Avenue Q closed...wait....

Let's not break out the black dresses and mourning attire just yet. It turns out the closing of one of the most innovative and hilarious musicals on Broadway was only "For Now." In a groundbreaking move, the producers of "Avenue Q" joined the cast on the stage for the final curtain call yesterday and announced that they will be moving the show Off-Broadway for an open-ended run, starting October 9! This will be the first time that a Broadway show will be taken Off-Broadway for a new life. And there couldn't be a more perfect show for this move.

This is a show that broke the mold for a successful Broadway musical. Who would have thought that a musical puppet show would last six years on Broadway, recoup it's investment (and then some--apparently, it cost $3.5 million to initially produce on Broadway and has grossed over $117 million!), and win the Tony Award for Best Musical in 2004, beating this little show? And while it played Broadway successfully, it can transfer to a smaller house Off-Broadway easily, as it has a small cast and a relatively simple set. Furthermore, they can drop the prices on the tickets because, obviously, Off-Broadway shows are not as costly as those on the Great White Way. So, everybody wins! The producers still get to make money on this show and audiences will still get to see what will essentially be the same product, but it won't cost as much.

I, for one, am very pleased by this. I think this show should always be running somewhere. Not only, is it painfully hilarious, but it speaks to all of us. We all look for our purpose in life and occasionally get lost along the way. And this show tells us that we are not alone. And if that is not something you want to see in a show, I would offer this: Puppets curse and have sex on stage. And that's just awesome.

Tickets and information are here.

Layeth the Smacketh Down

It has often been said that professional wrestling is basically a soap opera. The only difference is the audience. Soap operas cater to middle-aged women (and gay men) and wrestling caters to adolescent boys (and gay men). And for the most part, it is true: high stakes storylines, bad acting, and well choreographed "fight scenes." But, I would take that comparison one step further: Pro Wrestling is Theatre. Or, at least, a modern day Vaudeville.

This is live performance. A difference between this and theatre is that these stories need to change and evolve with every performance. They aren't doing the same show every night (although if you've been watching pro wrestling for a while, you might disagree with that). But they are doing a show almost every single night. The squared-circle is their stage and they must make the fans (thousands to millions depending on the TV coverage) feel something if they want to stay viable. Actors on stage must also make their audience feel, think, and discuss. Both professions must tell a story through performance, no matter how simple or complex. And if the audience doesn't feel it, the story doesn't continue. In theatre, shows close and actors lose jobs. In wrestling, wrestlers no longer get their "push" from management and may ultimately lose their jobs.

In addition, wrestlers are gypsies. They may have a home base, but they are in a different city almost EVERY night. And that is not an exaggeration. Some guys work upwards of 300 days a year. If they have families, they rarely see them. All for the love of the business and for a shot at being the next Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, or Stone Cold Steve Austin. If you're an actor, imagine being on a non-equity tour (pro wrestling is not unionized), doing one-nighters EVERY NIGHT for most of the year. No split weeks, no week or month-long stints. A different city every night. Many of them won't even be interesting cities (not that it matters, these guys hardly have time to "explore" the cities they are in).

And even if you've never seen a stitch of a wrestling telecast, you cannot deny that the theatricality of wrestling is what makes it tick. You can watch no-name boxers beating each other to a pulp to cure your fix for violence. But, the reason that pro wrestling has been so popular for all these years is the characters. What's more fun: watching two middleweights punch each other for 6 rounds, or seeing Shawn "Heartbreak Kid" Michaels face The Undertaker in a "Hell in a Cell" match.

Does it appeal to our more base sensibilities? Sure. But, so does "Rock of Ages" and "Tony and Tina's Wedding." Sometimes entertainment is meant to be just that. Which is why, when a lawsuit from the World Wildlife Foundation threatened him a few years ago, WWE owner and chairman Vince McMahon had no problem changing the name of his product from World Wrestling Federation to World Wrestling Entertainment. We know the results are pre-determined, and in the internet age, many are finding out said result before the events even take place. But, most of the world knows what happens at the end of "Hamlet," and we still go see it because we want to see how it's going to play out.

I have been having this discussion for years. While I don't really watch it on a regular basis anymore, I will incriminate myself and say that I used to be a huge fan. And I do feel that it still needs to be defended as entertainment. And I think it matters. Right, Rock?

A career trajectory?

So, Broadway Dance Center has been a New York institution for aspiring and professional dancers for a number of years. It's where young dancers go to sharpen their skills and where not-so-young dancers go to keep their skills sharp.

As with any business, location is everything. This is a dance center aimed for those who aspire to be on Broadway and for those already there and wanting to stay there. Naturally, one wants to have a business catering to Broadway in the midtown area. For quite some time, the Center was housed on 57th street. Certainly in midtown, but just a few blocks north of the "Broadway Block."

Recently, they have moved to state-of-the-art facilities on 45th Street, just two buildings over from the Al Hirschfeld Theatre, currently housing the hit Broadway revival of "Hair." Now, THAT is a great location as students can literally see their aspirations a mere two buildings away. You want to be on Broadway, well, there it is! You can almost touch it!

Two buildings away...all you need to do is look past one building. The building you need to look past? Well, if you looked at the picture above, you know what it is. Just a little establishment called Private Eyes Gentleman's Club. That ain't no off-Broadway theatre, folks.

I'm wondering if they got a break on the real estate by partnering with the building next door. Broadway Dance Center: We'll get you ready for the bright lights of Broadway! But, if those lights are too bright, we believe in options. Hey, you're still a dancer right? Just stop in next door and get a taste of another kind of dancing. No dance bag necessary (you won't need a leotard). Tap shoes optional, as they may increase the quality of your "show"--Gotta Have a Gimmick, right?

The Show Must Go On. Even if you suck.

Thank the goodness for Facebook. Without it, I would not have come across this article by our theatrical Perez Hilton, Michael Riedel. Now, the NY Post is not really what I would call "a news source," but it's fun to thumb through for the bold words and fun pictures, because you know, seeing the leader of the free world in swimming trunks is at the forefront of bipartisanship.

Riedel is a Broadway columnist for the Post and recently wrote an article pertaining to the amount of people calling in sick for the Broadway production of "West Side Story," citing, and I quote, "injuries, illnesses, vocal troubles, blah, blah, blah." His angle is "Don't cross the Boss," as he describes 91-year old writer/director, Arthur Laurents, riding in on his high horse...well, hopefully not that high--I mean, he could break something getting off it (Cheap joke? Yes. True Statement? Yes.)...and coming down on the actors and stating they had better show up more often or find another job.

Look, if I didn't see this production, or more importantly, didn't hear information from the receiving end of Mr. Laurents' "riot act", perhaps I wouldn't care as much. But, I feel that I need to speak for professional theatre personnel. There are people who will read this article in the Tri-State area, or beyond, and have a very bad taste in their mouth for Broadway talent. Furthermore, they will use this as a cautionary tale when they stage their community theatre production in Blaine, Missouri. "Don't be like those kids in 'West Side Story' on Broadway. Like Ron Lee said, 'bloodied and bowed, you crawled on stage.' It doesn't matter that your audience paid to see dancing and you gave them bloodied crawling--get out there and be the best crawler you can be!"

The Actor's Equity Association was established to protect professionals in the theatre business. Look, I know the show must go on. And that's exactly what understudies are for. So, if you are sick, a family member dies, you get shin splints and can't walk for a week, or you (God forbid) get married and have a honeymoon, the show CAN go on without you. In most "regular" jobs, people are allotted sick days, personal days, vacation days, and in some instances, mental health days! Why are performers and technicians, who work more days (Count 'em, 6. Every week, 'til the show closes) than corporate America not allowed the same? Because, you know what, sometimes you need to have a break. Because the argument against the "we paid all this money to see the original cast" rant is this: What if you paid all that money to see the original cast, and they were sick? But, to be the "work horses of old," they went on anyway? And they blew dog because they were performing with pneumonia? How cheated would you feel then?

This cast busted their ass not only with this show, but with the billion press events surrounding it since before it opened. So, no, they are not only working 3 hours a day. They devote mountains of time and energy to this every single day. Because they are paid to do so--just like an accountant for Price-Waterhouse is paid to bust his ass crunching numbers all day, every day. But, sometimes Mr. Accountant gets sick and can't come to work because he knows that not only will he be doing a disservice to his health, he will be doing a disservice to his co-workers and clients (the people who pay for his service) because he will not be at his best. But, Mr. Accountant may not have someone waiting for the chance to do his job for the day. Mr. Broadway Actor does.

When you are doing a show of this magnitude, getting this attention (for better or worse), you want to be at your best every time. And when grandpa keeps ragging on you because it's not like it was "in my day," it cuts the soul a bit. And now you're afraid to call out of work because you have swine flu, but if you come in, you infect everyone else. The A-Man's got the WSS cast by the balls. And look, if he's just a crazy old coot (I'm not saying he is, I'm saying if he is), it doesn't matter because he owns the show! He can pull the plug at any time! The producers can't even override him. The best they can do is apologize for him should the need arise.

Do people take advantage of sick/personal days on Broadway? I do not doubt that. But, has there been a time where you called out sick when you weren't? Be honest. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it happens. So, save the Piven parallels. Jeremy Piven signed a contract and welched on it. This is about Broadway production contracts which actually have time off written in. And when you are literally sweating and bleeding on stage 8 times a week, you might need more than just one Monday to recover.

Don't call us. Just check out my webpage.

So, I came across this story in the Times. If you are too lazy to hit the link, here's the deal. Apparently a casting director, Daryl Eisenberg, was "broadcasting live" from the audition room. Meaning, she is "tweeting" her reactions during actual auditions (Not during the auditions, she clarifies. After the actor has left the room.) Well, now there is (or was) a whole uproar by Actor's Equity and, of course, many others in the business regarding what is ethical in an audition room.

Look, I'll just say this. Most performers are phenomenally insecure. Furthermore, they are obsessed with access to people who can make decisions on their career (i.e., casting directors). So, if an actor "follows" Ms. Eisenberg on Twitter, checked out her page about the time they are done auditioning, and received a "bad review," there will be a VERY busy bartender in midtown about a half hour later. Because not only did the actor not get a callback, they are paranoid that their bad habits are broadcast on the internet.

For the most part, the audition room is supposed to be a safe room. It's a very awkward setting with a small amount of people sitting at a table on the far side of the room (sometimes only 1 or 2) and actors have to bear their souls (for better or worse). That's the job interview, essentially. "Hi, nice to meet you. I see you've trained at NYU. Great. So, I'm sure you know many people in the waiting room. Now, take every risk you've been afraid to take in your life. And do it in 16 bars." They should be able to do what they need to without being embarrassed on the internet. I know she did not mention names or take videos, but if someone goes to her page and reads the list, they can see what time she commented and begin their shame spiral. Then again, if she liked them, they can do the Happy Dance.

And, look, I'm not addressing the "American Idol" auditions (and many like them) where the actor/singer is taped for public consumption. The auditionee (if that's a word) is notified and has to sign a release form acknowledging this, lest they sue for misrepresentation. And, of course, they tape you for film and TV, but it's not for the world to see.

Maybe there is no right or wrong answer to this. The world is changing and communication changes with it. I just think it lacks class. Yeah, they may suck. But, it's about being constructive to the person in the room. By "tweeting" (and I'm really growing weary of the term), the usual "ok, the actor's out of the room" gossip now has a much bigger audience. We've all heard audition horror stories (and some of us have probably been a part of them), but does that condone live updates to, literally, the world about how you are so annoyed at hearing "All That Jazz" for the umpteenth time? What do you think?

In the Times piece, it states that Ms. Eisenberg has met with Equity and apologized and is looking forward to putting this behind her. So....sorry to bring it up again....I've been busy. But, look, she "tweeted" all about it.

These Hippies are Rich!

Playbill.com has just reported that the revivial of "Hair" has recouped its original investment of $5.76 million.  That means moving forward, any money the show makes, after the weekly operating costs, is all profit for the producers and investors.  Considering the recent box office grosses for this show have hovered around $1 million (or more) a week, I see a whole lot of tie-dye jeans and peace sign medallions in the near future.

Two things are of particular interest to me:

1.  With an opening night of March 31, 2009, it took less than 5 months after the "official" opening night to make all of its money back.  That's crazy fast.  (Previews began March 6--so that would be just over 5 months)

2.  Rumor has it, this show had lots of difficulty getting capitalized.  This past winter, producers were having trouble raising all the money to get it going.  So, it almost didn't happen.  Now, I'm guessing lots of people are happy they backed this one.

So, congrats to "Hair."  It proves that it is possible, no matter how unlikely, for a "message" show to make money in the theatre.

Don't forget to hook up the doll

The voice of a genre was silenced today (the genre, of course, being whiny teenage dramadies of the 1980s).  I just wanted to pay quick tribute to John Hughes.  He wrote/directed/produced some of the most influential movies of my youth.  In fact, I dare say that many artists had their childhoods shaped by many of his films.  Whether you admit it or not, you wanted to be Ferris Bueller.  But, you probably were Duckie.  There's nothing wrong with that.  At least you loved Otis.

I'm saddened by this not just because he's gone.  But because he joins a list of extremely influential entertainment personalities that have passed on far too soon this year.  Who are the pioneers to take us into the future of entertainment?  Are you among them?