Sad to see Honeymoon go...and this disturbing trend

[Seperite]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:25am

As a big fan of Honeymoon in Vegas, I know I'm in a small minority on this board...

But even theater fans who didn't like the show, or who even found it offensive, should find its abrupt closing to be an unfortunate sign. Whether it was your taste or not, you have to admire the writers/producers of Honeymoon for trying to mount a new show (yes, yes, I know it played at Paper Mill) that was not a revival or London import, and which at least tried to bring a more 'hip,' young, audience to Broadway. Think about all of the original musicals that have opened on Broadway in the past season and a a half: Honeymoon, Last Ship, Soul Doctor, First Date, Bridges, If/Then, Rocky, Holler...what do they have in common? They all died within a few months. Aladdin and Gentleman's Guide are the only survivors of the 2013 - 2014 and 2014 - 2015 seasons (it's too soon to judge the crop of musicals that just opened.) There hasn't been a mega-hit new musical since 2009's Book of Mormon (honorable mention to Kinky Boots and Matilda.) Compare that to, say, the 1940s or 50s, when new hits that would prove able to stand the test of time were produced by the bushel every year on Broadway.

This is such a troubling sign for theater fans. The musical is the quintessential American theatrical art form. Plays and operas preceded Broadway by centuries, but the musical was essentially invented on the Broadway stage. And nowadays, new musicals cannot survive on Broadway. The more shows fail, the more likely it is that producers and composers will move on to other art forms. Failure begets...fear of trying. The American theater obviously has a phenomenal and unparalleled history of outstanding musicals created in the 20th century, but a relative dearth of such classics produced in the 21st. I hope the best years of the American musical are not behind us.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:32am

I loved the show, but I'd hardly call it's closing "abrupt". 

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:34am

I completely agree with you 100%!!! As Patti Lupone said when talking about Women on the verge, "It was a bold, original musical. I find it depressing that our original material is not being supported. It can be criticized, but it needs to be supported ALL OF IT"

Interestingly enough, it was the people who slaughtered this show, and not the critics!! What is happening!!! The tides are changing on Broadway for sure haha :)

Also, Book of Mormon opened in 2011.

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:35am

What Jordan said. :P I stopped reading when I read "abrupt closing." 

[Seperite]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:36am

"Abrupt" in the sense that its numbers have been abysmal from day one, everyone expected it to close for months on end, and the producers (producer? Danza?) steadfastly refused to do so. Then, just as the weather starts to warm up, and Tony Season is about to swing into full gear...they give five days notice of an impending closing.

I call that pretty abrupt.

I, too, loved the show. Saw it four times. Thought it was clever, funny, entertaining, and great to listen to. Surprised this couldn't find an audience when mindless nonsense like Mamma Mia prattles on for more than a decade.

[goldenboy]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:38am

I too loved Honeymoon in Vegas and am very sad it is closing.

I can't understand anyone getting upset at the sexism of it. Women still want to get married. Men still want to get married. People have trouble with commitment and people of all persuasions use friki friki to get what they want.

It was a lovely score, a fun old fashioned show. I think what was on stage was gold and it was a shame it never  caught on and I too am worried about new musicals.

I do think there were some terrible choices were made by the lead producers such as terrible tv ads, 8 weeks of previews, no ads before previews, changing from the Brooks Atkinson to the out of the way Nederlander. These lead producers should write a book about how not to produce a musical.

But again...what was on stage was gold. Gary Griffin, Denis Jones and the entire cast should be lauded.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:42am

Yes, it is sad for the creators and talent and crew who have put a lot of time and energy and hope into a new musical when it closes.

However, I would argue that Honeymoon in Vegas was not "trying to bring a more 'hip,' young audience to Broadway." At all. 

I would also say that there's a question of quality. I don't think that those hit musicals of the past would have bombed had they premiered today (of course making allowances for some differences in taste and cultural norms, etc.). I think a lot of the problems with the shows you named can be ascribed to quality and appeal. There is an audience out there that still loves Broadway shows. I see it all the time when I go to the theatre. But new shows have to make an effort to reach that audience by bringing a certain standard of quality and material that appeals to them. And that's not saying you have to appeal to the lowest common denominator. On the contrary, it's getting rarer that mediocre or subpar work can survive. And I think in a way that's to be admired.

Now if you want to have a conversation about the costs of mounting a show and the kind of projects that get chosen, that's a whole other discussion.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:43am

Not abrupt but still sucks.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:44am

This story isn't new. You put up a show and it either catches on or not. If not then it closes. And as others have opined, closing after 150+ performances does not qualify as abrupt. The producers gave it every opportunity to succeed but the audience just didn't materialize. That, alas, is show biz.

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:54am

"On the contrary, its getting rarer that mediocre or subpar work can survive."

Honeymoon in Vegas isn't mediocre or subpar at all. It is definitely a well crafted show. Whether you like the content is a different story. Also, I think a lot of crap can survive and on the contrary, a lot of good work doesn't survive.

[Seperite]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 12:56am

I don't know if it's quality that is lacking; the musicianship, singing, and dancing in virtually all shows are extraordinary. Ditto the sets and costumes. The material, well...some shows are better than others, sure, but I'd daresay that everything -- EVERYTHING -- that makes it to Broadway surpasses a certain threshold of professionalism.

In my view, the problem is ticket prices...a topic I've ranted about before. The price of decent tickets is so prohibitively expensive that the theater becomes an entertainment choice of only splurging tourists, devoted junkies (like us on this site) and the very rich/very old. The tourists want to see things they've heard of. And the blue-haired ladies aren't generally excited by a Rocky or Honeymoon. The target audience for these types of shows -- 20 - 40 somethings -- just don't make it out to the theater all that much, in large measure because it's too damn expensive. Between a pair of tickets, dinner, transportation, and a babysitter for the kids, you're looking at spending in excess of $500. Way too much to spend on an evening of entertainment when there are so many less expensive options out there. 

So we get more revivals, revues, and jukebox musicals (the old folks love the nostalgic stuff) and more superhero (Spidey? Peter Pan?) or super-(movie) star driven stuff that the tourists like. There is no audience for new stuff because those people are priced out of the theater. 

 

 

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 1:03am

preach!!

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 1:08am

The only disturbing trend I see is the disturbing trend of people on here having a show they liked that fails and labeling it as the demise of Broadway, the lack of anything new or good ever being able to be successful, blah, blah, blah.

And if you're trying to "to bring a more 'hip,' young, audience to Broadway", don't make a musical out of a 23 year old long forgotten movie that is headlined by a 1980's sitcom star.

And please don't make this into another tired rant about ticket prices.  Plenty of discounts were available and it was on TKTS for 50% off every night.  Overall attendance for Broadway is not down and plenty of shows are doing terrific business. People made a conscious decision to not see THIS show. 

 

[Bwaydide92]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 1:10am

Man I hate this trend too. Shows closing and everything. Why aren't all shows staying open forever!!!!!!!!

[Seperite]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 1:13am

Like most on this board, I rush, use TDF, standing room, etc.

But most of humanity doesn't want to, have the patience to, or the flexibility in their schedule to wait until the last minute to maybe, possibly, get tickets to the show they want to see.

Most potential customers want the comfort and convenience of being able to select tickets for the show they want to see well in advance. TDF/rush is not on their radar.

If your regular price tickets for a decent seat is $175, you scare away a sizable percentage of your customer base. With discounts and half-empty houses, producers actually take in as little as $40 per seat in the theater (obviously excluding the hit shows). If their base price for every ticket was somewhere closer to that number, every show would sell out every night, and producers would make far more money.

I firmly believe that.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 1:41am

Last week 18 shows did better than 90% cpacity so I guess someone is buying tickets. Although, clearly, not to show they don't want to see.

[Pootie2]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 2:02am

If/Then ran for a year-plus, not a few months. 

Invalidates your post.

[goldenboy]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 2:38am

And If Then was the most painful five hours of theatre I've ever spent watching anything.

Ok it felt like five hours.

 

Some of us really loved Honeymoon in Vegas. Allow us that please.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 6:23am

Who is suggesting you give up having loved the show?Just because people like a show, doesn't make it a success.  If you can't get an audience, you can't get an audience.

Only sshows that have had a decent run usually announce a closing more than a week or two away.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 7:07am

 

Once again, FishermanBob shines forth as a bastion of reason.

 

(Even though bastions do not emit light.)

[jonanthony2]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 7:55am

I agree that current prices have driven many away from attending theater. But your reference to "Old People" seems a bit off the mark. Not being a "Old Person" yet I take offense at your reference of them. Those "Old People" have been supporting the theater for decades before you were probably born. They have a wide variety of tastes and like and dislikes like we all do. If you have been to any afternoon performance those "Old People" are there because they got discount tickets like I and many others do since it is the only way I to afford going to the theater. I hate seeing shows I love close before their time but business is business. Something has to be done about prices if we are to be able to go see shows other than blockbusters that run for years. 

[indytallguy]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 8:31am

I'm a consultant in my professional life and the absence of long-term megahit products if you will is a trend pervasive in many, many industries.  See any of what Chris Anderson wrote about in The Long Tail. 

We live in a world where it is often possible/easier for small hits to happen that previously would not even have been created or produced, but we don't coalesce around a limited number of blockbusters as often as in the past.  That's why you see so many biz books about really knowing your audience or tribe and cultivating ongoing relationships with them.

This line of thinking may apply a bit less to theatre productions, but I think it is still part of what is happening.

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 8:36am

"Aladdin and Gentleman's Guide are the only survivors of the 2013 - 2014 and 2014 - 2015 seasons"

Looks like someone forgotten about Beautiful: The Carole King Musical, as of now the only new musical from last season to have recouped its investment.

[jkstheatrescene]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 8:40am

Golden boy, some of us loved If/then. Let us have that 

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/3/15 at 8:52am

Musicals (and plays) have flopped on Broadway from the start. This isn't a new "trend." Not every show in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's was a hit. Very far from it. If you think this is a new trend just tell that to the shows amassed in Not Since Carrie, and those only represent a fraction of the flop musicals, and of course none of the flop plays. 

Not everything on Broadway is at a certain level of quality, or even professionalism. What, may I ask was "quality" about Bronx Bombers or Baby, It's You or Wonderland (camp value aside)?

I'm not placing Honeymoon in Vegas on that tier of crap; I enjoyed the show and thought the score and McClure were quite strong. But shows with good scores and/or leading performances have not been immune to failure. So put the OBCR on the shelf next to the other "H"'recordings like Henry, Sweet Henry, House of Flowers, High Fidelity, High Spirits, Hands on a Hardbody, How Now Dow Jones- and realize it will be in very good company.