If I’m looking at it from a “flopped on all accounts” direction (i.e. not just running for a shorter amount of time than expected, but also critically panned), I would have to say “Tarzan.” I was thoroughly entertained, thought the visuals were stunning yet also motivated, and enjoy the score quite a lot.
Similarly, I think “Big Fish” was one of the best new big, Broadway musicals I had seen in years. Wonderful story, terrific acting, and I truly loved the fluidity of the score. I didn’t mind that not many songs “stuck” with me – I thought they flowed well within the show and enhanced the moments that were happening onstage. I actually enjoyed the fact that it was hard to remember the songs in detail, because it made the show, for me, feel like it was one, cohesive unit, as opposed to broken up into sections.
And, while I did not see it live, I love everything about “Passion.”
For a musical, I would have to say Taboo. I believe it was pulverized because of Rosie O'Donnell and not due to the merits of the show. I had such a wonderful experience the 2 times I saw the show. Loved it and was sorry to see it go after just a short run.
For a play, I would say, the original version of La Bete. It was mesmerizing and the performances grand. I could not believe the critical reception it got. I saw an early preview and went back right before it closed because I couldn't believe it wasn't supported by the critics. I enjoyed the revival but that original production was flawless.
chewy5000, I too saw Via Galactica and loved it, but I put it in the category of so bad it was brilliant. Wondering if you disagree and included it, or if you agree and just decided not to follow the instructions of the original poster?
I defined "flop" as any show that didn't recoup. I believe our vocabulary is limited as so many shows don't recoup and many - if not most - are successes by other standards.
ARTc3 formerly ARTc. Actually been a poster since 2004. My name isn't Art. Drop the "3" and say the signature and you'll understand.
Most of my favorite musicals flopped on Broadway (except Cats) so my list would be very long, but of the most recent ones I would have to agree with a few others and say Bonnie & Clyde. I followed that show from the first out of town tryout in La Jolla and I thought it was excellent then. I didn't initially embrace all of the changes that were made for Broadway, but there were some major improvements like the addition of "Raise a Little Hell" and the act two reprise. Personally, I would have made a few little tweaks to the book and reverted back to some of the scenes as they were originally written for the La Jolla Playhouse production, but I don't think those changes would have made a huge difference sales wise on Broadway. The show was always going to flop due to timing, inexperienced producers and the critic's vendetta toward Frank Wildhorn. It's still his best written show though thanks to the mostly clever book by Ivan Menchell, even if it is missing some of the more charming book material from La Jolla.
I loved Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown. I grew up watching the movie and had so much fun seeing it live onstage. I also did love Dance of the Vampires. I saw it twice on broadway. I saw one of the very first previews and then went back just before it closed and saw a very different show. And I had fun both times. I had no other exposure to the European version and just thought the broadway show was tacky campy fun. I saw Amour's first preview and enjoyed that quite a bit as well. I wish that I would have been smart enough to have seen Taboo. But, alas, I had this evil little fairy whispering hateful things about it in my ear. I only blame myself for listening to him.
Hands on a Hardbody - So glad I was able to see it three times in it's short run, and that it was well preserved with it's cast album.
Follies (Revival) - It helped me actually make sense of the story, that was always muddy from trying to understand it from previous recordings, and it brought the glorious staging of Who's that Woman.
Bennett's version built slowly: (i) older women; (ii) younger, "mirror" women behind them, until the the two gradually merged and the contrast between youth and age was dramatically apparent.
The revival put on a terrific number, but it was a thematic mess by comparison. (Not that I'm complaining. I still loved it.)
*** As for this poll, I'd say FOLLIES unless we go with the 250 performance rule (not a bad idea), in which case I'd say CANDIDE and GOLDEN APPLE.
I like to think that Via Galactica could've been amazing had its creators been a little bit more focussed on the task at hand. I do not deny that it was an incomprehensible mess.
Funny how some of the flops of the 2000's had a much richer regional life than their original runs seemed to predict: CAROLINE, OR CHANGE, THE SCOTTSBORO BOYS, and GREY GARDENS, just to name a few.
"Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they've been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It's a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary. Impossible is nothing.”
~ Muhammad Ali
The Fig Leaves Are Falling! This 1969 flop made me love the theater & start going regularly to shows early n their run or on previews so I wouldn't miss any qood flops.. Still do it today!
Words don't deserve that kind of malarkey. They're innocent, neutral, precise, standing for this, describing that, meaning the other, so if you look after them you can build bridges across incomprehension and chaos. But when they get their corners knocked off, they're no good anymore…I don't think writers are sacred, but words are. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.