as a reference for the public. ( with the possible exception of Kinky Boots which is lower profile but has a drag component which looks fun ), However I’m not sure Book of Mormon has anything for the public to immediately recognise , apart from the South Park writers. Even the title doesn’t sound fun. I hope I’m wrong, I want our theatres to be successful and full houses for a wide variety of shows. |
|
7,054 posts
|
Post by Jon on Nov 14, 2017 16:54:22 GMT
I can't imagine it would tour while the West End production is running as I think the audience is not as broad compared to Wicked or The Lion King.
|
|
1,132 posts
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 14, 2017 17:16:56 GMT
It has very strong positive word of mouth and excellent brand recognition because of the composers. It has ran in London for near to 5 years with mostly sold out audience. It isn't an elaborate show, so therefore cheap to run. Some local advertising is needed, but this will also get picked up by local radio stations and publicised that way. If that doesn't work you can stick your arm in the air and say 'Hasa Diga Ebowi" and curse his rotten name. I can say that before I moved down to London a few months ago, the London production was being heavily advertised around Glasgow. We had six adverts alone in our local tube station (a lot for Glasgow) Hopefully this will help it along when it does tour. Also, I think Scottish audiences will eat it up! |
|
4,974 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 14, 2017 20:27:31 GMT
Also because BOM is a comparative small show to run, it can play the medium size theatres for a longer period of time. I'm sure it won't tour for a while, whilst still in London. On the same note I wouldn't be surprised if the London production of Kinky Boots closes, once it tours.
|
|
660 posts
|
Post by Oleanna on Nov 16, 2017 0:20:02 GMT
Saw this tonight for the first time.
I enjoyed having a good laugh, but don’t think it’s a very good musical.
Unfortunately, the lack of skill the writers possess to craft musical comedy in a truly effective, sophisticated way is very evident (I’m thinking specifically of some structural elements as well as the repetition of ineffective jokes and especially the poorly rhymed and stressed lyrics). In addition, the specific references made by each number in the score makes you yearn for those original numbers and works.
I found the first ten minutes the most effective. The idea of this being a great buddy comedy and the set up of the two opposing characters was strong, but unfortunately, once the idea of cheap culture gags presented themselves, the writers seemed to leave the development of this to chance and coincidence.
It’s a good night out, and as said above, a great laugh, but there was an opportunity here to make something more sophisticated which, through lack of skill and technique, was not fully realised.
|
|
4,177 posts
|
Post by HereForTheatre on Nov 16, 2017 8:21:57 GMT
Saw this tonight for the first time. I enjoyed having a good laugh, but don’t think it’s a very good musical. Unfortunately, the lack of skill the writers possess to craft musical comedy in a truly effective, sophisticated way is very evident (I’m thinking specifically of some structural elements as well as the repetition of ineffective jokes and especially the poorly rhymed and stressed lyrics). In addition, the specific references made by each number in the score makes you yearn for those original numbers and works. I found the first ten minutes the most effective. The idea of this being a great buddy comedy and the set up of the two opposing characters was strong, but unfortunately, once the idea of cheap culture gags presented themselves, the writers seemed to leave the development of this to chance and coincidence. It’s a good night out, and as said above, a great laugh, but there was an opportunity here to make something more sophisticated which, through lack of skill and technique, was not fully realised. I don't think it was through lack of skill and technique. They just didn't want to. Or need to. It is what it is. A silly, rude, not to be taken seriously show. |
|
660 posts
|
Post by Oleanna on Nov 16, 2017 14:54:32 GMT
Saw this tonight for the first time. I enjoyed having a good laugh, but don’t think it’s a very good musical. Unfortunately, the lack of skill the writers possess to craft musical comedy in a truly effective, sophisticated way is very evident (I’m thinking specifically of some structural elements as well as the repetition of ineffective jokes and especially the poorly rhymed and stressed lyrics). In addition, the specific references made by each number in the score makes you yearn for those original numbers and works. I found the first ten minutes the most effective. The idea of this being a great buddy comedy and the set up of the two opposing characters was strong, but unfortunately, once the idea of cheap culture gags presented themselves, the writers seemed to leave the development of this to chance and coincidence. It’s a good night out, and as said above, a great laugh, but there was an opportunity here to make something more sophisticated which, through lack of skill and technique, was not fully realised. I don't think it was through lack of skill and technique. They just didn't want to. Or need to. It is what it is. A silly, rude, not to be taken seriously show. Are you trying to suggest that the writers have the skill to write good lyrics, but just chose not to? I think it’s missing the point to suggest that good musical comedies need only be throw away and not utilise strong content to boost the comedy to higher levels. The Producers may be throw away, rude and not to be taken seriously, but it’s still constructed with great skill in order to make the most of the form and make the comedy as effective as possible. In other media, see Noises Off, The Simpsons and early Woody Allen. |
|
2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Nov 17, 2017 23:20:47 GMT
I can't imagine it would tour while the West End production is running as I think the audience is not as broad compared to Wicked or The Lion King. We thought that in the US too, but now most of the stops our (remaining) tour is going to are two- or three-time repeat cities. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 0:18:08 GMT
Saw this tonight, for the fourth time, but the last time i saw it was during previews when it first opened here.
It was great seeing it again and it reminded me of how good it really is, but it could be so much better if they replaced KJ Hippensteel as Elder Price. I thought it was such a lazy performance. He seemed to really struggle with I believe, and it wasnt nice to listen to and got a very tepid response. He raced through the whole show at such a pace that much of it was lost. Has he always been like this? I see from his bio that he's been doing it a long time now.
Cunningham was the understudy and i thought he was excellent. Though when did Nigel Farrage become a name for Nabalungi? It needs to be cut. Using current, modern references are just a cheap laugh.
The person i went with was quite offended at the start, as they had never seen anything like it before, but by the end, thought it was one of the best things they have seen
|
|
651 posts
|
Post by greeny11 on Dec 16, 2017 8:46:40 GMT
Nigel Farage has been a reference in the show at least since Brian Sears was in the show - so nearly 3 years
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 9:19:59 GMT
KJ is good, it's normal to get tired from playing the same role for a long time tho. But hey, Nic Rouleau has been Price basically since it opened in Broadway in 2011 (started as understudy) and is still killing it.
|
|
3,325 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Dec 16, 2017 14:08:19 GMT
The Nigel Farage reference has always got the longest laughs in the show whenever I've seen it.
Those references have always changed based on what's topical. Just like all the shows on Broadway that now have Donald Trump jokes that weren't in the original script.
|
|
218 posts
|
Post by Elle on Dec 20, 2017 1:08:48 GMT
I have seen BOM once before, back in 2011 in NYC and really enjoyed it. Saw it tonight in London and I still think it's a fun show with catchy tunes but felt disappointed by KJ's Elder Price. He lacked energy and oomph and I desperately wanted to give him a Red Bull! I agree with the previous review, "I Believe" was a let down. It was sung without emotion and I didn't believe. 😯 I wasn't expecting the Andrew Rannels Tony performance but still... Only one person in the stalls gave a standing ovation at the end of the show.
I hope I'm not being too harsh, these are just my thoughts after the show. Must add that the rest of the cast was wonderful, full of energy and gave great performances. Nabulungi was excellent and my favourite was the gay Mormon! 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2018 13:13:26 GMT
This is clearly a minority opinion but having seen this with my family over the hols, I don't really get what all the hype is about. It's ok and perfectly entertaining but that's it. I was expecting it to be shocking and funny, but it's actually quite tame and at best raised a smile. I kept comparing it to Jerry Springer the Opera, which is probably unfair - but that was genuinely near the knuckle enough to make an atheist wince and both funny and clever. This just made fun of Mormonism (which is not exactly a moving target) and was really broad brush. Maybe in America it's still daring to have a comedy Jesus on stage, but surely not in London?
It was a decent enough evening out but I don't get all the 'fight to get a ticket' responses.
|
|
528 posts
|
Post by ruby on Jan 2, 2018 13:24:37 GMT
This is clearly a minority opinion but having seen this with my family over the hols, I don't really get what all the hype is about. It's ok and perfectly entertaining but that's it. I was expecting it to be shocking and funny, but it's actually quite tame and at best raised a smile. I kept comparing it to Jerry Springer the Opera, which is probably unfair - but that was genuinely near the knuckle enough to make an atheist wince and both funny and clever. This just made fun of Mormonism (which is not exactly a moving target) and was really broad brush. Maybe in America it's still daring to have a comedy Jesus on stage, but surely not in London? It was a decent enough evening out but I don't get all the 'fight to get a ticket' responses. I haven't seen Jerry Springer, but my opinion on Book of Mormon is very similar to yours. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2018 16:01:11 GMT
We all have different ideas about what is shocking. The friend i took in December was VERY shocked by it. Almost offended. I was surprised, but she had never seen anything like it on stage before, with people being portrayed in such stereotypes.
For me it is a great show worthy of all the hype and praise, but the guy currently playing Elder Price is a big let down to the show.
|
|
2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Jan 2, 2018 16:12:55 GMT
Having seen BoM all over the world, yes, definitely, lots of people have different ideas of what's shocking, even within the same city or theatre. I saw Jerry Springer: The Opera about 10 years ago and felt the same as I did at Avenue Q — that it was brazen, and kind of funny, but not for me. I appreciate both, but that's about it. BoM has never really offended me, but I enjoy its boldness.
Also, the new West End cast begins rehearsals soon (today?), so look out for your new Elder Price...
|
|
218 posts
|
Post by Elle on Jan 3, 2018 6:02:12 GMT
I like Book of Mormon and think it's a good, entertaining show however I must admit that I do have some mixed feelings about it. There are many parts which I find great and enjoy very much but then there are also a few parts which I just don't find funny. When I first saw it I was a bit shocked by certain things but then became desensitized to it. I wasn't offended though because you can't take this show seriously and have to see it as one big joke, in a good way. I chose to see it again mainly because I really like the songs. My favorite is I Believe and then Two by Two, I am Africa and Tomorrow is a latter day. I would see it again in the West End but with new leads and if I could get a cheaper ticket.
For the seat review, I had Stalls C16 which was 3rd row 6th seat in. I bought the ticket on their site for £60. I was very happy with my seat and can recommend it. It's close enough to see expressions and everything else with no neck strain, then not too far to the side either. In regards to comfort this was probably the best seat I experienced, large comfy seats with plenty of legroom. I'm 1.68m but 1.78m in my non kinky boots. 😉
|
|
