It is an interesting phenomenon with which I am somewhat more familiar in the reverse. (Did well in the West End but tanked on Broadway.) I tend to think the problem is often with the producers/creative team thinking they need to change the show for the audience on the other side of the Atlantic, rather than with the show itself not connecting with the other audience. (What Broadway did to "Starlight Express" was criminal.)
It is an interesting phenomenon with which I am somewhat more familiar in the reverse. (Did well in the West End but tanked on Broadway.) I tend to think the problem is often with the producers/creative team thinking they need to change the show for the audience on the other side of the Atlantic, rather than with the show itself not connecting with the other audience. (What Broadway did to "Starlight Express" was criminal.)
I know the changes they made for Starlight on Broadway, I just wish I could see it. (Same with all the different versions of it, especially 1984!!)
I actually apologized to people. I had recommended Starlight based on the London production, and then after I saw it on Broadway, I kept saying, "No, no, it wasn't like this. It was GOOD."
What on earth happened to Starlight ? This piece really did not need to reinterpreted
Two things stood out.
1. The set. The magnificent race-all-around-the-audience set was turned into a do-half-assed-loops-around-the-first-few-rows endeavor. What had been impressive and involving in London now just looked stupid. 2. The Silver Dollar was added. A shiny oversized silver dollar coin (which at least one reviewer described as the cheapest-looking thing on the set) was placed center stage. It was the prize all the trains were racing for. They even sang a song about it. I assume this was because someone decided silly Americans wouldn't understand the idea of racing for honor or glory; we'd only get it if the trains were racing for a monetary prize.
Although it's been a hit in other productions, the original Sweeney Todd with Dennis Quilley and Sheila Hancock at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane failed to match the success of the American production.
I went to see it as a teenager just as it opened and was so taken with it I booked again for a few weeks ahead. I remember sitting in the stalls before the performance seeing two front of house staff shaking their heads and looking at all the empty seats.
It was a huge theatre to fill though, and as much as I enjoyed it I think subsequent smaller productions were better.
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Feb 6, 2016 13:47:04 GMT
Going back ages, Finian's Rainbow flopped badly, as did Carnival, both a bit too whimsical maybe, same with Upon a Mattress which stiffed (although it didn't hurt Brigadoon)? 1776 probably hadn't got the same resonance here so flopped (as good a show as it is) as did the original Pippin. A little later both the burlesque tribute Sugar Babies (with Mickey Rooney and Ann Miller) tanked, as did The Mystery of Edwin Drood (including a Morecambe-less Wise). Grand Hotel was badly advised to go into the barn-like Dominion and flopped, Movin Out similarly at the Apollo Victoria.
Given its subsequent life it should also be mentioned that the original Grease packed up six months after opening here.
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 6, 2016 18:25:41 GMT
Getting some great feedback so far.
Starlight Express at the Gershwin, I understand that the bridge failed, but luckily it failed in a good position, where it was still usable and the tickets weren't selling and the repair cost was prohibitive, so they left it?
Also reading about Grand Hotel and Sweeney Todd there seems a good case of doing a thread, right show, wrong theatre?
With regard to shows from WE to Broadway bombing, Sandy Wilson talked in an old TV documentary I watched recently (recommended by a poster on the old board) of The Boyfriend. Successful here but ruined by Broadway producers when they tried to turn it into a burlesque show. SW disagreed with them but was literally thrown out of the theatre for daring to have his say about his show!