Thanks for the video! Very interesting interview. His exact argument about "star casting" is one I've used for a while and he's exactly right about it. His arrogance is a bit off-putting. I really don't think he has anywhere near the influence that he thinks he has. His coverage of Spider-Man has certainly destroyed that show at the box office. (Or not?)
Scratch and claw for every day you're worth!
Make them drag you screaming from life, keep dreaming
You'll live forever here on earth.
I hate that those lines in SMASH also give him a lot of 'power'......if the 11.44 million people who watched the pilot didn't know who he was beforehand they do now :-/.
"You can't overrate Bernadette Peters. She is such a genius. There's a moment in "Too Many Mornings" and Bernadette doing 'I wore green the last time' - It's a voice that is just already given up - it is so sorrowful. Tragic. You can see from that moment the show is going to be headed into such dark territory and it hinges on this tiny throwaway moment of the voice." - Ben Brantley (2022)
"Bernadette's whole, stunning performance [as Rose in Gypsy] galvanized the actors capable of letting loose with her. Bernadette's Rose did take its rightful place, but too late, and unseen by too many who should have seen it" Arthur Laurents (2009)
"Sondheim's own favorite star performances? [Bernadette] Peters in ''Sunday in the Park,'' Lansbury in ''Sweeney Todd'' and ''obviously, Ethel was thrilling in 'Gypsy.'' Nytimes, 2000
It was interesting and amusing. He loves Shaiman and Wittman...and seems to adore Reba McIntire. I think his influence is considerable, for sure. But, he overstated his importance in the theatre world. I'm curious about something.... how does a cast member of a particular show react when he/she realizes Michael Riedel is in the theatre? I wish I could "pick" the brain of some theatre people who have encountered Riedel in their audience. Just wondering....from RC in Austin, Texas
"Noel [Coward] and I were in Paris once. Adjoining rooms, of course. One night, I felt mischievous, so I knocked on Noel's door, and he asked, 'Who is it?' I lowered my voice and said 'Hotel detective. Have you got a gentleman in your room?' He answered, 'Just a minute, I'll ask him.'" (Beatrice Lillie)
Thoroughly enjoyable interview, Joey! Looking forward to more...
I worked for TheaterWeek, obviously before Riedel arrived. His story about assuming the editorship doesn't exactly add up. I'm not saying he didn't edit the publication at some point, but he makes it sound like he got the job without expressing any real interest in theater. That just doesn't ring true to me. Also, while I see the "objective" value in not being a "fan" of theater to write a column, it wouldn't hurt Mr. Riedel to have a better understanding and respect for what it takes to mount a production, not just from the producers' viewpoint (which I think he has some measure of understanding) but much more from the perspective of directors, writers, designers and performers.
Riedel reminds me very much of Simon Cowell. He makes no apologies for his candor.
Or his abject ignorance. I don't know how you East Coasters stand the man.
Yes, I know I've been told here that I take him too seriously. But I don't think there are so many legitimate outlets for theater information that the art form can afford a columnist who is so utterly unserious and lazy.
There will always be some in the business of show who want to make a name for themselves, but don't have the brilliance to do it with talent, so therefore, will do it by being provocative.
If anything Reidel writes sells tickets and puts butts in the seats, theatre people, the ones who actually make it happen, will tolerate the man. But do they put much stock into what he has to say or have respect for what he puts out into the universe? Absolutely not. And the ones who do... are just as vacuous as the man himself.
Reidel doesn't care what anyone thinks about what he writes... just as long as you keep reading. Has nothing to do with the theatre; it's all about the messenger.
The number of people who will not see a show they don't want to see... is unlimited.
Oscar Hammerstein
Michael Riedel serves an important function to a lot of people...he's not just skulking around with a notepad hiding in the shadows.
People call him with stories all the time. Agents, producers, theatre owners, actors...they want to leak information (a star is misbehaving, their client is getting a huge salary, their show is in trouble and they need to fire the writer) and then leverage the publicity to accomplish what they need.
Riedel's no saint, and he likes to paint himself as the black sheep. And most of the sources who talk to him would swear on Bibles that they don't. But they do.
Sometimes he gets info that is just wrong (for example, Donna Murphy didn't apparently miss all those shows because of vocal problems, but because of something else she wasn't interested in revealing)...but a lot of the time, he gets it right. (Yes, I know he needs a fact-checker).
You need a guy in any industry who's not afraid of the sacred cows and not afraid to be the bad guy. And the fact that he has fun and a sense of humor about it makes it a bit more bearable.
It's a gossip column, folks - only to be read for entertainment purposes; not to take seriously, discuss in depth, or (god forbid) influence your decisions about anything.
In a world where we actually did things and weren't so desperate to escape our comfortable boredom, this sort of thing wouldn't even exist.
I'd say that a better analogy is that Michael Riedel is the booger of musical theatre - you might pick at him, look at him with idle curiosity, but you should eventually discard him.