|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 11:11:25 GMT
With lots of new shows closing early recently and it becoming more hard to open a show in the West End, I wonder what makes a good musical and what keeps shows open compared to others?
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Jun 12, 2016 15:38:26 GMT
If anyone had even a hint of the answer to that then shows wouldn't be closing early. It's almost entirely a matter of luck: you can look at a successful show and try to work out all the things it did that made it successful, but there'll be another show that did all the same things and sank like a stone.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jun 12, 2016 16:29:32 GMT
There is a formula that ensures a new musical is both a critical and commercial success.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 17:23:35 GMT
There is a formula that ensures a new musical is both a critical and commercial success. What's that? |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jun 12, 2016 17:30:15 GMT
There is a formula that ensures a new musical is both a critical and commercial success. What's that? I believe it is out there, but probably just beyond the grasp of human understanding! |
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 12, 2016 17:41:10 GMT
Matthew is dead right, there is no known formula.
For example why did Gypsy do well in the West End, but Merrily We Roll Along Struggle, both from the same composer and both got equally great reviews.
|
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jun 12, 2016 18:58:12 GMT
Matthew is dead right, there is no known formula. For example why did Gypsy do well in the West End, but Merrily We Roll Along Struggle, both from the same composer and both got equally great reviews. 1) Lead Actor - Imelda Staunton (Gypsy) vs Ensemble (Merrily) 2) Pre-West End Accessibility - Far Away (Chichester, Gypsy) vs Just Down the Road (Menier, Merrily) 3) Narrative Thrust - Forwards (Gypsy) vs Backwards (Merrily) 4) Tunefulness Quotient - High (Gypsy) vs Low (Merrily) 5) Intelligence of Book - Low (Gypsy) vs High (Merrily) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 20:41:08 GMT
Also Gypsy was composed by Jule Styne, Sondheim only did the lyrics.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 12, 2016 20:49:37 GMT
Gypsy played a theatre in Chichester for 6 weeks that seats 1000 people, you can bet your bottom dollar about 20% would have travelled down from London, so about the same size as the Menier.
Merrily also had some good actors who are well known in theatre circles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 21:01:43 GMT
Star casting DEFINITELY helps with theatre shows, hence why it is coming so common now. Unless producers know for certain that a show will do very well without any star names then they always try to grab someone who is well known
|
|
6,285 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 12, 2016 21:15:05 GMT
Most of the long running shows haven't needed star names, War Horse didn't and neither did The Play that Goes Wrong or Hangmen so it wrong to assume that star casting is essential, it can help recoupment but it's wrong to assume you need a name for a show to be a hit
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 21:27:32 GMT
Most of the long running shows haven't needed star names, War Horse didn't and neither did The Play that Goes Wrong or Hangmen so it wrong to assume that star casting is essential, it can help recoupment but it's wrong to assume you need a name for a show to be a hit Yeah I know that, sorry. Hangmen had a name though? David Morrissy was in it and Reece Shearsmith was originally in it. Also War Horse had Kit Harrington when it first opening too? I guess I was abit hasty with my assumptions. I would usually cast names in shows though. Maybe it's musicals then? It's so strange how some shows stay open for ages but then some classics like Showboat don't. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 21:33:31 GMT
I don't think Kit Harrington was in the original cast of War Horse. Not at the NT. It was when it opened at the New London (but did anybody know him then...?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 21:39:36 GMT
Most of the long running shows haven't needed star names, War Horse didn't and neither did The Play that Goes Wrong or Hangmen so it wrong to assume that star casting is essential, it can help recoupment but it's wrong to assume you need a name for a show to be a hit Actually Hangmen had quite a few names in the West End run!! |
|
6,285 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 12, 2016 21:50:56 GMT
Most of the long running shows haven't needed star names, War Horse didn't and neither did The Play that Goes Wrong or Hangmen so it wrong to assume that star casting is essential, it can help recoupment but it's wrong to assume you need a name for a show to be a hit Yeah I know that, sorry. Hangmen had a name though? David Morrissy was in it and Reece Shearsmith was originally in it. Also War Horse had Kit Harrington when it first opening too? I guess I was abit hasty with my assumptions. I would usually cast names in shows though. Maybe it's musicals then? It's so strange how some shows stay open for ages but then some classics like Showboat don't. David Morrissey isn't a huge draw on his own though. Hangmen sold well because it's was very good and it was a new Martin McDonagh play and Kit Harrington wasn't known today as he was when he did War Horse as the transfer of War Horse was in 2009, 2 years before Game of Thrones started It's not strange at all, not everything is going to succeed in the West End or run decades, that's just the nature of commercial theatre. Aladdin is successful because it's a known title and also Disney marketed it like crazy and many shows don't have the luxury of huge ad campaign |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2016 22:28:06 GMT
I don't think Kit Harrington was in the original cast of War Horse. Not at the NT. It was when it opened at the New London (but did anybody know him then...?) Kit Harington was the second Albert in War Horse at the NT. I don't know if he then did the West End transfer or if that's when they brought in the third Albert, but you're absolutely right that he was very much an unknown at the time. |
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 12, 2016 23:43:04 GMT
Martin McDonagh name is a draw, same way Jez Butterworth is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2016 8:05:24 GMT
Is it though? Surely it's only going to be a draw to people who are already into theatre, who've probably already decided to go anyway because they know they like going to the theatre?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2016 15:05:03 GMT
Does anybody think that London theatre is in crisis? Will there still be loads of theatres in London in 10 years time?
|
|
6,285 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 13, 2016 15:08:27 GMT
Does anybody think that London theatre is in crisis? Will there still be loads of theatres in London in 10 years time? Think you're overreacting, shows closing doesn't mean the West End is in a bad state, shows open and close every year and one or two underperforming shows doesn't affect the rest of the West End. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2016 15:12:37 GMT
People are always in such a hurry to declare that theatre is dying, forgetting that it's probably the second-oldest form of story-telling there is. It might change, buildings might close, theatre might not be now as we remember it from the past, and it won't be in the future how we'll remember it being now, but theatre as a concept will outlive us all, and I think it's pretty safe to say that while there are people, London is always going to have an abundance of venues.
|
|
6,285 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 13, 2016 15:15:25 GMT
People are always in such a hurry to declare that theatre is dying, forgetting that it's probably the second-oldest form of story-telling there is. It might change, buildings might close, theatre might not be now as we remember it from the past, and it won't be in the future how we'll remember it being now, but theatre as a concept will outlive us all, and I think it's pretty safe to say that while there are people, London is always going to have an abundance of venues. We're getting two new venues in the next five years with The London Theatre Company as well as Nimax's new theatre that's being built as part of Crossrail so I would say theatre is still in rude health if they're still spending money on building new venues as well as refurbishing the old ones. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2016 15:15:53 GMT
Does anybody think that London theatre is in crisis? Will there still be loads of theatres in London in 10 years time? Think you're overreacting, shows closing doesn't mean the West End is in a bad state, shows open and close every year and one or two underperforming shows doesn't affect the rest of the West End. I honestly didn't mean it like that! I meant because of the up of ticket prices, it has put a few people off seeing as many shows as they would like to. I hope the theatres stay as they are in coming years, for all our sakes! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2016 15:25:46 GMT
If people can't pay the expensive prices, then discounts will come in. It's probably going to end up like a souk, where only tourists and idiots pay the price listed, because they don't realise the theatres are expecting you to haggle it down to a manageable sum. Mobile phone providers have already largely gone that way. While there are skyhigh ticket prices, there'll almost always be an affordable alternative that the top prices are subsidising (even in the case of Hamilton on Broadway).
|
|
6,285 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 13, 2016 15:30:38 GMT
Think you're overreacting, shows closing doesn't mean the West End is in a bad state, shows open and close every year and one or two underperforming shows doesn't affect the rest of the West End. I honestly didn't mean it like that! I meant because of the up of ticket prices, it has put a few people off seeing as many shows as they would like to. I hope the theatres stay as they are in coming years, for all our sakes! You do realise that shows have a variety of prices, it's not just top and premium seats. I see plenty of shows every year and that's due to buying tickets on the lower end of the pricing scale and occasionally splurging. If you look at the theatre landscape, there are rarely any dark theatres and most are only dark because of refurbishment works or the timescale to load in a new show. There have plenty of successful shows and plenty of not so successful shows but if every show was a long runner, it would mean the West End is stagnant and that's worse than having a mix of old and new shows. |
|
2,051 posts
|
Post by infofreako on Jun 13, 2016 15:35:46 GMT
Shows closing makes way for new shows. It makes the west end healthy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2016 15:55:28 GMT
It's like forest fires. They may seem awful, but actually they're all part and parcel of a healthy ecosystem (as long as they don't rage out of control, but that's an analogy for anotger day).  |
|
43 posts
|
Post by sayers500 on Jun 14, 2016 14:43:20 GMT
I think new plays have a chance of succeeding in the West End on it's own merit without a star cast (curious incident or the 39 Steps) but new musicals or revivals without a star (like Bend It or Showboat) will always struggle when they are trying to reach the same tourists who want to see Les Mis or Phantom. Therefore I don't think we will see many successful new musicals from the commercial sector unless they are jukebox musicals, which can attract wider audiences. That's why I think the West End should cull Les Mis, Phantom, Lion King etc. to force audiences to see new work.
|
|
6,285 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 14, 2016 14:56:35 GMT
I think new plays have a chance of succeeding in the West End on it's own merit without a star cast (curious incident or the 39 Steps) but new musicals or revivals without a star (like Bend It or Showboat) will always struggle when they are trying to reach the same tourists who want to see Les Mis or Phantom. Therefore I don't think we will see many successful new musicals from the commercial sector unless they are jukebox musicals, which can attract wider audiences. That's why I think the West End should cull Les Mis, Phantom, Lion King etc. to force audiences to see new work. Curious Incident and The 39 Steps aren't good examples as they're based on source materials and both had successful runs before transferring. We had successful musicals in the last ten years with Kinky Boots, Mormon, Charlie, Matilda, Wicked etc and none of those are jukebox musicals so it is wrong to assume that tourists don't want to see new work |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2016 15:16:28 GMT
Jon, all of your musical examples are also based on source materials and have had successful runs elsewhere before transferring. For the record. I don't know if it really alters your point, but it made me smile.  |
|
