Shuffle Along previews

[henrikegerman]

KJisgroovy said: "This seemed fairly definitive to me: "It seems far too ambitious that Wolfe could now rework the libretto for it to begin to meet the worthy ambitions hinted at in the final scenes."

 

It's that tone that I sort of think is weird... that... like... "oh this is impossible, they should have gone out of town" tone that seems to pop up in these sorts of threads. For the most part, your criticisms seem fair and sound valid. 

Fair enough, KJ.  Perhaps Wolfe can still work real magic here.  I was merely pointing out that it strikes me as a tall order (and I suggested lesser ways in which the show might be improved).

 

"

 

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Carlos, with all due respect, everyone on this website might know what a preview is, but I doubt a tourist who sees "now in previews!" would think twice about buying tickets. They don't know what a preview is and how it might differ from the final product. Obviously, they are not writing reviews but not everybody is as knowledgeable about theatre as we are here.

 

As I said above, Wolfe is a miracle worker and I have no doubts the final product will be a completely different animal. I'm looking forward to seeing it - hopefully once in the next week than again after it freezes.

[CarlosAlberto]

Sally, with all due respect that is not what I'm debating. What I am debating is Kad saying "A preview period on Broadway is treated, for all intents and purposes, the same as regular performance"

 

To which I replied that if the audience doesn't know that the show is in previews then they aren't being attentive, because as you can see in the examples I clearly posted it is being advertised as such.



I never mentioned anything about them thinking twice about buying tickets or even knowing that the preview version might differ from the final product.

 

None of that came into play in my post. 

 

 

[Scarywarhol]

I don't think most of the crowd last night understood that what they were seeing was not a final show. The idea of a preview period has been mitigated by full price tickets and the fact that most shows barely take advantage of the opportunity to make changes. I trust Wolfe will. 

 

I also think it's worth noting, though a lively crowd is typical for early previews, that the response was so overwhelming through most of this show that it eventually became distracting. 

[uncageg]

I am hoping that my gut feeling is correct in that Wolfe and the cast are very much aware of the shape the show is in right now. That he wanted to throw it all up there in front of an audience and guage responses. My thought is that he already knows what he might cut and by opening night the show will be in great shape and garner good reviews.

 

With that said, it could go completely the other way. As brilliant as this man and this cast is, it is possible that this won't happen but will end up being a show that people can say they were there to see and will be discussed for years to come. I hope my gut feeling is right though! Just my opinion.

[macnyc]

Yes, exactly. I think audiences in recent years have gotten used to early previews that are very close to the completed project. I think the idea behind that is that it's difficult to make changes after the show has been teched. But I love the idea of more fluidity.

[CarlosAlberto]

I'm pulling for this show to be a success. It's a great idea and the creatives and cast are top-tier all the way. I just hope it does not turn out to be another "Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown". 

[Scarywarhol]

It's already a far more interesting show, in my opinion.

[Jshan05]

I'll be seeing the show next Saturday evening. While some of the reviews have been a little worrisome, nothing in this world could bring me down. I won't mind terribly if there are still plot issues because it is seriously a once-in-a-lifetime kind of cast/creative team.

[QueenAlice]

I have absolute faith in the creative team involved, but I frankly (and sound like a broken record here ) find it irresponsible and perhaps inappropriate to present an audience with a first preview that is 3 1/2 hour long, in which everything is being "thrown out there."

 

Early editing is what workshops are for, and It just indicates a lack of vision or direction to present something so meandering  and unfocused to a full price paying audience.  Yes it's fun for us who love the creative process, but that's not what the average audience member signs up for when they pluck down near 200 dollars for a ticket.  And they open themselves to needless bad word of mouth and press as a result (the Internet is buzzing about the length of last nights preview and most people are not amused) If the creatives felt the need to present all this for an audience in this developmental way than I think they should indeed charge less for previews. Or at the very least George Wolfe should be coming out to explain what is going on beforehand.

 

 

[Scarywarhol]

Your issue is with the producers and the economic landscape of Broadway. Yes, it was a long performance. No, that is not unprecedented or obscene. 

[perfectlymarvelous]

This is certainly not the first Broadway preview to run 3.5 hours. I have faith that Wolfe can work magic with this concept, and I personally can't wait to see what he and Savion Glover come up with as they edit. 

[JM226]

I have absolute faith in the creative team involved, but I frankly (and sound like a broken record here ) find it irresponsible and perhaps inappropriate to present an audience with a first preview that is 3 1/2 hour long, in which everything is being "thrown out there."

 

wow! probably one of the most dramatic statements and overreactions i have seen on here since joining last year. it is a new musical in previews - they are making changes, editing, cutting and what not. there is no rulebook or set of guidelines that says the musical MUST BE LESS THAN 3.5 HOURS! if someone thought they were there for far too long, they can always get up and leave... i mean, come on. let us tone down the rhetoric a bit -- we're not at a campaign rally here. 

 

it is clear that you felt there should have been an out of town tryout. i don't disagree. but there wasn't and so this is what you have. it is what it is.  it doesn't actually negatively impact anyone... especially if they were not even in attendance. sheesh 

[Scarywarhol]

Our beloved King & I revival was nearly that long when I first saw it. And that was an actual revival of a show that is constantly done. 

[JM226]

Scarywarhol said: "Our beloved King & I revival was nearly that long when I first saw it. And that was an actual revival of a show that is constantly done. 

 

"

 

you are better off using examples of new musicals because i think the queen is conflating two issues. he/she is suggesting that if there were an out of town tryout, as he/she feels there should have been, this wouldn't have been 3 and a half hours.  but the two have nothing to do with each other and it is an irrelevant hypothetical because it is just that. a hypothetical. they are opening cold on Broadway and that's all there is to it.  we cannot change or control that... 

[CarlosAlberto]

I am going to ask this again because clearly some of you have absolutely no idea the purpose of a preview period. 

 

In what shape do you feel a show should be in before going into previews whether it be here on Broadway or Peoria.
 

[QueenAlice]

I'm not being over dramatic. Like I said, I love watching the creative process unfold. My point is really more about perception and indeed what is "appropriate" use of the preview period. And this is a debate I put forth for discussion that is indeed tied to the current economics of Broadway.  Audience members are paying large amounts of money for tickets, and social media gives everyone a rampant, far reaching way to spread opinions that can become instantly damaging to a show  (look at Hughie) that investors may have collectively pledged more than 10M To get in front of a "Broadway audience"   

 

My question is: does the director and creative team, given all this, have some obligation to fine tune their vision before opening it up to audience scrutiny.  I am harping on the length, because yes, as a new musical, most people are going to observe the show has a running time that indicates something potentially problematic and that instantly causes the beginning of bad press and word of mouth.

[JM226]

there are musicals -- and plenty of plays -- that are more than three hours long, regardless of why or how. if you want to make an argument that those 3.5 hours of quality are not good... then fine. that is one thing. but to just hyper focus on the length without taking quality into account is crazy. there are amazing 60-minute musicals and amazing 3-hour musicals.  refine your argument 

[QueenAlice]

I really can't name any 3.5 hour musicals, except Les Miserables, which was cut from that length a long, long time ago.  I agree in principal quality isn't tied to length, but I can't name any current quality musicals that needed 3.5 hours to tell their story successfully.

[Scarywarhol]

So Les Miz was an unacceptable doomed property in its first performances? It's just an arbitrary thing to feel so strongly about sight unseen in regards to a very ambitious new show's FIRST PERFORMANCE EVER.

[ACL2006]

FYI, for those interested, the show's up at TKTS for 40% off.

[QueenAlice]

Of course Shuffle Along isn't doomed because of a long first preview, but Les Miserables didn't have to contend with social media when it first opened. That's again part of the question I pose:  there is no question previews can and should be used to strengthen material, but you can no longer do it without intense public scrutiny along the path, which I think makes it more risky for any production, since Internet word of mouth now begins instantly and is more difficult to turn around. 

[Scarywarhol]

I see. Having seen the show, I just think it would have been far more irresponsible, damaging, and probably morale-killing for Wolfe to have made large cuts before seeing it with audiences and measuring what's working. It isn't a case of  a show arbitrarily throwing a bunch of crap onstage. This isn't Spider-Man (which started just as long). I never wondered why he wanted a scene in there. I also haven't heard many severe complaints about lengrh--more just noting that it is a long show. 

[christinelavin]

I got a 40% off ticket last night at approximately 7:30 -- G4, one seat off the aisle, on the right side (as you look at the stage).

 

What about Nicholas Nickleby?  That was 8 hours!  I never saw it, but somehow I ended up at a party for the cast and heard what they were all obsessing about.  There was a scene where someone asks the boy who stutters where someone else is.  His line was, "He's w-w-watering the b-b-b-egonias" -- but every performance he would say a different flower, for example "He's w-w-w-atering the p-p-p-tunias."  

 

They told me the cast had a pool bet for each performance, each one betting on which flower they thought he'd say.  That night (I'm remembering now -- it was a Saturday so they did the first 4 hours at matinee time, and the second 4 hours at 8 PM) -- the flower was "petunias" and the actor who won the bet was so happy.  It was the first time he'd won.  That's all they were talking about -- not the show, not the audience -- the flower bet.  

 

You actors are a funny lot! 

[QueenAlice]

Thanks Warhol-- and I'm glad to hear that. And at this point I'm sort of pondering what the preview process means in general in this day and age.  If the Internet had existed back then, I wonder if things like "Hello Dolly," "Camelot" "The Wiz" and "Grand Hotel" which were in bad shape when they started out would have been able to really make the turn arounds they did, or if social media word of mouth would have just killed them before they had a chance to make the changes they needed. 

 

[EthelMae]

That's great Christine! Talking about your ticket at 40% off! 

I was glad to see the show up at TKTS at 40% off. Glad about $40 Rush too.

I do come from the world of Low Priced Previews. Even if a show had a out-of-town try-out, it came into NY with low price previews. That way everybody is on board the same ship. We know the show is going the changes and, therefore, we paid less than patrons who attend after opening.

I know people don't think the amount of admission should matter but I think it's easier to see a show that is changing nightly if you paid less.

As far as length, most out-of-town try-outs for musicals of yester-year can, I think, boast a 3 hour or more running time.