Groundhog Day -- Spring 2017?

[aces25]

Any news whether Groundhog Day will arrive this coming spring before the Tony cut-off? 

[Oak2]

Dunno, but it'd probably be better off delaying and going for the 2017/2018 season, since there's so much good competition on the plate for the 2016/2017 Season that Groundhog Day probably will have a much tougher time getting nominations.

[NZBOY2]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1776920685857242&id=1617553715127274&fs=5

[Eurotrash]

Saw it a couple of weeks ago, it will crush all opposition if it can overcome the 'not invented here' syndrome...

[Valentina3]

Oak2 said: "Dunno, but it'd probably be better off delaying and going for the 2017/2018 season, since there's so much good competition on the plate for the 2016/2017 Season that Groundhog Day probably will have a much tougher time getting nominations."

 

You're making the assumption that there won't be any "good competition" in 2017-18 season. It's usually a better idea to ride the wave of good buzz and reviews (aka from London) than wait a year and do excessive promotional campaigns to get back on people's radar. 

Having said that, I haven't seen Groundhog Day yet, but after DEH - it will be Platt's Tony to lose, and deservedly so.

[Whateverjsays]

http://nypost.com/2016/08/18/broadway-producers-are-terrified-of-groundhog-day/

 

 

this was very interesting. We'll see what happens 

[aaaaaa15]

Also saw it and completely disagree that it will defeat all opposition. This has no chance at getting best musical over DEH or Great Comet. The same with Best Score. Its best bet if it was to come in this season is Andy Karl but as has been noted, he already has very tough competition with Ben Platt.

[Kimbo]

It has a theater and is coming in this season

(will then return to London for 2017-2018 season).

 

Having seen all of the shows under discussion so far (in various stages) I do think it's safe to say that while it will be another strong year, this will be the one to beat.  For one thing, I think there's some residual goodwill towards this creative team, who (nearly all identical save for the bookwriter) are still perceived in some quarters to have gotten short shrift, at least in some categories, during the Matilda-Kinky Boots race a few years back.

 

But beyond that, it's just a sensationally entertaining, funny and unexpectedly touching old-fashioned but still inventive feel-good musical.   I won't speculate on the Andy Karl v Ben Platt race - that one may indeed be tight, and people will want to give Evan Hansen something.  But this one will overcome nearly all resistance and opposition. 

This article I feel overstates the case a bit - but the points are well worth making -

https://heatst.com/entertainment/why-the-groundhog-day-musical-will-be-the-biggest-broadway-show-since-hamilton/

[neonlightsxo]

aaaaaa15 said: "Also saw it and completely disagree that it will defeat all opposition. This has no chance at getting best musical over DEH or Great Comet. The same with Best Score. Its best bet if it was to come in this season is Andy Karl but as has been noted, he already has very tough competition with Ben Platt."

 

Agreed with this 100%. Andy is very good but doesn't hold a candle to Ben Platt. And to put it simply. GHD is just not half as good as Great Comet, DEH, or even Anastasia, IMO. But then again the Brits have always had different...taste in musicals.

Our critics will not be as kind as they were in London.

 

[aaaaaa15]

Why Groundhog Day will be the biggest show since Hamilton? Sorry but they're not even comparable. I really don't understand what people see in this show that I don't. It was good, enjoyable enough but the only aspect that really stood out as exceptional was Andy Karl. Even the people that love this show have said the score isn't memorable enough etc.

It's a cute movie adaptation with an exceptional leading performance. Nothing more and nothing less.

[neonlightsxo]

aaaaaa15 I honestly think it's a matter of British vs American taste in musicals. They love spectacle, jukebox musicals and recognizable names. We like...actual substance.

[aaaaaa15]

I think you must be right!

[Princeton2]

I thought this was brilliant, and andy karl gives one of the best leading male performances ive seen in  years. In fact its one of the best new male roles in a long time. However oddly for a musical its score is the weak part. Couldnt remember one song on leaving the theatre and quite often the lyrics couldnt be heard clearly. However due to a strong cast and flawless production it didnt matter.

[neonlightsxo]

Again, the difference. IMO a weak score DOES matter. Andy Karl was great in Rocky too...

[Princeton2]

neonlightsxo said: "aaaaaa15 I honestly think it's a matter of British vs American taste in musicals. They love spectacle, jukebox musicals and recognizable names. We like...actual substance.

 

yeah because broadway doesnt like those things either. 

 

 


"

 

 

[neonlightsxo]

I didn't say that.

[Call_me_jorge]

neonlightsxo said: "I didn't say that.

 

"

What did you say?

[Mister Matt]

Our critics will not be as kind as they were in London.

Brantley was quite kind to it already.

They love spectacle, jukebox musicals and recognizable names. We like...actual substance.

What sort of evidence are you referencing for that sort of bigoted statement?  Are you speaking in terms of longevity or awards?  I've always found it interesting that musicals like Follies, Candide, Sunday in the Park With George, Once on This Island, Merrily We Roll Along, Jerry Springer-The Opera and Caroline, or Change managed to win Best Musical in the UK, but not in the US.  As far as audience popularity, there are a few differences, but the majority of the long-running shows tend to be the same.  But to infer that the US prefers substance to spectacle, jukebox musicals and star names is just flat-out wrong.  The US audiences LOVE those things as well.

[neonlightsxo]

I didn't say that we don't like spectacle. Obviously we do. But they tend to have more success with flashy musicals over there and less success with heavy stuff. Remember how Spring Awakening flopped and Next to Normal has never even made an attempt?
 

I am well aware that Brantley reviewed it well. I mean everyone else. But thanks for condescending to me. Appreciated.

[Mister Matt]

Remember how Spring Awakening flopped and Next to Normal has never even made an attempt?

Yes, I remember how Spring Awakening flopped (which was credited mostly with its marketing) and still managed to win the Olivier for Best Musical, though personally, I've never considered it a "substance" musical.  More like a glorified after-school special with a gimmick.  And I'm not sure what insight you have on why Next to Normal hasn't been produced in the UK, but shows like London Road, The Hired Man, Martin Guerre, The Fix and Spend Spend Spend haven't been produced on Broadway, either.

But thanks for condescending to me. Appreciated.

You opened the door of condescension, so...you're welcome.

[Emma MK]

I saw GHD on Saturday for the first time and im terribly sad that i didnt book tickets earlier in the run as i adored it and will be going back on Saturday to queue for day tickets along with 2 friends who have already seen it 3 times. Andy was perfect as Phil and the set was absolutely stunning! The songs to me were really quite catchy and though i couldnt remember words i have been humming the tunes since seeing it. I think it would do pretty well on Broadway, though my opinion doesnt count for much as i loved American Psycho in London enough to see it 5 times (and planned to see it on Broadway but it closed a week before i arrived) and that didnt last too long lol

[Skimbleshanks2]

I am praying with every bone in my body that GROUNDHOG DAY opens in time so ANDY KARL can win the Tony he's been robbed of TWICE already ... Now that MICHAEL CERVERIS and FUN HOME are gone I am putting my strength behind Broadway's TRUE talent, ANDY KARL!

[Mister Matt]

"Broadway:s TRUE talent?". He's the only one?

I admit I never saw Rocky because I simply didn't have any interest in it, but I thought Karl was one of the best things about On the Twentieth Century.

[ukpuppetboy]

Since we're doing massive generalisations here; the stripped down Color Purple that Broadway seems to have taken to heart originated (along with many reinterpretations) in LONDON at the Menier Chocolate Factory - and Sondheim musicals regularly fare better in London than New York (maybe with the exception of Into The Woods and the original Sweeney). But I wouldn't argue these points too fiercely. Tastes are remarkably similar between the cities and, as Mister Matt correctly points out the examples about Spring Awakening and Next to Normal are as BS as the rest of that comment. Billy Elliot on Broadway and Book of Mormon in the West End should go some way to prove that.

[aaaaaa15]

There are patterns that can be seen in the types of musical produced in the West End (NOT fringe) venues and Broadway, as well as the type that are successful in both. There is nothing offensive about saying that, and I say that as someone in the UK. Look at the massive Broadway success of Rent vs. its short run in the West End. Look at the last time an original musical (not an adaptation or jukebox) had a successful run in the West End that wasn't a Broadway transfer. I live in the UK and am constantly frustrated by the state of musicals vs. those in New York and often find myself having to go to fringe theatre in order to be satisfied the way I am when I visit New York and go to big Broadway houses. I personally think there is an element of British theatregoers and critics being pleased that this has been in London first and therefore viewing it positively to start with as a somewhat (but not really) 'British musical'. If it had started on Broadway and transferred, I doubt that there would have been this type of excitement. Perhaps I'm wrong!