Despite Turnaround, ‘Beetlejuice’ Being Forced Out of Theater- Page 5

[teresa2]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 2:32pm

I saw Beetlejuice when it opened. It wasn't a favorite show of mine, but I enjoyed it. It is totally unfair for them to be pushed out of the WG when they have done such a turnaround and are doing extremely well. MM can go into the Marquis or the Broadway. Both are huge venues and MM would do well in any theater it chooses. The Marquis could use a hit as it hasnt had one in a long time. I think there will be some backlash regarding this, but don't know if it will hurt MM's ticket sales. People seem willing to pay those outrageous prices regardless, because of the cast that is being led by Hugh Jackman. The producers, led by Scott Rudin, are being extremely greedy with those prices, but they are selling. Unless people stop buying tix the prices will continue to rise. Broadway is definitely for the elite, but as long as lottery, rush and SRO exist I can still attend. Can't and won't pay those prices.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 2:33pm

jo said: "Someone posted on Instagram a photo of the lab work in September that was done by an ensemble related to Music Man, with Rudin, Carlyle and Sutton in the photo with a fairly large group. Could this lab work reported as month-long have been the basis for the decision on choosing WGarden (and not the Shubert) as what would be a more appropriate stage setting for them?

https://www.instagram.com/p/B3iTZDuprPo/"

That sounds about right to me, and it matches the time frame when I had heard that The Music Man was too big for the Shubert. 

[JBC3]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 2:46pm

Stuff happens. Chill.

[raddersons]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 3:14pm

Everyone talks about stop clauses being invoked all the time, but they're pretty rarely acted on. The theater owner will definitely give the tenant a nudge when they go below the stop clause, but if the show gets its grosses back up, the owners are happy just to have a paying tenant there in the first place instead of a dark house for a few months where they're making nothing. The last I heard was Sideshow back in 2014 -- and that was raking in half the amount Beetlejuice was during their bad weeks. When a show goes below the stop clause threshold, owners start shopping around with new producers, as the show will probably close soon anyway, but if grosses turn back around they'll direct interested producers to other theaters.

I think what makes it a dick move is that it's not in the spirit of why the clause is there -- to protect the theater owners from a show with bad grosses from producers who are running in the red claiming "We're gonna turn it around!" for months. With Beetlejuice, it's as if the Shubert's were waiting for their first chance to pounce on it, as they knew Rudin was interested and thought BJ had no chance. They made him an offer quickly, signed the contract, while at the same time BJ turned its grosses around -- But by then it was too late because their hands were tied and they had already signed a contract with Rudin. They didn't want to renegotiate to another house either because well -- Rudin is Rudin, and you think the Shubert's wanna miss out on those sweet sweet Hello Dolly size grosses in the future?

I'm kinda rambling here. I see both sides, but still think it was a dick move. 

Updated On: 12/10/19 at 03:14 PM

[JBC3]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 3:22pm

Understand where you are coming from, but given that contractual terms are legally binding and the so-called "spirit" behind them has no standing in a court of law, producers would have to be pretty foolish to be hanging their hat on the latter.

[raddersons]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 3:30pm

Oh, of course. Not saying they should go to court screaming "BUT THE SPIRIT!". The second they signed that contract with Rudin their hands were tied. 

[PeterC6482]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 3:47pm

In the winter of 1977, the first Broadway production of "American Buffalo" (with Robert Duvall)  was nudged out of the Ethel Barrymore to make way for "I Love My Wife." "American Buffalo" moved to the Belasco, but its ticket sales, which were miniscule at the beginning but were going up 3 or 4% every week, couldn't sustain the momentum after the move and closed in June. Wasn't this sort of the same situation as now? The show was coming around, catching on, good word of mouth, etc, but it was forced to move anyway.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 4:14pm

It shows how much Shuberts Organization is handicapped by lack of mid size houses, they have 5 and you really could say 4 as the Majestic isn’t going to come free anytime soon. They were forced to sell the St James many years back and part of the judgement at the time by NYC they cannot build anymore theatre. This included the operating the Minskoff and Marquis which Gerald Schonefeld said in his book was ‘unfair’.

Maybe it’s time for NYC to cut the Shuberts some slack and allow them to compete again?

[JBroadway]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 4:20pm

Phantom of London said: “part of the judgement at the time by NYC they cannot build anymore theatre. This included the operating the Minskoff and Marquis which Gerald Schonefeld said in his book was ‘unfair’.

Maybe it’s time for NYC to cut the Shuberts some slack and allow them to compete again?"

 

Can you expand on this? I don’t totally understand? Why can’t they build theatres, and what does that have to do with the Minskoff and the Marquis? I don’t know the story there.

Alternately, could you link me to some article or website that explains this situation? 

 

[darquegk]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 4:21pm

Between the Beetlejuice stop clause being evoked, the star power of the year-unseen Music Man revival looming, and the avant-garde West Side Story... I think we’re living through the long-awaited season 3 of SMASH.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 4:26pm

Big difference to me.  Baby was not a juggernaut charging outrageous prices and American Buffalo was never going to really catch on and run long.  It was (and is) too dark a play to attract a large Broadway audience.  

The Barrymore was a plum theatre, Baby was a musical that would benefit more from the location and lack of a second balcony.  I think they were trying to give Baby as much chance as they could.  (I actually saw both shows at the Barrymore and thought it really was perfect for Baby).  Also, since shows did move more in those days than now, I have to assume that it was a lot cheaper to move a show, especially one like AB (one set, three person cast) than it is today.

Beetlejuice (which right now I still have no interest in seeing, so I have no agenda), represents a huge investment and appears to be that rare case of a show that slowly catches on (and could have a decent run (beyond 6 months) as long as there are summer vacation, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter and Spring Break weeks to offset mediocre weeks (that I imagine are still currently making their nut).

In some ways -- and I am not complaining -- I think the real issue is with all these long runs that essentially have taken shows out of commission for decades.  It makes the list of available theatres much smaller than it probably ever has been.

Ironically, assuming that Rudin does not really try to go for a long run after Jackman leaves (as was the case with Dolly) AND every seat will be sold for the entire duration of Jackman's run, no matter where it is), it seems to me that a perfect theatre for MM from the producer's perspective would be the Marquis...more seats, great location, no fear that the barn won't sell out).  But he does seem to be very loyal to the Shuberts.  

I would not be surprised -- if WSS is not a success -- if we eventually get an announcement that MM is opening at the Broadway.  It could definitely gross more at the Broadway, provides a better opportunity to have some decently priced tickets in the rear-mezz.  

For that to be possible, Beetlejuice can't lose steam and WSS has to flop.  I personally am hoping that WSS is a huge success, as I am so sick of WSS productions that simply recreate the original production.  It really needs a breathe of fresh air.  If it does flop, though, the above would be reasonable.

Finally, if BJ is able to maintain its momentum and MM still wants the Winter Garden, maybe the Shuberts will consider underwriting the cost of the move. That is not something that I imagine anyone would consider this early, however.  The Broadway IS occupied and who knows what other musicals will be lining up to open in the fall of 2020; they are not going to subsidize anything if there is competition for the theatre.  The other problem of course  is that, since it has already been opened 8 months or so, the probability is that BJ is not going to ever be more than a show that makes its nut X weeks a year and does great business when families are buying tickets.  If that proves to be the case, it is never going to return its investment anyway.

 

 

[PeterC6482]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 4:50pm

Greetings, but my post wasn't referring to "Baby." "Baby" opened 12/4/83. "I Love My Wife" was the show that pushed "American Buffalo" out of the Barrymore. "I Love My Wife" opened  4/17/17.  "American Buffalo" lasted another two months at the Belasco. It colsed 6/12/77.

 

"Baby" is another story altogether. "Baby" was probably below its stop clause, except for two weeks, for the entire time of its run. Most weeks it was selling about 55% of capacity. Even though they didn't invest in it, I think the Shuberts liked it and let it stay. Broadway was entering a cyclical downturn and there was not as much competition for theaters in the mid to late 80s. During two seasons the Barrymore stood empty for almost a year, March 1987 to March 1988, and June 1988 to March 1989. Also August 1992 to March 1993, and May 1991 to April 1992. Things picked up again around 1997.

Updated On: 12/10/19 at 04:50 PM

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 4:58pm

PeterC6482 said: "Greetings, but my post wasn't referring to "Baby." "Baby" opened 12/4/83. "I Love My Wife" was the show that pushed "American Buffalo" out of the Barrymore. "I Love My Wife" opened 4/17/17. "American Buffalo" lasted another two months at the Belasco. It colsed 6/12/77.



"Baby" is another story altogether. "Baby" was probably belowits stop clause, except for one week, for the entire time of its run. Most weeks it was selling about 57% of capacity. Even though they didn't invest in it, I think the Shuberts liked it and let it stay."

 

In some ways, I Love My Wife was similar to Baby.  It  was a small scale musical that opened in a theatre that almost never had musicals.  I can't imagine that it opened with any advance either.  It was more successful than Baby, but the argument still seems valid.  

I will say this:if I really liked Baby, I totally loved I Love My Wife.  It was so damn funny and had a great score.  The pacing was really fast -- the director, Gene Saks, deservedly IMO won the Best  Director Tony over the director of Annie, Martin Charnin.  I always wonder why it was never revived, even by a Roundabout, because it was really good.  I assume that the humor, which was so hysterical then, would come across as very dated today, but am not sure.  One thing is clear: there is an opportunity for a star-making performance. Lenny Baker won a Tony in one of the four lead roles, giving one of the funniest performances I have ever seen on stage.  Sadly, he died very young, from some type of cancer.

 

 

Updated On: 12/10/19 at 04:58 PM

[PeterC6482]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 5:07pm

I agree with you completely regarding "I Love My Wife." I was sad when it closed.

And, I wish "Baby" could have a first-class revival on Broadway. It's long overdue for one. I loved that show, too. Liz Callaway singing "The Story Goes On" was magical. A magnificent way to close Act 1.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 5:16pm

JBroadway said: "Phantom of London said:“part of the judgement at the time by NYC they cannot build anymore theatre. This included the operating the Minskoff and Marquis which Gerald Schonefeld said in his book was ‘unfair’.

Maybe it’s time for NYC to cut the Shuberts some slack and allow them to compete again?"

Memory a bit hazy on this, read this a while back. But in the 1950s Shuberts had a virtual monopoly on Times Square and NYC Borough wanted to break the monopoly and part of an anti trust case Shuberts were forced to sell the St James and barred from building or operating more theatres, so when the Minskoff and Marquis were built they were barred from bidding to operate them.

Even though the Shuberts are Broadways biggest theatre owners with 17 theatres, 12 of these are small ‘play houses’. So are limited for mid size houses.

Let me recommend the reading of  Gerald Schonefeld’s autobiography and Michael Riedel’s book Razzle Dazzle.


Can you expand on this? I don’t totally understand? Why can’t they build theatres, and what does that have to do with the Minskoff and the Marquis? I don’t know the story there.

Alternately, could you link me to some article or website that explains this situation?

"

 

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 5:40pm

I love some of the responses, especially the one from a galaxy far, far, away...

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/BEETLEJUICE-Fans-Respond-To-The-Production-Being-Evicted-From-Its-Theatre-20191210

[ACL2006]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 9:00pm

Did anyone else sign the petition to keep the show open via change.org?

[Robbie2]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 10:00pm

MM was always planned for the Winter Garden

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 10:06pm

I think part of the fervor to keep the show open was definitely the way the NYT article was worded.  It takes much more of a "poor Beetlejuice is dead" stance than a "well that's show business for you", so it really does make it seem more like a dick move, as people have mentioned.  Though of course, the cast's response has probably also added to that.

I do have a question about shows announcing closing though.  In the article it mentions that they were notified back in October, but obviously there wasn't an official release up until now.  If anyone happens to know, would the Shuberts/Scott Rudin set a "latest date" for the press release that Beetlejuice is closing so that they can announce Music Man will be taking a theater and then let the Beetlejuice team decide when/how they'd like to announce the news any time before then?  Or would they have more control over the exact date that the announcement is made?  It's definitely pretty strategically timed to make the most of the holiday season and then presumably the slower January/February months. 

[Zion24]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 10:16pm

ACL2006 said: "Did anyone else sign the petition to keep the show open via change.org?"

ill never understand these sorts of petitions, unless it includes a binding pledge to actually buy tickets to keep the show open (in this case, buy tickets 9 months in advance because the show*is*still*going*to*run*through*the*spring*)

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 10:35pm

Well, it is tricky. I don’t think they’d post a typical “closing notice” since it wasn’t there decision and wasn’t due to “low ticket sales.”

I’m not sure what move I’d make next? I mean a tour makes sense and maybe they could use it at the Universal Parks? But a move to another theater seems wrong. When you downsize it doesn’t seem it ever workouts.

[Zion24]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 11:04pm

SouthernCakes said: "Well, it is tricky. I don’t think they’d post a typical “closing notice” since it wasn’t there decision and wasn’t due to “low ticket sales.”

I’m not sure what move I’d make next? I mean a tour makes sense and maybe they could use it at the Universal Parks? But a move to another theater seems wrong. When you downsize it doesn’t seem it ever workouts."

Obviously it only works if the economics work, but it has worked for Mamma Mia and Chicago, no? And the Humans? A few others. 

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 11:09pm

SouthernCakes said: "But a move to another theater seems wrong. When you downsize it doesn’t seem it ever workouts."

Beauty and the Beast ran several more years after downsizing and moving to the Lunt, but that was Disney. Maybe if West Side Story doesn't take off Beetlejuice could move to the Broadway Theatre and they wouldn't have to downsize.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 12/10/19 at 11:34pm

I wouldn’t say it worked for Mamma Mia...

And Chicago and The Humans, to my knowledge, downsize. They just moved theaters. Still the same physical production.

[itsshowtime2]

Posted: 12/11/19 at 12:27am

The part I don't understand is why it appears to be such a big deal for BJ to move theaters.  Touring productions around the country move every week.  How hard would it be to pack up the set and haul it a few blocks away?  I can't imagine it should cost more than 10-20 thousand dollars.  Would appreciate if someone knows and could explain.  Thanks in advance!