Is Joe Mantello Biting Off More Than He Can Chew?

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:00am

We've all seen what happens to Joe Mantello's productions when he overloads himself with work.

WICKED
ASSASINS
THE ODD COUPLE
THREE DAYS OF RAIN

Only one of which was decently staged.

You'd think he'd learn not to bite off more than he can chew. But, he's at it again.

THE RECEPTIONIST
NOVEMBER
THE RITZ
9 TO 5

I hope history doesn't repeat itself.

[FranzRelax]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:02am

Jesus. He needs to chill. How could he possibly give each production the individual care and creativity they need?

[elphaba.scares.me]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:11am

You're kidding, right?

Assassins won him his second consecutive Tony. He was nominated against himself...for some musical about the Wizard of Oz backstory.

Three Days of Rain and Odd Couple both returned their investments and then some, and Mantello established himself as a go-to director for huge movie stars who want to do Broadway.

Nearly four years after it opened, Wicked is practically minting money at the Gershwin and everywhere else it's playing.

You may not like some of his stagings (and you would be in line with some of the reviewers), but it sounds pretty ignorant to start with "we've all seen what happens..." because what has happened is massively successful by most yardsticks.

[InfiniteTheaterFrenzy]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:12am

In perspective, 3 of the 4 of those turned HUGE profits.

[Lavieboheme3090]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:15am

"He was nominated against himself...for some musical about the Wizard of Oz backstory."

He didn't get a nomination for Wicked.

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:18am

Three Days of Rain and Odd Couple both returned their investments and then some, and Mantello established himself as a go-to director for huge movie stars who want to do Broadway.

I'm not talking financially successful. And we all know why they were. BIG STARS.

Except for ASSASSINS, all of those shows received mediocre to poor reviews.

I'm talking about artistic hits. Not financial.

If you take all the big names out of those productions, they would have closed after the reviews came out. That's a successful director to you? Relying on names to carry the show?

Updated On: 8/9/07 at 11:18 AM

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:24am

Wicked and Assassins opened during the 2003-2004 season.

Three Days of Rain and The Odd Couple during the 2005-2006 season.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:34am

It makes sense that the man likes to work. Plus, once the show is frozen after opening, there is little to do. Doing a few shows a season is possible. Actors do it all the time.

He's a director, not a magician. He will make some choices people love and some people won't-it's his vision. The fact of the matter is he is balanced and creative and actors love to work with him. That is what is important.

[RockabyeHamlet]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 11:50am

He is one of the most prominant directors of today, and he keeps getting work, so he must be doing something right. If he keeps wanting to work at this pace, and he seems to be succesful at it, there really is no harm in it.

[bwaygal1]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 12:11pm

He's known as an actor's director and has yet another project to add to the long list there-whenever the projected Pal Joey revival hits, he is to be the director at the helm.

I personally like how he directs. I have worked with him (not as an actor or anything.) I did observe him and he is quite talented-he has a style of his own. He allows the actors, by and large, to shape the characters they portray, making them their own. I like that because it can make for more honest theater. After all, it's the actor who ultimately conveys the playwright's message to the audience, not the director.

[ShuQ]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 12:14pm

And yes, it is up to us to define "artistic hits"

Posted: 8/9/07 at 12:18pm

A director who has "Financial Hits" will work 100 times more than a director with "Artistic Hits."

And again we get the "Only" attack-- his shows were "ONLY" hits because there were 'big stars' in them-- Big Stars that WILL NOT WORK with a Director they don't like.

[Link Larkin Wanabe]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 12:28pm

Most directors have to do way more than 4 shows in a year to make a good living. As long as they are scheduled right, it should be fine.

Akiva

[Sykes24]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 12:40pm

Yea. God forbid Joe Mantello puts his name on another Three Days of Rain or Wicked.... I'd hate to see Broadway's numbers stay so high. We've seen how much of a disaster WICKED has been.... by the way, how many productions are running now? Six? Seven? And you're right.... no body likes it, which is why it's been at 100% for at least two years. Yea.... I hope Joe Mantello doesn't do THAT again.... next thing you know he'll win a third Tony award....

Joe Mantello doesn't HAVE to do anything. He's at a point in career that he could literally sit by the pool all day, the fact that he's taken the time to do so much on Broadway is wonderful. Why does everyone have to be so negative?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 1:17pm

Mantello's always been hit-or-miss.

His work on Odd Couple and 3 Days of Rain was clearly subpar, but made up for those (and everything else he's ever directed that sucked) with Blackbird.)

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 1:27pm

Yea. God forbid Joe Mantello puts his name on another Three Days of Rain or Wicked.... I'd hate to see Broadway's numbers stay so high. We've seen how much of a disaster WICKED has been.... by the way, how many productions are running now? Six? Seven? And you're right.... no body likes it, which is why it's been at 100% for at least two years. Yea.... I hope Joe Mantello doesn't do THAT again.... next thing you know he'll win a third Tony award....

I love how people on this site are so quick to put words in others' mouths.

Did I say no one liked WICKED? No. But the critics sure weren't fond of it. I never made a statement to the effect that it wasn't a financial hit. Please find that somewhere in my post. So, using it's financial status for your arguement is nill.

I also never said he was a bad director. It just seems to me that when he overloads himself, he spreads himself too thin.

More often than not, I've loved his work...but it was when he devoted his efforts toward one show. I understand he has to make a living. But, do you honestly think he's getting jobs because of how well THREE DAYS OF RAIN and THE ODD COUPLE sold? I think producers are smart enough to know it's the actors who sold those shows...not Mantello's direction.

He is a fine director. I never made one negative remark about his talent. But, I do think his work is not as up to par when he does one show on top of another.

[elphaba.scares.me]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 2:47pm

foot. in. mouth.

definitely forgot he wasn't nominated for wicked.

BUT still mean everything else i said.

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 3:41pm

But everything else you said was moot. You attacked me for saying "no one likes WICKED" when I didn't even say it.

And THREE DAYS OF RAIN was profitable because of two words: Julia. Roberts.

Needless to say I wasn't arguing financial hits, I was arguing critical ones.

So you basically argued points that weren't being argued.

Posted: 8/9/07 at 3:46pm

"And THREE DAYS OF RAIN was profitable because of two words: Julia. Roberts."

Roberts tells the New York Post, "I needed an exemplary reason to leave the house. My family is very fulfilling and interesting to me. And for me to step away from that for any period of time, I was going to have to do something that was really different and challenging. Joe really lured me into this. It's one of his favorite plays. We had a long conversation about it, and he made it all seem so vibrant and exciting."

So the person who made that possible? Two words: Joe. Mantello.

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 3:55pm

If you want to be specific about it, the two words you're looking for are: Marc. Platt.

Posted: 8/9/07 at 4:36pm

NOPE- Julia Roberts NEVER mentions Platt. In interview after interview she said she did that show because of Joe Mantello.

I agree that sometimes his work is less than great, but really- If he was the worst director in the world but his shows made money and big stars wanted to work with him, he'd work constantly.

[Danielm]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 4:51pm

I didn't see the Odd Couple or Three Days of Rain. I guess Assassins is the one you thought was well staged. I completely disagree with you about Wicked. I finally saw it and have to say that I think it is extremely well directed--especially the first act. It's got a bad book and a mediocre score yet I enjoyed it--why? Because of the staging. It was really well directed--he gave the book more humor than it had, the characters were pretty well acted in spite of the fact that they were underwritten and thier motivations are unclear. I can tell you have some sort of animosity towards him (I'm guessing based on jealousy), but I think it's less about him and more about you.

Also, he doesn't write these shows--Three Days of Rain is a very problematic script and the Odd Couple can be kind of creaky. He can't be blamed for the writing.

[elphaba.scares.me]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 4:52pm

Please don't be a drama queen.

I didn't "attack" you, for not liking Wicked or anything else.

Clearly there are different definitions of success.

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 5:01pm

And you're right.... no body likes it, which is why it's been at 100% for at least two years.

That's taken directly from your post.

I didn't mention ONCE that people don't like WICKED. Yet, you said I do.

You were putting words in my mouth and arguing against something I didn't say.

Stating that is not being a "drama queen." If I were whining or complaining that would be different. I was simply pointing out you had no case because you decided to bring up something that wasn't even being talked about.

Yes, there are definitions of success. Almost all theatre followers know there are two types of success a show can have: critical and financial.

And, of all the shows I listed, the only crtically financial one was ASSASSINS. And, as a director, I would think Mantello would be going for good reviews. Everyone wants a paycheck and bully for him that his shows did so well. But, any idiot would know that THE ODD COUPLE and THREE DAYS OF RAIN were going to be huge financial successes. He had nothing to worry about in that arena. Thus, he could focus all of his efforts on direction and, unfortunately, he recieved poor reviews for both (and WICKED).

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 8/9/07 at 5:09pm

I can tell you have some sort of animosity towards him (I'm guessing based on jealousy), but I think it's less about him and more about you.

OH MY GOD!

Talk about being dramatic. ALL I SAID was that when he overloads himself with projects, we seem to get a bunch of OK productions instead of one or two great ones.

I know what Mantello is capable of, that is why I'd rather not see him overdo it. Because, I'd rather see one really great performance, than half a dozen mediocre ones.

Only an idiot would think this is about vanity. I'm not jealous of Mantello. I didn't say he was a bad director. If you actually READ my first post the only thing I said was one of those four was decently staged. Then half of the posters on this thread immaturely put words in my mouth and made stupid insinuations.

And, I never attacked the writing of these shows. They were both revivals. So, when they're reviewed, the books don't get as much attention as the direction does. And Mantello's direction got poor reviews for both.