Do you have any favorite / least favorite Broadway theaters? There's always talk about the size of the theater not being right for the show, and obviously a show gets the best theater it can when it's avail, but as either a performer or theater-goer, is there a theater you love or dislike no matter what is in it? For instance, maybe the sound isn't great, or the viewing from the balcony isn't great, or maybe there's a theater that you just light up going into no matter the show?As an example, I'm not a fan of the Marquis theater. It doesn't stop me from going, but even if 'Escape to Margaritaville' had been the next Hamilton, I just don't personally like the feel of that theater. I've heard from performers that the Sondheim is too wide (tho I'm not a performer, so I don't know). I have always liked the Al Hirschfield. I've heard mixed things about the placement of sets for Moulin Rouge!, but the theater itself I like a lot. I haven't been to the Lyceum. I've heard as a performer it's great b/c it's intimate, but as an audience member it's pretty steep in height so maybe that plays a role?While a certain theater would never stop me from seeing a show, just curious if you had opinions on the theaters themselves, especially as this new crop of shows has fought for placement.
Studio 54 should be imploded. The redesigned Hayes is lovely imo. I equally love the Booth and, while many here won’t agree I’m sure, find the Music Box a nice place to catch a show.The Hudson is great too but the top balcony can feel far from what I’ve heard (never sat up there myself).
BSKY said: "I haven't been to the Lyceum. I've heard as a performer it's great b/c it's intimate, but as an audience member it's pretty steep in height so maybe that plays a role?"I just saw BMC a month ago and I wouldn't say the mezz was very steep really (maybe a bit more than normal, but perfectly fine). But my SO saw The Play That Goes Wrong last year, where she sat in the balcony. The first thing she mentioned to me is how easy it would be for someone to slip and fall off, so the Lyceum's balcony is probably far worse. Still a great house. The bathroom next to the mezz was a bit odd, but the mezz felt great.
I agree that the Marquis certainly isn't special to look it but boy those seats are comfortable compared to some of the older theaters.From an architectural standpoint, I think it's tough to beat the New Amsterdam.I love the versatility of Circle in the Square and the Beaumont.In terms of sightlines, etc... I think the Music Box, Walter Kerr (minus the terrible balcony) and Schoenfeld are all great. At least those three popped into my head right away as I have sat near the back far sides of the mezz at all three and had a great experience.
My favorites are the Schubert, the Broadhurst and the August Wilson because I've seen shows from each in different locations and enjoyed them all. Least favorites are the Broadway, the Palace and the Gershwin.
The BoothThe HudsonThe GoldenThe MarquisThe ShubertThe LyceumAmerican AirlinesThe Lyric
For musicals the Imperial and for plays the Booth
There's no way a theater is ever going to be more important than the show it's housing. The New Amsterdam is gorgeous. I don't particularly want to see Aladdin again but I wish I could take a tour of it. The Broadway is always going to be the place I saw Doctor Zhivago twice in the same week. I've grown attached to the Brooks Atkinson because of Waitress but I feel like I've just gotten lucky with seats and it doesn't have the best sightlines. The Imperial has a solid mezz. You do feel at a distance but I never worry about sitting behind someone tall. I appreciate the marquis of the Walter Kerr and the intimacy of the productions I've seen there. I have good associations with the Friedman and the Roundabout theaters (in spite of their terrible legroom) but I think that's more because of Hiptix and the fact that there's enough turn around that I've seen more shows in those theaters. I've had good experiences seeing Chicago but last time I was at the Ambassador it felt like it was falling apart. I like the Broadhurst. I saw Tuck and Anastasia there. But there are some terrible seats on the far sides of the mezz that should really be sold discounted as partial view. There are some less than fabulous seats at the Shubert and those side orchestra Longacre seats are really partial view, but at least they're sold as such. I wish the Golden had a better rake in the orchestra. I don't have strong opinions about any of the other theaters besides Circle in the Square where I usually appreciate sitting in the round. But yeah, the theater rarely makes a difference in whether I see a show. I might just be particular about where I want to sit or how much I'll pay for a ticket if I don't have much of a choice.
Vivian Beaumont. Thrust stage. Sit in the first two rows of the orchestra to either side of the pit and you are on stage. Seats level with stage.Kelli and Ruthie Ann walk towards you to deliver their numbers, stopping about fifteen feet from you. You can see every facial expression.
i really like the hudson. i've seen several shows there (SITPWG, HOH, BT, 1984, soon to see SW/AL) and i still feel the same way over the years. i really like the seats there
I like:1. the Vivian Beaumont - orchestra section sightlines are great even the section 100 (first section closest to the wall). Since its stadium seating the person in front of you can be tall and you can still see. Also, the legroom is great.2. August Wilson - orchestra section sightlines are great as well having sat in the back row at seats away from the aisle near the wall.
Unfortunately, the modern theaters like the Marquis and Sondheim have the most legroom, by and large, so I always appreciate when a shows are in one, although I'd never consider them a "favorite."The New Amsterdam is simply a knockout to visit.I love the almost perfect size of the Booth especially for plays.The Imperial is a perfect size musical house IMHO.Other gorgeous houses are the Belasco, the Shubert and (I hear) the Hudson
The theaters I don't like are those with long but narrow halls, such as the Lunt-Fontanne, the August Wilson, and even the Golden. If you are far back in the orchestra you are a long way from the stage, and the mezzanine and balcony get pushed back, too. Theaters like the Broadhurst, the Schoenfeld, and the Jacobs are better.
I've not been to tons (somehow keep repeating theatres) and I almost always sit non prime orchestra, but a couple that stand out:The richard Rodgers has always been so beautiful and grand to me, and the rake of the seats means I've always had a great view.Music box is also beautiful but I had terrible sightlines there, in contrast to other posters.The gershwin is great until you get into the theatre itself, then it looks like a movie theatre.No bad seat in CITS, which I enjoy haha.Currently been inThe Richard Rodgers (x4)Gershwin (x4)CITSWalter KerrBroadhurstImperial (x3)Music boxSchoenfeldExcited to add the golden to the list this fall (and my 3rs visit to CITS and 2nd to the Kerr)
Broadway Buddy said: "I think Wicked can stay on Broadway but it should transfer theatre’s. Music Man will hit big and it needs a huge house. I was in the Marquee for Tootsie a couple weeks ago and I really disliked it because the lobby was super confusing and to get to the theatre in the hotel didn’t make any sense to my dad and I. But I loved how they decorated the Palace for Spongebob."Why in the world should Wicked transfer theatres when it's still doing gangbusters numbers at the biggest house on Broadway?
My favorite theaters have front Mezzanines that are very close to the stage. Front Mezz at Shubert, Nederlander and Broadhurst are fabulous.On the other hand I sat front row Mezz for Hamilton at Richard Rodgers and felt very far away.
I've been in every Broadway house many times with the exception of the Hudson. I prefer the smaller, more intimate, older theaters for their ambiance, particularly the Belasco, Schoenfeld, Jacobs, Lyceum, Shubert, and Broadhurst. It's been a long time since I sat anywhere other than the orchestra, so I can't really comment about the mezzanine or balcony seating. Unfortunately, in older theaters, the leg room and comfort of the seats can be frustrating. The most frustrating for leg room for me is the O'Neill. I'm not a very tall man, so I wonder how taller people cope. Sometimes I feel like my knees are digging into the back of the seat in front of me. Yes, the Marquis has more comfortable seats and leg room being a newer theater, but it's not impressive from an architectural standpoint like the Hirschfeld. The orchestra seats at the Rodgers are stadium style, so you get a good view of the stage regardless of how far back you're sitting. The Beaumont also offers good sight lines from around the stage (it's projected), except for when I was in the second row of the 300 section at My Fair Lady and the man in front of my had to be literally seven feet tall. I had to contort my body in my seat so I could see around him. Be careful of some of the seats in the 200 and 400 sections, especially aisle seats closer to the stage, for example B201. Because of the angle of the seats in relation to the stage, some of those seats offer little, if any, room for comfort. I also found the seats at the Kerr to be uncomfortable.
OlBlueEyes said: "Vivian Beaumont. Thrust stage. Sit in the first two rows of the orchestra to either side of the pit and you are on stage. Seats level with stage.Kelli and Ruthie Ann walk towards you to deliver their numbers, stopping about fifteen feet from you. You can see every facial expression."I forgot about the Vivian Beaumont. That's my favorite BW theater. Haven't been there in a while.
© 2019 Wisdom Digital Media