Time Between Revivals?

[pawneeruraljuror]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 1:09am

Just a random thought and wondering others' opinions: How long do you think is a fitting amount of time between revivals of a show?

For example, Into the Woods had a (Broadway) revival 15 years after the original but for the most recent revival of Gypsy there was only a 5 year gap (while the first revival was 15 years after the original), so what is a fitting time frame for shows to stage a revival? 

Updated On: 7/27/17 at 01:09 AM

[whatdoesntkillme]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 1:52am

I think the time between the original and first revival should definitely be at least 10-15 years, longer depending on the length of the show's original run. Time between revivals, though, can be shorter if there's a good purpose for the production. 

[asimplegal2]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 1:59am

I would say at least 15 years, unless it's a particularly innovative or fresh interpretation. 

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 3:18am

In the old days a revival wasn't uncommon as soon as 5 years after the original or something like that. I think the way the media is and how we preserve shows that doesn't fly anymore. I think 10-15 is pretty solid. Give time for a new generation of performers to take on the role.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 7:21am

Anything less than 10 seems unnecessary.  Doesn't stop some from doing it though.  

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 7:36am

The short answer, to paraphrase Mr. Berlin, is "Any time the traffic will allow."  Meaning, if there's a reason - artistically, commercially, or hopefully both - to bring in a new production, then the timing is right (regardless of how soon or how long it's been since the last one).  if not, then not.

Opera lovers don't think twice about seeing the same different productions of the same operas over and over again in relatively short order - why should theatre lovers be any different?

Also, the "too soon' objection also often rings false on this board.  It seems that the people who complain about "do we really need another revival of - fill in the blank - so soon after the last one closed" are often the same people who will think nothing about going to see the same production multiple times during a run because they love the show so much, or simply because of an intriguing cast change.

The complaint may well be that there are so many other worthy things that deserve a revival, why "this" yet again?

But the fact remains that there's a reason that certain classics continue to fascinate artists and engage audiences.  (of course we can all disagree about whether any particular work merits such veneration and continued attention, but that's a different issue).



 

Updated On: 7/27/17 at 07:36 AM

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 7/27/17 at 10:34am

The Tonys has a rule that a revival can be eligible to compete if it took place at least three years after a previous production closes. Last season, we got an extremely premature revival of The Glass Menagerie about three years after John Tiffany's highly acclaimed production. Even with Sally Field in the starring role, Sam Gold's production still crashed and burned at the box office.

Of course, the most recent revivals of Gypsy and La Cage aux Folles did take place about five years after their previous incarnations.

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 3/30/23 at 6:06pm

Reviving (pun intended) this thread thanks to the gentle whispers of an August: Osage County revival on the horizon, and it’s blowing my mind to think it’s been over 15 years since it opened. And since it seems the general consensus here is a 10-15 year gap, I’d say it’s right on time.

I’d be thrilled to see Sally Field as Violet, but I would be genuinely heartbroken to miss the chance to see Laurie Metcalf take it on. It feels destined, even if in my own mind (and the collective mind of anyone with a working brain).

Are there any other “recent” plays that are ripe for a revival?

[JasonC3]

Posted: 3/30/23 at 6:30pm

Clybourne Park and Other Desert Cities are two I think about wanting to see again, and both are around 10 years since last staged on Broadway.

[Wick3]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 10:36am

I think classic plays get revived more often depending on the stars they can get cast. 

I've also noticed in recent years that if a revival is successful in London's West End, the likelihood of it going to Broadway is quite high.

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 10:45am

I always say it should at least be 5+ years. The only exceptions I can think of are Waitress and Beetlejuice but I would not necessarily refer to those as "Revivals". More of a Return Engagement. 

I do not believe there should be a revival of something like Spring Awakening, Anastasia, Something Rotten!, etc. Give some other shows time to shine. Also, if the show is on tour, there definitely should not be a revival happening at the same time. But what do I know lol  

[Dylan Smith4]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 10:58am

I would definitely say 10 years would be an appropriate minimum. Giving time for new directors to come up with new ways they can interpret an iconic show whether it may be a musical or play. 
 

I definitely think we are overdue for a Gypsy revival. As well as How to Succeed! Also, is it too soon to ask for a Pippin revival? 

[kdogg36]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 11:12am

hearthemsing22 said: "I do not believe there should be a revival of something like Spring Awakening, Anastasia, Something Rotten!, etc."

I agree with this as written, but I do think that the unique approach of the 2015 revival of Spring Awakening fully justified that show's early return.

[pethian]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 12:14pm

The last Cabaret closed 8 years ago in 2015. Is Broadway ready for another one?

[darquegk]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 1:10pm

There’s an acronym we use in government work/ CBCB. It stands for case by case basis, meaning that more often than not there is no hard and fast rule. There are guidelines and expectations, but not so strongly that you can say “typically the rule is X.” Everything is CBCB.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 3/31/23 at 9:29pm

asimplegal2 said: "I would say at least 15 years, unless it's a particularly innovative or fresh interpretation."

Fifteen years between revivals of HELLO, DOLLY! would be insane! Five years is more realistic.