Well, in reality, it's a bit of both. Today, the New York Times released this article. The title: "Star-Studded Theatrical Hits Obscure Broadway's Challenges." It's about how Broadway, as a whole, is having a great fall. And a lot of the revenue coming in is from two plays (not musicals) consecutively grossing over a million dollars per week. Furthermore, a third play is not far under the million dollar mark in grosses. The plays are vehicles for the following stars: James Gandolfini, Jeff Daniels, Hugh Jackman, Daniel Craig, Jude Law, Hope Davis, and Marcia Gay Harden. The issue? Well, there are a lot more plays on Broadway that need audiences. And they're not getting them. So, overall, the economic health of Broadway is stable and, dare I say, thriving, for the moment. But, when these stars go bye-bye, will the pulse of midtown flatline?
Are we being lulled into a false sense of security? By these PLAYS doing so well, (remember, not musicals--plays are cheaper, because even if the stars get lots of money for their performance, producers don't have musicians, extra sound cues, etc., in their overhead--and that saves cash) are we getting the feeling that Broadway is "fixed"? Because "Brighton Beach Memoirs," the classic Neil Simon comedy, is in previews just a few streets down and it's not doing so well (Like "only 50% sold", not doing so well). And, Julia Stiles and Bill Pullman are right next door from "God of Carnage" in Mamet's "Oleanna" (hell, they even have a talk-back session after the show) and their numbers are...well, they're not the same (as in: $271K vs. $1M). So, it's not really stunt casting that sells, is it?
As I might have mentioned before, I have no problem with "stars" in a show....if they're good. And the group in the "Million Dollar Club" has the reputation and the reviews to garner this box office. In short, they're good. Great, even. I mean, come on, ALL FOUR cast members of "God of Carnage" got nominated for Tonys! That's ridiculous (in a good way). Furthermore, they have good material with which to work (except, "A Steady Rain," which, I hear, would have never made it to dinner theatre if Jackman and Craig weren't attached--but, it grossed over $1.2 million last week....and I didn't). So, yeah, Broadway is better for having them. And, ultimately, they legitimize themselves (even more than they already had) as actors because they can handle the Broadway grind.
I think, for better or worse, the theatrical stars align (in more ways than one) every so often. It's a copout, but it's the truth. But, we need to roll with it because it means people are coming to the theatre now. And we need to parlay their attendance into repeat performances, so to speak. Would it be possible to have the ladies who came to see Wolverine and James Bond today, come back next week to see the new Tracy Letts play, "Superior Donuts," across the street? Regional theaters, even Roundabout, can get audiences to buy ticket packages and subscribe to their season. Can theatre owners make a deal with producers to employ the same kind of package? For example, can the Nederlander Organization couple "Wicked" (undoubtedly, their most attended show) with "Brighton Beach Memoirs" at a discount? They own both of the theaters. Why not try to fill them both?
Most importantly, the theatrical community cannot be caught in a financial trance just because Jude Law is playing with his sword 8 shows a week. That's only until December. Then what happens? New and exciting material is out there to be financed, produced, and enjoyed by all. We just need to find it, option it, and get a star to be in it....wait....
Now for something completely different (or just more of the same): Because I have mentioned this show often in my writing as an example of too much input for not enough output, here's what I'll leave you with: The Ogre is calling it quits. The winter exodus is just around the corner, gang. How are we going to beat it?
No comments:
Post a Comment