Riedel on 42ND STREET Revivals Eyeing Broadway

[Cfried]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 8:20pm

Interested in Drury Lane Theatre's production. Sounds interesting...

http://nypost.com/2017/11/14/42nd-street-revivals-may-duke-it-out-for-a-spot-on-broadway/

Updated On: 9/27/19 at 08:20 PM

[phan24]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 8:34pm

Cfried said: "Interested in Drury Lane's production. Sounds interesting...

http://nypost.com/2017/11/14/42nd-street-revivals-may-duke-it-out-for-a-spot-on-broadway/"

^^which one???

[Cfried]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 8:37pm

phan24 said: "Cfried said: "Interested in Drury Lane's production. Sounds interesting...

http://nypost.com/2017/11/14/42nd-street-revivals-may-duke-it-out-for-a-spot-on-broadway/"

^^which one???"

LOL I meant Drury Lane Theatre! Edited. Oops!

[Marlothom]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 8:44pm

I live in Chicago so i will check out this new version for sure - I was in London a few months ago and ended up seeing Dreamgirls over 42nd St.  Now I kinda wish I had made a different choice.  

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 8:54pm

Isn’t the London production just a rehash of the early 2000’s version?

[adamgreer]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 9:14pm

Who wants to see this show with a cast of 14? A big part of its appeal is seeing those big production numbers jump off the stage with a big ensemble dancing their hearts out.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 9:51pm

Heading to London in a few weeks and giving some serious thought to seeing this - Sheena Easton!!!   What are the chances she actually performs in Matinee Performances?

 

 

[BwayLB]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 10:43pm

I've already seen 42nd Street twice. The first was opening night of the Musical Theatre West production in Memphis and second time was the recent national tour.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 10:47pm

adamgreer said: "Who wants to see this show with a cast of 14? A big part of its appeal is seeing those big production numbers jump off the stage with a big ensemble dancing their hearts out. "

 

I think this is a typo (shocker coming from him). If you watch the video there are wau more than 14 performers. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 10:49pm

This is the only show I wanted to leave at intermission. Almost saw it in London because it sounded lavish, but I can't imagine this would succeed on Broadway.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 11:00pm

Going to be be “controversial” but argue that: rarely does London do great big Broadway shows any justice. Trevor Nunn’s revival of Anything Goes is the best I can think of in the past decade (and yes i saw the recent National Follies production and, albeit some time ago, the well reviewed and received Guys and Dolls with Ewan McGregor).

With that said, very very curious about this Chicago production and considering it’s size, it could find producers to want to invest and (reasonably) believe they’ll at least make their investment back.

[phan24]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 11:00pm

The video with the large cast is from the London production, while the picture on top is of the Chicago production with the 14-person cast.

edit: The Chicago (outside Chicago) production looks like it has 16 cast members as per this trailer:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoSWxrBxbv8

Updated On: 11/14/17 at 11:00 PM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 11:06pm

Is it still running in London? It's in a giant theater. Could be good for Roundabout, but I guess they have "Kiss Me Kate."

I just don't think it's a viable product. The revival was a flop, no? Even though it ran for like 3 years?

[Zamedy154]

Posted: 11/14/17 at 11:36pm

Sad that I know this, but I believe the 2001 revival ran for 1,524 performances and still is considered a financial flop, most likely because of its HUGE cast. But who can forget that opening at the Tony's that year. Wow.

This show holds a special place in my heart because it was the first Broadway show I ever saw. With that said... do we REALLY need another revival of this so soon? Even if it was a brand new, scaled down interpretation, it's still the same (dated) story and score. A revival less than 20 years after the latest revival closed? Come on. What is this, ANNIE?

 

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 12:09am

I'm not really seeing the magic of either of those two that warrant a transfer. London appears to literally just be the 2000 revival dusted off which has toured around the US like 4 or 5 times by now. Then you have the one from outside Chicago that is just a stripped down version with no flash and color blind casting which you could do with any production of it.

Why are these being mulled? If you want to restage it, then restage it. Don't dust off almost a 20 year old production to plop is back on stage and expecting to turn a profit with it. It's not like we're staring at the Donmar Warehouse's Guys and Dolls that EVERYONE wanted to come over before instead of the ****ty LCD based 1920s New York, 4 leads where only one could actually sing, and had Damon Runyon running around at times because reasons. The was an entire embarrassment to Mary Testa and Titus Burgess. 

Updated On: 11/15/17 at 12:09 AM

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 12:17am

The Oakbrook production lists a cast of 26 on their website: http://drurylanetheatre.com/shows/17-181/42nd/meet-cast

The appeal of this production is not that it's stripped down, it's that it is entirely reimagined. Chris Jones of the Chicago Tribune writes:

"Here’s the root of my enthusiasm: If you remove this show from its period and turn its corny comic ballads into torch songs and orchestrate some numbers like they were penned by a rapper, some like they belong in the 1970s, and allow the characters to float through the decades as it were, then the show’s metaphor deepens. Instead of being about a Broadway of 1933, and thus having appeal mostly for nostalgists and purists, it becomes the story of every fragile artist from every fraught era. For, lest we forget, they all were fraught.

Everything in this piece — even the dumb comic plot involving the old star who must give way for her successor — thus becomes emblematic of what artists risk for a career in show business, and it reveals that nothing has really changed. And I include the routine harassment of women in that. It is hard to overstate how much the comic scenes have morphed here: There still are some laughs, but Heitzman dissects the business we call show with just the right mix of deep affection and cold-eyed realism." (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/theater/reviews/ct-ent-42-street-review-1113-story.html)

I'm seeing the show next week, I am very curious to say the least.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 12:36am

So... turn a musical comedy into not a musical comedy? 

[Tag]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 12:44am

There are 26 in the Chicago cast, 2 are swings, so maybe the article was supposed to say 24, and not 14??

The London cast actually has a cast of 58 (!) including 10 swings/standbys but Reidel lists the cast at 43.

Where is he pulling his numbers from?

[JBroadway]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 1:25am

Wait wait wait...I'm sorry but how are all your minds not blown by the fact that they are both playing at the "Drury Lane"? What are the odds? I feel like that's the bigger news here. 

[Mark_E]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 3:19am

"The first of the two is the acclaimed production at London's Theatre Royal Drury Lane. The production, which recently concluded its run, featured a stunning cast of 43, including 90's pop star, Sheena Easton."

 

The show is still running, so not sure why he's written it recently concluded its run. The fact that the article is littered with errors means to probably take it with a massive pinch of salt.

[MN4Theater]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 8:41am

Caught the Chicago production on a lark this past weekend after coming in to see Escape to Margaritaville and The Minutes.  Thought I was just going to see a standard production and was pretty knocked out by the reimagined staging.  I can see purists of the show getting snooty about it but I thought it was absolutely excellent.  The cast is across the board great and I loved that they didn't make Dorothy Brock a complete shrew (no dancing with shadows for Suzzanne Douglas!). 
You know you're in for something different when ushers had out protective eyewear to the front row before the show...

[markypoo]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 10:27am

I saw the original at the Winter Garden in November 1980.
And though one can always reimagine, reedit, attempt to transcend the years, rewrite books and speak volumes,
NOTHING will ever surpass that production.

[TheSassySam]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 10:50am

MN4Theater said: "Caught the Chicago production on a lark this past weekend after coming in to see Escape to Margaritaville and The Minutes. Thought I was just going to see a standard production and was pretty knocked out by the reimagined staging. I can see purists of the show getting snooty about it but I thought it was absolutely excellent. The cast is across the board great and I loved that they didn't make Dorothy Brock a complete shrew (no dancing with shadows for Suzzanne Douglas!).
You know you're in for something different when ushers had out protective eyewear to the front row before the show..."

 

Where do you recommend to sit? Would it be worth it to be in the first two rows?

[MN4Theater]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 10:56am

We were third row center and that felt just a little close to me.  The stage is open enough and the choreography spread out nicely so that even the sides would be fine...but I'd stick with center if possible for maximum impact :)

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 11/15/17 at 12:14pm

Zamedy154 said: "This show holds a special place in my heart because it was the first Broadway show I ever saw. With that said... do we REALLY need another revival of this so soon? Even if it was a brand new, scaled down interpretation, it's still the same (dated) story and score. A revival less than 20 years after the latest revival closed? Come on. What is this, ANNIE?"

The last revival closed almost 13 years ago, it's not like it was just here yesterday like The Glass Menagerie. We've also seen instances where shows like Gypsy and La Cage aux Folles were both revived five years apart.