No Springtime for Crawford!

[JakeB]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 4:54am

- from today's Daily Mail (UK) by Baz Bamigboye

Michael Crawford has suffered a crushing blow - he has been turned down for the lead role in the West End version of Broadway's hit musical The Producers because, it is claimed, he's 'not funny enough' for the part.

Mel Brooks and Susan Stroman met with Crawford in New York but apparently deemed him 'unfunny'. Maybe it's a cultural difference thing. The backers of the London production urged Brooks and Stroman to see Crawford after first choice Robert Lindsay decided not to do the show.

The London executives consider Crawford a box office draw, but in New York it's a different story. Once a luminous presence on Broadway thanks to Phantom of the Opera, Crawford couldn't get arrested with his last show there, Dance of the Vampires, which - unlike The Producers' spoof play Springtime for Hitler - bombed big time.

Crawford's friends are putting it about that he turned down The Producers because he didn't want to work with comedian Lee Evans, who has already agreed to play the other main part.

Crawford, it is being said, felt that Evans' comic style was too similar to his own.

However, the word from across the Atlantic is that they said 'no thanks' to Crawford.

The show will still go on. Rehearsals start in July and the production will open next autumn at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, following the transfer of the National Theatre's exuberant Anything Goes.

My guess is that The Producers original stage star, Nathan Lane, will re-create the part of Max Bialystock in London if they can't find a British 'name' to play the role.

-----

The guy who wrote the article, Baz Bamigboye, is giving The Producers SO much press at the moment, literally every week or every other week his top story is about who will play who in The Producers. It's getting kinda boring.. He must really love the show and therefore wants it to be a hit in London. With all the dross London is pouring out at the moment, we really need a hit like this so I do respect him for that.

Jake.

[DofB5]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 6:53am

No biggie. Either way–he turned the job down–they turned him down. How many job interviews have you been on that happened the same way? It’s all part of the process. He’ll just find something else. When one door closes–another opens...

D

[lass]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 8:09am

I hope he does find the right show for him soon.

[QueenS]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 1:19pm

Meanwhile, Robert Lindsay would have been spectacular as Max! How disappointing that he won't be doing it, either.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 1:24pm

They should have gotten Edina & Patsy. Bubble could be Ulla.

Updated On: 9/26/03 at 01:24 PM

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 1:25pm

Can I just say again that Crawford is WAY past his prime.....

[Sunfish]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 2:12pm

Revisit the topic in a few decades, BWG2. Right now you can't judge ANY "prime" but....meat.....

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 2:17pm

UM, gee thanks.. I know I look 12 in teh pic, but that is the beauty od good lighting. I maybe 20, but I do know a bit about theatre people from when I was a tot and before I was born.... after all, Broadway didn't start with Cats, Les Miz, and Phantom.. and I have had exposure to Crawford's work. And I will say again.. he is past his prime. he is not teh performer he once was and I have just as much right to say that as anyone on this board. Thank you.. moving on....

[ChristineDaae]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 5:41pm

Ahh! Not funny enough? He used to be a comedian before Phantom.
He'll get a part in another show better then the Producers. =-P

[The8re phan]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 6:47pm

Yeah....he'll get work alright. I'm sure there is a dinner theatre somewhere just itching to do "Dance of the Vampires".

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 6:52pm

The8re phan,
they aren't itching to do DOV, they are biting at the bit and dying to do it!
Updated On: 9/26/03 at 06:52 PM

[The8re phan]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 6:57pm

LOL!!!

Let me also clarify that my member name here in no way endorses, praises, or implies any admiration for Phantom of the Opera, it's so-called composer, or it's washed up star. Thank you

[sheekala]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:00pm

The Michael Crawford who brought POTO to life no longer exists, he's been replaced by someone who has spent too much time reading his own press and embracing a "Vegas" performing style, not to mention munching on countless "HobNobs"....tis a pity he's a bore.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:01pm

A.Men.

[The8re phan]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:03pm

And his ego demands it's own dressing room

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:04pm

No, honey.. his ego demands its own theatre.

[macbeth]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:09pm

I saw Michael Crawford in Phantom, and in Dance of the Vampires and enjoyed him in both. I also know several people that have worked with him over the years, and I can tell you for a fact that he's a kind, gratious man who's earned every bit of that press through very hard work. I hope he finds another project soon.

[The8re phan]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:12pm

People actually think he's kind and gracious???? Wow, he's a much better actor than I thought!!!

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:12pm

You enjoyed him in both? That means NOTHING. I saw britney Spears's concert on HBO and I enjoyed it.. her lip-syncing was atrocious and among many other things, I was waiting for the teenage boys to start stuffing dollars in her g-string (especially when her top almost came off).. it was horrible beyond words, but I still enjoyed it. I have rarely laughed that hard.

[sheekala]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:21pm

I don't think we'll see Mr. Crawford in anything in the near future on a theatrical stage, he has sqaundered his once good name with the horror of DOTV and his falling out with Sir Andrew has made certain he'll never play the role of the Phantom again.

[Sally]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:38pm

"The Michael Crawford who brought POTO to life no longer exists, he's been replaced by someone who has spent too much time reading his own press and embracing a "Vegas" performing style, not to mention munching on countless "HobNobs"....tis a pity he's a bore. "

I think that you might be wrong although I was disappointed by his performance and appearance in Dance of the Vampires (not in the singing). Even if his ego was a huge as some think, it must have taken a serious deflation in the failure of the show. I'm no where nearly as sure of my opinions about something I know about only indirectly as the naysayers are. I think he might have another good show in him---if he can get one.

"I don't think we'll see Mr. Crawford in anything in the near future on a theatrical stage, he has sqaundered his once good name with the horror of DOTV and his falling out with Sir Andrew has made certain he'll never play the role of the Phantom again. "

I'm afraid that you could be right about this matter, and I'm sorry, unlike some who are clapping their hands in glee whether or not they have actually seen or heard him in anything (not you, shakeela. I know that you have).

[babyface]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 7:50pm

I don't think that we'll see Michael do Phantom again, but I do know that the rumors of a huge fall-out with Lloyd Webber are false. They've had some disagreements over the years (some big ones too) but are still in touch with one another, and there's no animosity on either side. I also know people that have worked with Michael on his most recent concert tour and they came away with a great level of working and personal respect for him. Sure Dance of the Vampires flopped, but give the man a break.

[sheekala]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 8:00pm

babyface I can say with first hand knowledge that things between them are chilly at best and they haven't been the same since Michael Crawford said no regarding performing at ALW's 50th birthday celebration.

[Kate]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 8:31pm

It's so easy to sit back behind your little computer and judge and criticize others isn't it. I'm interested in hearing about the specific experience and training you have that could help us take your ignorant remarks seriously.

[sheekala]

Posted: 9/26/03 at 8:33pm

by the "tone" of your reply dear Kate, it seems you already have taken me seriously. And my computer is isn't "little", it's BIG!

Updated On: 9/26/03 at 08:33 PM