Harry Potter and the Cursed Child - Subsequent US Productions

[kade.ivy]

Posted: 6/15/18 at 3:44pm

I hate to start another thread, but perhaps this could become a place for news and speculation. According to the last part of this Daily Mail article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5846501/amp/BAZ-BAMIGBOYE-Samantha-Barkss-smart-Pretty-Woman.html) on Samantha Barks, there are plans to open Cursed Child productions in major US cities for two to three years at the time. I know Chris Jones has speculated that it could revitalize Chicago’s Auditorium Theatre, but that seemed speculation on his part. Sounds exciting nevertheless!

I’m thinking LA and Chicago would be the first stop(s), then maybe San Francisco and/or Seattle?

[Dave13]

Posted: 6/15/18 at 4:00pm

I often wondered how it would tour. I think it will be hard for families to be able to afford two nights, or an entire day. Either way, the show will only be able to cater to half of its normal audience during a weeks time based upon it being a two part show. 

Has there even been a 2 Part Play or Musical tour in the past? I cannot think of one. 

[astromiami]

Posted: 6/15/18 at 4:18pm

Angels in America toured back in the 90s. Cider House Rules may not have done a full-out tour, but the production did move to a few different cities after it opened in Seattle.

[MarkBearSF]

Posted: 6/15/18 at 7:14pm

I would think that Carole Shorenstein might be interested in leasing her Curran theater in SF for a few years. (Although she has seemed to genuinely enjoy bringing new stuff to her house)

[Alex M]

Posted: 6/15/18 at 8:30pm

I wonder how a lot of the magic will be done in tour houses. I don’t want to reveal any spoilers but there’s some effects that I feel like can only be done in theatres modified for the show.

Updated On: 6/15/18 at 08:30 PM

[Notreallysilent 2]

Posted: 6/15/18 at 11:00pm

I think the biggest issue is all the magic and effects they do in the show. That’ll definitely need some rethinking. Though I definitely could it having long stops. I think that’s the only way this will work if it has sit down type productions. But I imagine the tech to get into the theaters would be probably take a few months per location

[JennH]

Posted: 6/16/18 at 12:38pm

^^^ All the above. After seeing it second time recently, I've had to resign myself to changing my opinion of it's ability to tour. Heaven knows, I'd love it to travel and it seems so do the powers that be, but the logistics of setting up a theater in various cities to do this seems just as much of a massive undertaking as putting on the show itself. This is very much a sit down, "permanent" type of show. That said, I fully support it going into any of the San Fran houses.  

[VotePeron]

Posted: 6/16/18 at 12:54pm

I feel like opening in Chicago for a permanent sit down is a no brainer, but what other cities would be best for a 2+ year stint? Would it be able to have a worthwhile run in SF, or is LA more likely?

I also agree with the above points that I don’t believe getting patrons to pay to see the shows will be the issue - it’ll sell out wherever it goes. The question is how can it tour in its current state?

I’d imagine if we ever see a true “tour” it’ll be a few years after a sit down production or 2 exists.

[MarkBearSF]

Posted: 6/16/18 at 2:42pm

I agree that sit-downs are more likely. I think that SF could support it. There were sit-downs for Phantom that lasted about 4 years, as well as long sit-downs for Les Miz (Curran) and Rent, and extended engagements for Wicked and Jersey Boys in other theatres, if I recall correctly. I'm sure LA could as well (but not likely both) 

I would think that they would also be looking for appropriate houses that they could modify for the production. The Curran would probably fit the bill here (It seats 1600+ but staging-wise, I don't know how extensive the trap space is - I assume that it plays a large part in the magic and the stagecraft).  I wonder if, due to technical requirements, they'd need modern houses or could use smaller, more classic ones with history in their bones.

Updated On: 6/16/18 at 02:42 PM

[Fosse76]

Posted: 6/16/18 at 2:58pm

I actually don't think it would be that hard to replicate the magic effects on tour. Slight re-staging and modified lighting should probably resolve most of the more advanced effects. Only the lake scenes and the effect that closes part 1 require major changes. Regardless, they would definitely require longer runs in each market.

This is probably why they want to do sit-downs; they could then re-create the physical production without major changes.

[Jonwo]

Posted: 6/17/18 at 1:29pm

I imagine a Toronto production is likely as well and they have options like the Elgin, Royal Alexandra Theatre and perhaps the Ed Mirvish, the latter a few years ago was able to play a production of Gaslight by using fake walls to reduce the capacity from 2300 to 1400.   

[Tag]

Posted: 6/17/18 at 2:05pm

^The Elgin doesn't have the room (backstage & under the stage) for that kind of show.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 6/17/18 at 9:53pm

They seem very picky about what theaters they choose, so I'd be curious how that would work. They'd probably want a decent sized house, but a lot of the touring houses are so huge, I don't think they'd appeal to the team. I do wonder if they'd recreate any front of house stuff, or how extensive their marquees etc would be.

[whatdoesntkillme]

Posted: 6/17/18 at 10:04pm

Chris Jones now says it's not sitting down in Chicago but rather San Francisco, because it's closer for Asian tourists... not sure what I think about that reasoning, but he usually has reputable sources.

[bdn223]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 12:32pm

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Comcast/Universal works out some type of deal with JK Rowling to build a theater in Orlando or in one of its Sound Stages in Hollywood to house a production, like Disney did with Lion King for Disneyland Shanghai. 

[MarkBearSF]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 1:05pm

bdn223 said: "I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Comcast/Universal works out some type of deal with JK Rowling to build a theater in Orlando or in one of its Sound Stages in Hollywood to house aproduction, like Disney did with Lion King for Disneyland Shanghai."

The catch here is that it's two long plays. Such a production doesn't fit will with families at an amusement park. Perhaps as part of a larger development in which the average visitor would spend two days or more.

[SweetLips]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 4:49pm

I believe that The Princess Theatre in Melbourne has been book for a 5 year run--don't know anything more than that.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 7:29pm

whatdoesntkillme said: "Chris Jones now says it's not sitting down in Chicago but rather San Francisco, because it's closer for Asian tourists... not sure what I think about that reasoning, but he usually has reputable sources."

He's speculating as to why the talk is San Francisco add the next production. His reasoning is bizarre,  considering the show is opening in Australia soon and that is much closer to Asia than San Francisco. It would make sense though to open a company on the west coast first, but it would be a mistake to ignore Chicago too long. Disney did that with Beauty and the Beast, and I recall seeing box office staff standing on the sidewalk I  front of the theater offering free tickets to the show. 

[SomethingPeculiar]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 7:49pm

If they're just going to do sit-down engagements, they would cover large chunks of the country if they do a West Coast (LA or SF), a midwest (Chicago), and Toronto. Then, New York can remain the East Coast destination city for the play. Fewer productions could help the NYC production's longevity, too.

(That is, if all these spinoff movies don't cause wizarding fatigue.)

[RippedMan]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 8:01pm

They spent so much $$ renovating this theater here in NYC I don't see why the'd rush another US production when their whole thing is "keep the secret." Don't saturate the market. 

[Tag]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 8:05pm

^Tell that to the bank accounts of Hamilton's producers, with their multiple productions...

[RippedMan]

Posted: 6/18/18 at 11:26pm

Hamilton is a FAR easier show to replicate. It came from off-broadway and was pretty much intact. It's a cheap-ish show to produce. Harry Potter...not so much. There's a lot of technical work that goes into that floor and there's a good bit of front-of-house stuff that they have to change to make the whole thing work. Not saying it's not worth it, but I don't think every city needs their own production. People will come see the show. But I guess producers are hasty.