So, I have to say, I really love the marketing campaign that they are using for Hand of God. But, I was wondering something. Why are they touting it as a big deal that it's a play on Broadway with no popular West End transfer behind it and not one that has any Hollywood stars in it? I mean, it's not just the marketing, one of the producers spoke about the same thing in an article in I believe the Times. It wouldn't be the first successful play on Broadway with people who are no names to people that don't follow theatre.
Are they just doing this as a way to hype up the show. I mean, if you were to ask me of a play that did well but had no "names" August: Osage County does come to mind right away. Or is that different because it had the reviews of the Chicago run to help it out?
They're playing up their underdog status for comedic effect. And they're doing a brilliant job- maybe some of the best marketing I've seen for anything on Broadway in years.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
I think it's kind of clever of them. Tons of us talk about how so many shows are only popular because of their names, or because of their fame as a movie, or because of who's in them. So when you hear this show is doing well and has nonce of that --- hmmm, maybe worth seeing what makes it so good.
THe campaign is incredibly clever. This is one of those rare shows the I intend to push everyone I know to see. I'm really hopeful it does well but only time will tell. In any event, I'm just glad I get another chance to see this remarkable play.