Anatomy Of A Broadway Flop: What Sank These Four Shows?

[Sunny11]

How can this be?  Advertising agencies literally spend MILLIONS of dollars on focus groups to figure out how to get consumers to buy specific products.  Here is a chatboard populated by educated theater lovers who SPEND their OWN money on tickets, WANT to love shows, are VOCAL with their opinons, WANT good work to be recognized -- it's a marketer's dream to have access to what so many of you are sharing out of the goodness of your heart and your passion for theater.  How can they ignore the wealth of information posted here day after day?

"
I wouldn't give this board that much credit. People have already decided that Al Pacino is going to suck in his next play months before anything of substance has been released! That constantly happens, judgements are made purely on preconceptions without any factual backing what so ever. 
 

[TFMH18]

Here is the thing about Bright Star: it is not intended to be a musical "who dunnit?" There is no intent to pull the wool over the audience's eyes. The beauty and thrill is in watching the people on stage experience the outcome. Every time Steve Martin did an interview in regards to the show, he'd literally say it was based on the true event of a baby being thrown off a train and living. Obviously he wouldn't share that information if he wanted to present the show as having some sort of "twist" ending. The show is not for everyone, but if you think its major flaw is being able to predict the ending, you've missed the intention of its creators (which is okay, too). 

[GavestonPS]

After Eight said: "^

You've lifted your nose out of one of your comic books to post here, Eric?

Go back to it: it really is more your speed.

 

Psst.... And while you're not at it, learn how to read and cite correctly (if you're capable of either): it's "any of those four...."

 

"

A8, you claim to see everything that opens on Broadway, even though you haven't liked a show since LA CAGE... in the 1980s. I'm sure you know what they say about doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. So I don't think you're in any position to condescend.

As for lack of reading comprehension skills, gypsy101 wasn't judging anything. He simply used the word "mediocre" in place of Dolly's claim that the shows in question were "B grade". Now I'll grant you that B stands for "good" in school and thus better than mediocre; but in show business "B movies" (and other media) signify mediocre properties at best.

[GavestonPS]

TFMH18 said: "Here is the thing about Bright Star: it is not intended to be a musical "who dunnit?" There is no intent to pull the wool over the audience's eyes. The beauty and thrill is in watching the people on stage experience the outcome. Every time Steve Martin did an interview in regards to the show, he'd literally say it was based on the true event of a baby being thrown off a train and living. Obviously he wouldn't share that information if he wanted to present the show as having some sort of "twist" ending. The show is not for everyone, but if you think its major flaw is being able to predict the ending, you've missed the intention of its creators (which is okay, too). 

 

"

Judging only from the Tonys, I thought the major flaw was that it was a play about statues who sing.

[GavestonPS]

Kad said: "These four shows, frankly, would have flopped whether Hamilton was playing or not.

Shuffle Along ended up being marketed as a star vehicle for a star who wasn't going to be in it. Again: Hamilton had nothing to do with it.

 

"

And, for all we know, maybe they would have closed in a night or two rather than running for six weeks to several months amid all the attention HAMILTON was shining on Broadway.

I do wonder when the producers of SHUFFLE ALONG learned that McDonald was pregnant. (That is why she is leaving the show, yes?) It might have been prudent to wait until she could make a longer commitment.

[theatreguy12]

A show can be predictable and still be entertaining…and good.  As many have pointed out, I doubt the writers went into opening night shocked that so many people saw where the story was going.  Steve Martin scratching his head saying, 'How did they figure that out?'  I doubt it.

Again, it was about the journey.  And I really enjoyed it.  As did a lot of people.   And many very successful musicals have predictability involved.

Not enough people liked it though apparently.  It's yet another show where I disagreed with the critics and was sorry to see it go.  But glad I got to experience it.

Same goes with American Psycho.  The only degree to which I cared about what the critics thought was that it was their reviews that eventually helped lead to its closing.  I've had too many experiences where I went against the critics and saw a show and loved it.  I was going to see American Psycho regardless.

Selfishly I'm glad I was able to see it.  I'm bummed for the cast and creators it didn't keep them employed for a long time, and again, I totally disagree with the critics.  But I'm happy I was able to experience this provocative piece. 

I know it was risky.  The themes and subject matter were either going to find an audience as other musicals did that had rather shocking story lines, or it was going to just be a bit too much.  And it certainly wasn't going to draw in the tourist trade like other shows do, unless it was a visitor (like me) who had it specifically on their agenda.

The sad irony…and usually this doesn't happen with me….but School of Rock?  Didn't see it.  Had zero interest.  It's still running.   On Your Feet?  Didn't see it.  Zero interest.  It's still running.  

Waitress?  Did see it.  Liked it.  And it's still running.  So at least I was right with that one.

American Psycho….loved it.  It has closed.   Bright Star…..loved it.  It has closed.    Shuffle Along…..loved it.  It will be closing soon.

Though I know the latter has a fairly unique story behind its closing.  With Audra still in it it would have had a healthy shelf life.  I still think it should have without her, as the rest of the cast are strong too.  A uniquely odd occurrence with that one.

[ebontoyan]

GavestonPS said
"I  do wonder when the producers of SHUFFLE ALONG learned that McDonald was pregnant. (That is why she is leaving the show, yes?) It might have been prudent to wait until she could make a longer commitment."

The pregnancy was a fairly new development. It was not known that Audra will get pregnant so wait!   The known thing was Audra was scheduled to leave the show for 3 months (July to Sept) to open Lady Day in the West End, but she had plans to come back after that. The pregnancy definitely threw a wrench on the original plans! Lady Day is postponed indefinitely and we know what's gonna happen to SA

 

[themysteriousgrowl]

 

"...any of those four 60's shows..."

The only thing worse than a grammar scold is one who makes fundamental mistakes whilst scolding.

* '60s shows

 

[NJ_BroadwayGirl]

TFMH18 said: "Again, I'm not blaming Hamilton for any of these shows' failures. But they would have been paid more attention by press had it not existed. A simple point. "

I agree with this point. I certainly don't think any of these shows would have gotten the mainstream press that Hamilton is getting, of course not. We wouldn't have seen Bright Star on 60 Minutes, etc. However their might have been more room for them to get headlines on the Broadway specific sites. It's calmed down a bit but most days this very website would have several headlines that were about tweets from LMM! 

[uncageg]

TFMH18 said: "Here is the thing about Bright Star: it is not intended to be a musical "who dunnit?" There is no intent to pull the wool over the audience's eyes. The beauty and thrill is in watching the people on stage experience the outcome. Every time Steve Martin did an interview in regards to the show, he'd literally say it was based on the true event of a baby being thrown off a train and living. Obviously he wouldn't share that information if he wanted to present the show as having some sort of "twist" ending. The show is not for everyone, but if you think its major flaw is being able to predict the ending, you've missed the intention of its creators (which is okay, too). 

 

^^^Thank you.

 

"

 

[devonian.t]

I remember watching Les Mis at the Barbican in its first 3 months of existence.  Knowing very little about it,  thought, "this is the kind of show where a whole bunch of ghosts are going to come back at the end"..  Totally predicted the end, but it didn't stop me enjoying it!

[Mr Roxy]

Only saw Disaster and AP. Enjoyed them both . There is no rhyme or reason sometimes as to why a show succeeds or flops. I scratch my head re why some long running shows lasted as long as they have and why other shows flopped. That's show biz.

[groucho797]

theatreguy12 said: "Same goes with American Psycho.  The only degree to which I cared about what the critics thought was that it was their reviews that eventually helped lead to its closing.  I've had too many experiences where I went against the critics and saw a show and loved it.  I was going to see American Psycho regardless.

Selfishly I'm glad I was able to see it.  I'm bummed for the cast and creators it didn't keep them employed for a long time, and again, I totally disagree with the critics.  But I'm happy I was able to experience this provocative piece. 

I know it was risky.  The themes and subject matter were either going to find an audience as other musicals did that had rather shocking story lines, or it was going to just be a bit too much.  And it certainly wasn't going to draw in the tourist trade like other shows do, unless it was a visitor (like me) who had it specifically on their agenda.

American Psycho….loved it.  It has closed.   Bright Star…..loved it.  It has closed.    Shuffle Along…..loved it.  It will be closing soon."

 

While I agreed with nearly all of your post, the above lines prompted me to reply. The impression I got about Psycho (having seen it four times) was that it was just too expensive to keep running. Bright Star seemed to have the same problem. Didn't see Shuffle Along so won't pass judgment either way.

I've enjoyed critics when I agreed and hated them when I disagreed. I've yet to meet anyone who can predict with 100% accuracy whether a show will succeed or fail. I believe that Psycho and Bright Star would have achieved cult status given enough time, but they simply ran out of that. No point in blaming Hamilton (even though I have zero interest in seeing it based on the cast recording); I think simple economics did most of the shows in this season. Quality of the shows is a whole other debate that seems to add nothing to the point; both Psycho and BS had devoted fans. What's wrong with thinking the shows deserved them?

[broadwayguy91]

American Psycho should have really gone the off Bway route first, and joined forces with a not-for-profit company like the Public or Atlantic Theatre Company (which housed the original production of Spring Awakening before it transferred) to build up an audience. (I mean, Duncan Shiek should have known better. Though I blame this hubris on the producers I suppose)

[vampire musical]

broadwayguy91 said: "American Psycho should have really gone the off Bway route first, and joined forces with a not-for-profit company like the Public or Atlantic Theatre Company (which housed the original production of Spring Awakening before it transferred) to build up an audience. (I mean, Duncan Shiek should have known better. Though I blame this hubris on the producers I suppose)

 

"

American Psycho was supposed to go to Second Stage a few years ago, but that deal fell apart for various reasons.  The producers probably jumped at an opportunity to open on Broadway, gambled big, and lost.