|
|
Post by jaggy on Feb 16, 2022 17:52:10 GMT
The replacements have already been cast. It's all very hush hush at the moment, but if what I've heard it's true, nothing to be excited about Do the replacements equal the high profiles of Buckley and Redmayne or are they known by mainly theatre fans? |
|
|
|
Post by apubleed on Feb 16, 2022 17:59:51 GMT
It's so interesting reading this thread because, even though I've paid lots of money for shows that are marketed solely on the star...I'd never expect a refund if they weren't on because that's always the risk you take, ESPECIALLY in the times we are currently living in? Wild how many people expect a refund if X isn't on I tell you, wild. No that’s not the risk WE take it’s the risk the PRODUCERS take because they are the ones banking on the stars being there. If they don’t want to take this risk they should immediately remove the names from all marketing and only sell the show - so that we have no idea who is in the show and they are truly only selling the show. Of course they would never do this because they are relying on the names to sell the tickets. Producers can’t have their cake and eat it, too. I always find it funny the culture of west end fans who think it should be ok…it’s like some kind of weird Stockholm syndrome. |
|
5,826 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 16, 2022 19:50:29 GMT
They are selling this on THE STARS IN IT. They are above the title.
If they aren’t on- people should be able to get refunds.
|
|
19,696 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 16, 2022 19:59:43 GMT
If you bought a ticket for a Beyonce concert and you turned up to find she was “indisposed” and they’d dragged Kelly Rowland out of whatever obscurity she currently resides in, you would rightly expect some sort of compo. As said above,producers can’t have it both ways. The prices for this are ridiculous and presumably based on the names. If the names don’t show up then people deserve a refund.
|
|
7,067 posts
|
Post by Jon on Feb 16, 2022 20:02:13 GMT
Russell Tovey could be interesting, not sure if he can sing though? I saw Russell Tovey do a reading of Anya Reiss' Spur of the Moment years ago and he did a scene where his character had to sing and it was adequate to put it politely but probably not good enough for a musical. Also, whereas Eddie Redmayne is able to transform himself depending on the role, Russell Tovey isn't that sort of actor and I say this as a fan but I'm not sure he could play the Emcee. |
|
630 posts
|
Post by andrew on Feb 16, 2022 20:27:35 GMT
Saw Emily Benjamin this afternoon and she was phenomenal. Even better than Jessie in the musical numbers, I’d say. And it was very nice to hear people asking around what her name was in the interval, having been impressed by her performance, instead of hearing complaints about Jessie not being on. If they ever decide to stop going down the star casting route, she would make an amazing replacement. Anna-Jane Casey was also very good as Freulein Schneider, and it was so interesting seeing her transform to play someone so different.
|
|
83 posts
|
Post by brenth on Feb 16, 2022 21:37:05 GMT
What about Johnathan Bailey? As the emcee? He’s about to lead Bridgerton series 2, can sing and everybody fancies him and he has proven WE musical experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 16, 2022 21:41:15 GMT
What about Johnathan Bailey? As the emcee? He’s about to lead Bridgerton series 2, can sing and everybody fancies him and he has proven WE musical experience. Bailey is about to start “Cock”. |
|
397 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by interval99 on Feb 16, 2022 23:34:13 GMT
Based on the ATG website they have fairly good booking until the end of May already.
Cast does not seem to be a issue for future booking and with seats still selling at the top range prices for people wanting to see the show and the event experience, so seems no reason for them to spend too much on salary costs on a high profile cast until they need to boost interest.
If who ever is announced does provoke a box office boost anyone looking will see the next few months already well booked and more likely to pay whatever to ensure they can see their fave performer.
Not bad that a 50 year old show is the most sought out ticket in town.
|
|
|
|
Post by shadypines on Feb 17, 2022 10:56:58 GMT
If you bought a ticket for a Beyonce concert and you turned up to find she was “indisposed” and they’d dragged Kelly Rowland out of whatever obscurity she currently resides in, you would rightly expect some sort of compo. As said above,producers can’t have it both ways. The prices for this are ridiculous and presumably based on the names. If the names don’t show up then people deserve a refund. I disagree with this analogy. Beyonce is "the show". What you are saying would be correct if you'd bought tickets for "cabaret" but they did "chicago" instead - in that instance you'd rightly be entitled to a refund. If it was "KingLear with Ian Mckellan" and instead you got "an audience with Ian McKellan" you'd be entitled to a refund. if it's Cabaret with JB and she's off sick, you still get Cabaret, and it shouldn't matter if you'd paid £30 or £300 or £3000 in any of the examples. |
|
134 posts
|
Post by Joseph Buquet on Feb 17, 2022 11:34:12 GMT
If you bought a ticket for a Beyonce concert and you turned up to find she was “indisposed” and they’d dragged Kelly Rowland out of whatever obscurity she currently resides in, you would rightly expect some sort of compo. As said above,producers can’t have it both ways. The prices for this are ridiculous and presumably based on the names. If the names don’t show up then people deserve a refund. I disagree with this analogy. Beyonce is "the show". What you are saying would be correct if you'd bought tickets for "cabaret" but they did "chicago" instead - in that instance you'd rightly be entitled to a refund. If it was "KingLear with Ian Mckellan" and instead you got "an audience with Ian McKellan" you'd be entitled to a refund. if it's Cabaret with JB and she's off sick, you still get Cabaret, and it shouldn't matter if you'd paid £30 or £300 or £3000 in any of the examples. I don’t understand this argument. If you’ve paid for “King Lear with Ian Mckellen”, there are two parts to it: 1. King Lear 2. Ian Mckellen On what basis are you putting 100% of the importance on part 1, with zero on part 2? You will have no doubt paid a huge amount extra for part 2! |
|
1,083 posts
|
Post by andrew on Feb 17, 2022 11:35:51 GMT
I have to say, if I was a producer of this I would not bother with star casting. Get two genuinely excellent leads with West End experience, the run will sell just fine. If ticket sales are flagging towards the end, bring a name back in. If it proves the experience alone is good enough (and I reckon it will be for a good year or so), you've just saved yourself a boatload of A list money.
|
|
19,696 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 17, 2022 12:04:42 GMT
I disagree with this analogy. Beyonce is "the show". What you are saying would be correct if you'd bought tickets for "cabaret" but they did "chicago" instead - in that instance you'd rightly be entitled to a refund. If it was "KingLear with Ian Mckellan" and instead you got "an audience with Ian McKellan" you'd be entitled to a refund. if it's Cabaret with JB and she's off sick, you still get Cabaret, and it shouldn't matter if you'd paid £30 or £300 or £3000 in any of the examples. I don’t understand this argument. If you’ve paid for “King Lear with Ian Mckellen”, there are two parts to it: 1. King Lear 2. Ian Mckellen On what basis are you putting 100% of the importance on part 1, with zero on part 2? You will have no doubt paid a huge amount extra for part 2! And for some people it will be 100% 2. There will be fans of Eddie Redmayne who would not consider seeing Cabaret for one tiny second if it weren’t for the fact that he was in it. They pay their £250 and are then expected to suck it up when the named star doesn’t show up? It’s wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Feb 17, 2022 12:21:47 GMT
It’s fair to say that producers are a lot sneakier these days; forbidding cast from publishing their holiday dates etc and expecting the audience who have paid to see one thing being left with another. So much of modern musical ‘fandom’ is based on the cast members these days, which producers exploit when it benefits them but keep quiet when they know it’ll affect ticket sales. Shady, especially given how loyal to them MT fans have been over the pandemics.
|
|
|
|
Post by fiyerorocher on Feb 17, 2022 12:36:49 GMT
People are human. Even if they published every anticipated day off, sometimes people get ill. Sometimes they get injured. If a 'star' has to take an extended period of leave and everyone demands their money back, that show cannot survive. And what an insult to the understudies working their asses off, being made to feel like their performance is worthless. Audience members know what the risk they're taking when they book their ticket - you are not guaranteed the appearance of anyone, star or not. If you don't want to risk seeing Cabaret without Eddie Redmayne, don't book a ticket. Theatre, a beautifully live art form that is so effective *because* of the the humans onstage, is not the art form for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by shambles on Feb 17, 2022 12:39:49 GMT
I checked the understudies twitter account. He doesn't seem to have missed any performances, and she's only missed some since the last week. I'm going to put it down as genuine reason, because she doesn't seem like the type to do otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2022 14:14:54 GMT
I disagree with this analogy. Beyonce is "the show". What you are saying would be correct if you'd bought tickets for "cabaret" but they did "chicago" instead - in that instance you'd rightly be entitled to a refund. If it was "KingLear with Ian Mckellan" and instead you got "an audience with Ian McKellan" you'd be entitled to a refund. if it's Cabaret with JB and she's off sick, you still get Cabaret, and it shouldn't matter if you'd paid £30 or £300 or £3000 in any of the examples. I don’t understand this argument. If you’ve paid for “King Lear with Ian Mckellen”, there are two parts to it: 1. King Lear 2. Ian Mckellen On what basis are you putting 100% of the importance on part 1, with zero on part 2? You will have no doubt paid a huge amount extra for part 2! No. Only if the production itself includes the star - i.e. the star's name is in the title of the show as sold, and therefore what you are paying for is a guarantee to see both the star and the show. This is being sold as Cabaret, not "Cabaret with Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley" or "Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley in Cabaret" They happen to be the current stars and therefore inevitably the focus of the promotion, but you aren't watching an Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley concert, you are watching Cabaret. You bought a ticket to the show, not a guarantee to see a particular performer. It's really that simple. |
|
4,790 posts
|
Post by Mark on Feb 17, 2022 14:25:51 GMT
I don’t understand this argument. If you’ve paid for “King Lear with Ian Mckellen”, there are two parts to it: 1. King Lear 2. Ian Mckellen On what basis are you putting 100% of the importance on part 1, with zero on part 2? You will have no doubt paid a huge amount extra for part 2! No. Only if the production itself includes the star - i.e. the star's name is in the title of the show as sold, and therefore what you are paying for is a guarantee to see both the star and the show. This is being sold as Cabaret, not "Cabaret with Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley" or "Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley in Cabaret" They happen to be the current stars and therefore inevitably the focus of the promotion, but you aren't watching an Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley concert, you are watching Cabaret. You bought a ticket to the show, not a guarantee to see a particular performer. It's really that simple. If the same artwork/billing was used in New York as it currently appears on the website, with Eddie and Jessie both above the title (https://kitkat.club/cabaret-london/), then people would be entitled to a refund if either were out. If you are going to sell tickets at double/triple the standard ticket price of any other show, and advertise big names so prominently in the roles, then I think it only fair to have some flexibility in place for those people who have booked to see the stars. |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Feb 17, 2022 14:46:39 GMT
I have to say, if I was a producer of this I would not bother with star casting. Get two genuinely excellent leads with West End experience, the run will sell just fine. If ticket sales are flagging towards the end, bring a name back in. If it proves the experience alone is good enough (and I reckon it will be for a good year or so), you've just saved yourself a boatload of A list money. There is no "A-list money". knowledge covered this quite thoroughly on the Business Questions thread. Another reason why this is a terrible idea is that going from famous movie star Eddie Redmayne to Arts Ed Graduate #42019 simply won't sell. If you tell an average person you've been to see a show, more than half the time their response will be "oh, was anyone famous in it?". They would be more impressed at seeing Dean Gaffney than Dean Chisnall. Why should I pay £150 for a decent seat in May to see a nobody, when I could've seen Redmayne? It is about momentum. Once a show starts flagging it is very hard (but not impossible) to recover to become a hot ticket. What you've described is essentially stunt casting and I can't possibly endorse it. |
|
|
|
Post by giles on Feb 17, 2022 14:50:21 GMT
🤔 Odd they’re only just filming a trailer, especially with a cast change apparently imminent. From a post on Instagram/Twitter before the recording today, Eddie was spotted outside the theatre so it does seem they’re doing the promo with the original cast. |
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 17, 2022 14:59:10 GMT
I have to say, if I was a producer of this I would not bother with star casting. Get two genuinely excellent leads with West End experience, the run will sell just fine. If ticket sales are flagging towards the end, bring a name back in. If it proves the experience alone is good enough (and I reckon it will be for a good year or so), you've just saved yourself a boatload of A list money. There is no "A-list money". knowledge covered this quite thoroughly on the Business Questions thread. Another reason why this is a terrible idea is that going from famous movie star Eddie Redmayne to Arts Ed Graduate #42019 simply won't sell. If you tell an average person you've been to see a show, more than half the time their response will be "oh, was anyone famous in it?". They would be more impressed at seeing Dean Gaffney than Dean Chisnall. Why should I pay £150 for a decent seat in May to see a nobody, when I could've seen Redmayne? It is about momentum. Once a show starts flagging it is very hard (but not impossible) to recover to become a hot ticket. What you've described is essentially stunt casting and I can't possibly endorse it. There is also the fact they have to sell out for something like 4 years just to recoup the costs of the changes they made to the theatre. So it's unlikely, in four years time, people will still be paying full whack you see someone who isn't well known. |
|
134 posts
|
Post by Joseph Buquet on Feb 17, 2022 15:19:36 GMT
I don’t understand this argument. If you’ve paid for “King Lear with Ian Mckellen”, there are two parts to it: 1. King Lear 2. Ian Mckellen On what basis are you putting 100% of the importance on part 1, with zero on part 2? You will have no doubt paid a huge amount extra for part 2! No. Only if the production itself includes the star - i.e. the star's name is in the title of the show as sold, and therefore what you are paying for is a guarantee to see both the star and the show. This is being sold as Cabaret, not "Cabaret with Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley" or "Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley in Cabaret" They happen to be the current stars and therefore inevitably the focus of the promotion, but you aren't watching an Eddie Redmayne and Jessie Buckley concert, you are watching Cabaret. You bought a ticket to the show, not a guarantee to see a particular performer. It's really that simple. As Mark points out, the West End and Broadway have entirely contrasting policies, where the star’s name is above the title - as is the case for this production. What makes you so confident that the West End’s approach is right, and Broadway’s approach is wrong? Not “really that simple”, after all… |
|
397 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by interval99 on Feb 17, 2022 15:27:41 GMT
I would doubt if anyone at ATG believed they would get the full capital back on a 50 year old show running at full capacity for four years.
The stage set up is in the round and can be used for any number of high profile limited runs going forward and I should imagine there are several creatives who are already thinking how they could use the space for future productions once it becomes available.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattnyc on Feb 17, 2022 15:57:08 GMT
Walk around the Playhouse and you'll see the words "Eddie Redmayne/Jessie Buckley" printed as many times as you see the word "Cabaret". It's really silly to argue that the marketing on the backs of those names doesn't matter because "the show is the star".
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2022 16:07:52 GMT
Regardless of who or what is the star, if a named person isn't on stage, you ain't getting your money back.
But, if there was an insurance type of add on, where you paid say, £2.50 per ticket, that meant that if the named person wasn't on the night you had tickets, you got a full refund, would you pay the £2.50?
|
|
