who the hell is Nick Jonas?

[goldenboy]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:08pm

Perhaps I am out of the loop but who is Nick Jonas?
Does he have enough of a following to keep How to Succeed Alive?

I mean there was a time I never heard of Lady Gaga but now I have. (Wouldn't seh be fun as Hedy LaRue) Maybe he is great.
I don't know

Has anyone else not heard of him?
Will he keep how to succeed alive?

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:09pm

Did you even try Google?

He has over a million followers on Twitter, and his fan base is rabid.

Do your homework.

[MissAnneThrop]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:09pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Jonas

[goldenboy]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:11pm

Yes I did that. I know he was the best actor on Nickelodean or something like that.

Is it enough to sustain interest in a Broadway Show.
Don't bash me for asking a question. Geesh.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:13pm

Oh dear god.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:20pm

So you have heard of him?

What a friggin' waste of bandwidth.

[henryt]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:24pm

To take the OP seriously, it's hard to say. He and his brothers peaked in popularity a few years ago, so he certainly doesn't currently have the ubiquity of someone like Darren Criss or Daniel Radcliffe. Also, in my opinion, he doesn't have as diverse a fan base as either of those two. However, as TheatreDiva mentioned, he has over a million Twitter followers, and if even a fraction of those came to see the show, it would sustain it for quite a while.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:27pm

Nick Jonas is ten times as well-known and much more popular than Darren Criss, whose claims to fame are a recurring role on Glee and a youtube musical.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:28pm

I understand that some people do indeed live under rocks. It can be dark, lonely, and not much current information trickles underneath, especially when you don't know any kids under 13.

Nick Jonas is a former child Broadway actor who hit it big with his brothers on Nickelodeon. They sing and have toured extensively. Nick seems to be trying to make his way back to Broadway now that his child stardom is beginning to wrap up. He has recently played Marius in both televised concert of Les Mis and the stage show in England, and taken on the role of Link Larkin in the Hollywood Bowl production of Hairspray. Despite having little stage presence, and delivering wooden performances, yes he is a big enough name to keep How to Succeed going for the duration of his run.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:29pm

I mean there was time he had never heard of Nick Jonas but now he has. Geesh.

[ReggieonBway]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:53pm

"Nick Jonas is ten times as well-known and much more popular than Darren Criss, whose claims to fame are a recurring role on Glee and a youtube musical."

So very wrong. He may be well known, but he has absolutely no fanbase beyond the fourteen year old girl obsessives. Darren has a MUCH larger fanbase. Have you ever met anyone below the age of 21?

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 9:59pm

Some guy who appeared on the BaitBus and CorbinFisher.com

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 10:16pm

I have no idea who Darren Criss is, but I know who Nick Jonas is. (And before I posted on a message board, I would bother to look them up at least.)

It just goes to show you how fragmented "fame" has become. There is no all-encompassing pop culture anymore. It's made of up niche audiences who watch (and listen to, and wear, and drive) what they want when they want to.

We're way beyond three major networks and a PBS station. Way beyond local radio playing one kind of music.

I'm not surprised that people who are "famous" are unknown by others in the same age bracket and in the same country. Look at the Broadway culture. I guarantee you the "average" (if I can use that term) person has no clue about Donna Murphy, Sondheim, LuPone, Stritch, Mazzie, McDonald, etc. No idea who they are.

But it's even more fragmented than that. There are millions of people who have no idea who Colin Firth is, yet he won a Best Actor Oscar last year in a film that grossed $180 million.

It's still a fragmented audience that knows or cares.

Don't get me wrong, you can still definitely get thousands of fangirls to show up at a stage door, but to think that "everyone" knows who these people are ... that's really the naive part, not the other way around.

[kchenofan]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 11:12pm

"Nick Jonas is a former child Broadway actor who hit it big with his brothers on Nickelodeon."
If we want to get technical, it was Disney Channel. The Jonas Brothers are connected to the mouse.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 9/9/11 at 11:30pm

So very wrong. He may be well known, but he has absolutely no fanbase beyond the fourteen year old girl obsessives


Are you kidding me? Ask the mothers of those girls. They love that freshly-scrubbed, cleancut, super-Christian, adorable diabetic. He's the safest crush they'll ever have.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 4:40am

"If we want to get technical, it was Disney Channel. The Jonas Brothers are connected to the mouse."

Really? My bad.

[tazber]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 4:47am

besty, Darren Criss came into the pop culture consciouness about 10 minutes ago when he was cast as a recurring character on Glee.

He's only been "famous" for a few months (well maybe a year, I don't know, but not very long).

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 6:12am

^ Thanks, Taz. I discovered that when I Googled him. If I were a "Gleek," I guess I'd be excited and it would make sense, but I've never watched the show, so his name means nothing to me.

That's the thing about popular TV shows now. In the grand scheme of things, they may have millions of people who watch them loyally, but they also have many millions MORE who don't. Network TV ratings are (in general) at an all-time low. More people are watching cable, movies, and/or anything else besides network TV.

I'm an example of someone who loves musicals and theatre and has never seen an episode of Glee. It just didn't appeal to me, right from the start, when I watched the teasers for it. Nothing that has been said about it so far has enticed me to see it. In fact, it's the reverse. The more I hear about the direction it's gone, the less I want to see it. So, yeah, my reaction was "Darren Who?" Let the Gleeks fill the seats. I'm sure there are more than enough for his limited run as Finch.

Updated On: 9/10/11 at 06:12 AM

[temms]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 10:44am

The Hirschfeld seats around 1400. Every week, he needs to put 10,000 butts in seats. That's not very many, really, compared to Movie/TV audiences.

Even if he does the show for 6 months, that's still only about 250,000 tickets that need to be sold.

The Jonas Brothers, as recently as a year ago, can sell out stadiums and large amphitheatres for an extended tour. 250,000 sales represents a fraction of their concert ticket sales. Now also figure in the repeat obsessives who will go dozens of times, and the number of individual butts goes down even further.

I'm honestly not at all familiar with his work as a performer, but it seems to be a pretty solid coup for the producers to sign him. Whether he's good or not is pretty much meaningless in this equation, sadly.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 11:05am

^ Thanks, Taz. I discovered that when I Googled him. If I were a "Gleek," I guess I'd be excited and it would make sense, but I've never watched the show, so his name means nothing to me.


Sorry, but I never really understand this rationalization. I've seen ONE episode of Glee (well before Darren Criss started) and I'd heard of him a long time ago. I don't even like Glee or its fandom. It is possible to know a bit about actors in movies and TV shows you've never seen.

I mean, I know a lot of weird things about meat, though I haven't eaten the stuff since I was 14. Then again, I did work at Trader Joe's in college...

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 11:05am

I'm not surprised that people who are "famous" are unknown by others in the same age bracket and in the same country. Look at the Broadway culture. I guarantee you the "average" (if I can use that term) person has no clue about Donna Murphy, Sondheim, LuPone, Stritch, Mazzie, McDonald, etc. No idea who they are.

This is a true statement. I have 2 friends and the acquaintances I have met on this board who would know who Donna Murphy, Elaine Stritch, Marin Mazzie or Norm Lewis are. The majority though have no clue whatsoever who these people are.

I was walking down by the Sondheim the other day with my friend Eddie and he saw the poster for ANYTHING GOES and he turns to me and asks, "Who the hell is Sutton Foster?!!" Sad but true.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 11:06am

It's not sad; it's reality.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 12:25pm

I know a lot of things about a lot of things you don't know about, Lizzie. We don't have the same resources for information. Why would it be hard for you to understand that? We don't watch the same shows, read the same magazines, or live the same lives. It's as simple as that. No big mystery. And no strain of rationalization needed.

Updated On: 9/10/11 at 12:25 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 1:43pm

I'm not trying to crap on everybody's parade by pointing out how fragmented our pop culture society as a whole is becoming. The same would be true for your "ignorant friend" who has no idea who Sutton Foster is. I guarantee you whatever pop-world he's living in includes a lot of people we've never heard of. He might be just as surprised (or horrified or angered or depressed?) to learn that you don't know who his favorite (blah-blah) is.

I'm fascinated by this new trend of pop-culture diversity. Maybe I explained it too quickly before, but just look at the music industry. We all used to buy albums (yes, records) or singles that a record label decided to release. If you weren't signed by a record company, there was no way you were going to reach a wide audience with your music. And the music was played on a limited number of radio stations reachable on your AM or FM dial. That was it. So if a record became a hit, most everybody who listened to "current" music knew about it.

Same thing on TV with the season finale of M*A*S*H, which remains the most-watched TV series episode ever, and it aired in 1983. (Only Super Bowl XLIV has beaten its ratings for the single most-watched program of any kind ever.) Why? True, it was a popular show that ran for years, but when this M*A*S*H episode aired, it wasn't competing with major cable stations (we had cable by then, but with only dozen channels max, then). Most people were limited to the 3 networks, PBS, and a few local channels. That's it. There was no Internet, no home video to speak of (VHS was just beginning to catch on). So that's how you got such a huge viewership. It's not possible to do that today.

Even with all the "Gleeks" out there, last year's season finale reached 11 million viewers. Great! This country now has 311 million people in it. That's 3.5 percent of the total population who watched Glee.

And here's an even bigger trend. I know more people now who are canceling their cable, and some who have gotten rid of their TVs. They don't watch them enough anymore. They get info and entertainment when they want, and watch what they want, on the Internet. That's it.

For movies, it's the same thing. Take Gone With the Wind. No movie will ever sell that many tickets in its first run (not dollars but tickets) because back then, there was no TV, no home video release of movies. You either saw it in the theatre or you didn't see it at all. And you couldn't stay home and watch TV, either. That's why, as big a hit as Avatar is, it's dwarfed by the numbers of people who saw Gone With the Wind. More than twice as many, and the country's population was about half of what it is now.

Books can now be self-published and released via many outlets on the Internet. Blogs and message boards have taken the place of magazines and newspapers, to a large degree. Independent musicians can find and cultivate audiences without having a record label.

All of that is eating into the collective "pop culture," which is why there really is no singular pop culture anymore. It's all made up of niche audiences.

That's also why I find less ignorance in someone saying "who is that?" than I do in someone saying "I can't believe you don't know who that is!" It's the latter that shows they don't have their finger on the current shift in trends, not the former.

Updated On: 9/10/11 at 01:43 PM

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 9/10/11 at 2:13pm

I think Besty hits it on the head. Pop culture has changed a lot in the last decade. Despite that change there are still names that are mentioned on the cover of every magazine, and every talk show. Unless you wear blinders in the aisle of the grocery store and only watch the fishing channel on TV, it still surprises me when someone isn't at least vaguely aware of some of these names.