BILLY ELLIOT To Launch National Tour In Chicago At The Ford Center for the Performing Arts' Oriental Theatre In March 2010

[EddieVarley]

Posted: 7/21/09 at 7:10pm

Click Here to Read BILLY ELLIOT To Launch National Tour In Chicago At The Ford Center for the Performing Arts' Oriental Theatre In March 2010
https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/BILLY_ELLIOT_To_Launch_National_Tour_In_Chicago_At_The_Ford_Center_for_the_Performing_Arts_Oriental_Theatre_In_March_2010_20090721

[uncageg]

Posted: 7/21/09 at 7:36pm

Our next season is to be announced on Thursday. Will be interesting to see if we are getting it.

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 7/21/09 at 8:53pm

I'm curious to see how this show will do in southern markets.

[FinalDestination]

Posted: 7/21/09 at 10:37pm

I am excited for this. I live in St. Louis, but I usually visit Chicago a few times throughout the year.

I can't wait to see it. AndAllThatJazz, I agree.

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 12:44am

Guess that means Chicago won the premiere...
Updated On: 7/22/09 at 12:44 AM

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 2:32am

"Our next season is to be announced on Thursday. Will be interesting to see if we are getting it."

No one else is getting it. It's length of stay will be based on ticket sales...similar to how The Color Purple and Jersey Boys originally were planned. It's technically an open run.

[wicked91]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 2:45am

looks like its only staying for a few months since SHREK is playing at the Oriental starting in June.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 3:18am

I need them to announce dates, especially Florida dates.

[chinkie azn jai]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 3:38am

"looks like its only staying for a few months since SHREK is playing at the Oriental starting in June."

I'm sure they'll place Shrek and other shows in the Cadillac Palace Theatre or (unfortunately) the Auditorium Theatre. As of now there's a lot of shows that are scheduled for the Oriental Theatre right before March, and I'm sure Billy Elliot will need a lot of time to load in and do tech. My guess is that Shrek will go to the Cadillac Palace since nothing is scheduled there in June.

[Coraline]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 3:39am

"looks like its only staying for a few months since SHREK is playing at the Oriental starting in June."

Oh yeah, I forgot about that - wonder what's gonna happen

[onedaymore]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 3:49am

I live two hours from Chicago and my city has a train that goes straight to it (with a $3 ticket). Not only is Billy Elliot tour starting there but Addams Family is having previews there. We rock.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 6:54am

Why do they refer to it as a tour, when it's plan seems really to be a sit down? Won't they really need, then, THREE casts? NY, Chicago AND an actual Touring production? And then LA will probably want (and get) a sit down.

Boy....Billy Boot Camp must be packed. (kind of makes the boys seem less valuable)

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 9:45am

"looks like its only staying for a few months since SHREK is playing at the Oriental starting in June."

Shrek will be moved to a different Theater. They had to move other shows when Wicked stayed, so it isn't an issue.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 11:23am

I'm hoping it will stay at the Oriental at least 5-6 months. Ad yes, Shrek will probably go to the Palace or even the Shubert if Jersey Boys can't hold out for another year.

Posted: 7/22/09 at 11:40am

The Shubert (or whatever-Bank theater it is this week) is much smaller than the Cadillac (barely 2000 vs 2600+)- I'm sure Shrek will have to go with the bigger theater.

[mybigsplash]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 12:01pm

I just want to say that this announcement in the national press that Billy Elliot the Musical is launching a "National Tour", is very misleading. The truth is, and I've been saying this all year, is that Billy Elliot CAN NEVER go on a NATIONAL TOUR. For both legal and economic reasons. This announcement yesterday describes, an Open-ended Sitdown production in Chicago, which could and may run for YEARS, before they pack it up and move it to another city. Additionally, there is a third sitdown production planned to San Francisco in the fall of next year. They are doing this, because a show like Billy Elliot cannot travel like traditional tours can. SO WHY DO THEY CALL IT A TOUR IN ALL THE PRESS? Well firstly you should know, that the PR firm for Billy Elliot writes these press relseases, and they chose to call it a "Tour" so that all the local newspapers in every state would cover the story! If they call it a "National Tour" then it makes National Headlines. SO WHY IS THAT BAD? Well its not too harmful, but it may get many peoples hopes up that Billy Elliot will visit their state or local tour house on a tour, this is simply false. Billy Elliot cannot and will not tour, it can only afford to produce sit-down productions that must run for years to work.

Why can't it tour? Well there are two answers. And they are both the same reason. Children. This show has so many children that all children would need so many childhandlers, and parents, that it would be far too expensive to pay all those people. The second reason, and the more significant reason, is that Child labor laws and Union rules prevent these children from working the demanding hours of a tour, most people on tour work the equivialant of a 40+ hour week. And their only day off (Sunday) is used for travel. Each Child is also required to have tutors, meals, and otherwise that would make a tour financially impossible. The number of people it would take to make a tour of Billy Elliot, would be outrageous, bigger than any show before in history. (ask me about Annie) And Billy Elliot already has one of the largest casts on Broadway. Sitdown productions would rely on hiring more local actors for adults and kids.

Bottom Line --- Don't sit at home and wait for Billy Elliot to come to your nearest city, plan a trip to New York, or Chicago next year. Otherwise you'll be waiting for a long time. Most Likely forever!

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 12:41pm

"Why can't it tour? Well there are two answers. And they are both the same reason. Children. This show has so many children that all children would need so many childhandlers, and parents, that it would be far too expensive to pay all those people."

I don't believe there is any Equity Rule dictating how many wranglers are needed for a set amount of children. So that additional cost is negligible.

"The second reason, and the more significant reason, is that Child labor laws and Union rules prevent these children from working the demanding hours of a tour, most people on tour work the equivialant of a 40+ hour week."

Wrong. Stagehands, maybe. Actors, no. And since the main children don't do a full 8 shows anyway they can easily meet child labor laws.

"And their only day off (Sunday) is used for travel."

Most tours have a performance on Sundays, and Monday would be a travel day. A show this large wouldn't be able to load-out one day and start performances the next in a new city...even if it uses a jump set.

"Each Child is also required to have tutors, meals, and otherwise that would make a tour financially impossible."

They are required to have a tutor, but they will most likely only have a few. There isn't going to be one tutor per child. As for meals, they aren't any more entitled to a meal than any other actor in the company. The children are paid like everyone else in the Company.

"The number of people it would take to make a tour of Billy Elliot, would be outrageous, bigger than any show before in history. (ask me about Annie) And Billy Elliot already has one of the largest casts on Broadway."

Show Boat had over 65 members in its cast...so let's keep the hyperbole under control. They can easily reduce the number of ballet girls and chorus members if they need to.

If they are modest with the set for a tour, it shouldn't be any more expensive to run than any other large show.

I agree that financially they are better off by stopping for at minimum month-long runs. But your legal arguments are patently untrue. If this physical production moves to another city after its Chicago engagement, then it has met the definition of tour.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 1:05pm

I believe both Oliver and Annie have survived national tours in the distant and not-so-distant past (to varying degrees of success). Given the amount of money the show is making, and the amount the show could potentially pull in on tour, I've no doubt investors and producers could come up with a feasible budget for a national tour with perhaps only a slightly reduced cast and a modified set.

Posted: 7/22/09 at 1:06pm

I remember when people said "Lion King" could never tour for those same reasons.


Meanwhile in Chicago- Everything gets moved To The Cadillac: "Yesterday's confirmation of an sit-down run for "Billy Elliot the Musical" in Chicago means that other shows are shifting theaters.

A spokesman for Broadway in Chicago said Tuesday that "Shrek the Musical," which was to have played the Oriental Theatre, will now play the Cadillac Palace once it arrives in June. Both "Billy Elliot" and "Shrek" are organizing as Chicago point-of-origin shows.

"August: Osage County" will also make the same move, meaning that the Steppenwolf-originating drama will now have to play to the back of a 2,500-seat house that makes Broadway's Imperial Theatre look like a front parlor.

So in early 2010, the load ins and outs will be thick and fast at the Cady, with "Dreamgirls" and "The 101 Dalmations Musical" also on the docket.

The Bank of America Theatre remains the home of "Jersey Boys," which has no current plans to depart. The boys will face a lot of competition in 2010, although you could argue that both "Billy Elliot" and "Shrek" appeal to a different clientele.

It was also announced Tuesday that "The Addams Family' (which preceeds "Billy Elliot" into the Oriental) will play the Lunt-Fontanne Theatre in New York, following its Chicago tryout.

The first New York preview is set for Mar. 4, which will allow for a very short extension to the Chicago run, currently slated to end Jan. 10, assuming Gomez and Morticia do not exhaust themselves running around our fair city and assuming the 'Billy Elliot" crew does not rush immediately into the theater."

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 1:13pm

Joe - I almost mentioned Lion King as an example! NOBODY thought those sets could travel.

[mybigsplash]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 1:41pm

I guess I really struck A nerve! Hold tightly to your dreams that BE will tour... because its now apparent that that aint happening anytime soon with two more sitdown productions planned.

Posted: 7/22/09 at 2:25pm

Well MBS you could be right- after all Wicked didn't tour until all the sit downs were exhausted. Oh wait.....

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:39pm

"I guess I really struck A nerve! Hold tightly to your dreams that BE will tour... because its now apparent that that aint happening anytime soon with two more sitdown productions planned."

I get paid to watch Billy Elliot on Broadway, I can care less if it tours. I for one already implied earlier in this thread that it won't tour for awhile. My response was to your illogical reasons for not touring. The show will eventually tour. And there are no additional "planned" sit-downs...there's just "talk" about additional productions.

[jessica0414]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:43pm

Blargh...I've never seen the show and I've tried really hard not to pre-judge it but from what I've seen online and stuff I just don't get it. There's no denying the talent of the performers, especially the Billys, but the number they performed at the Tonys seemed just plain strange (although it was out of context). I don't know. I really wish BIC would buy or build another theater so that if/when this sits down there would be another place for touring shows to come besides the Barn (the Auditorium Theater).

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 9:30pm

Broadway in Chicago has the Shubert (or whatever they're calling it this week). Jersey Boys isn't expected to run past January. I doubt Shrek will last long either. Chicagoans don't generally buy into that kind of garbage...Beauty and the Beast was letting people just walk in off the street for free they were so desparate for an audience. And I understand Mary Poppins' numbers weren't that great.