Operation Mincemeat - New Diorama/SWP/Riverside/Fortune

Objection! Leading the witness, Your Honor!

Talk about trying to get your desired survey responses, geez

It just comes off as desperate. If US producers think the show is too niche to succeed in New York, how is collecting responses (again) from their niche group of fans going to disprove that?

I wish the show the best, and if they do go to Broadway, I dearly hope they take the original cast with them. But this is all so awkward.

That is so cringey.

The fact that they think this show has a ghost of a chance on Broadway shows how little they know about the Bway market.

If they were serious, they would aim for an Off-Bway venue and see if they show gains traction. If nothing else, they might have a mild success Off-Bway but even then, I can't see this being the type of show that generates the need to play a Broadway house...MAYBE The Helen Hayes in terms of its small size but even that would be a stretch.

The show is extremely British in just about every way and I can't see Broadway theatregoers giving a damn about it. It's just not that good.

Am I the only one who doesn't find the surveys cringe at all?

It is producers sending them, obviously working with other producers who want more hard data. The process being used to also work as marketing is clever. It's not desperation, they could have easily gotten the data quietly. They want to drum up more attention, get people talking. It's unique, it's DIFFERENT. Theatre production houses, and particular theatre marketing are SO STALE these days. Idk, I just like that it's different and participatory.

A huge amount of research goes into theatre shows, transfers etc, but it's usually 'behind closed doors' in focus groups or large scale surveys etc that sample different representative groups to get balanced opinions. Emailing a fan database with a highly leading questionnaire isn't research, it's clearly either a rubbish way of trying to generate buzz for a Broadway transfer or a really misjudged attempt to get some supportive sound bites to persuade an investor/theatre owner to take the plunge.

BUT I think this is having a weird opposite effect on people. It's planting a seed of doubt that it WON'T work on Broadway and encouraging that discussion to play out here and elsewhere. They clearly have eyes on a transfer, maybe it's even already confirmed and they just want to build buzz, but these repeated surveys are basically just reminding people of the reasons why it MIGHT NOT work.

It's a fact that performers will sometimes be off - no point pretending it doesn't happen.

Better someone is off when they are ill, rather than damaging their voice, or making everyone else ill.

I have read the survey and I find that it's filled with leading questions.  This one is definitely one of them, and what makes it worse is it does not allow for a more nuanced answer (as many surveys are prone to).    

Definitely I'm in the "grateful that understudies/swings exist and can go on and make sure a show can go on" camp, but I'd be lying if I said that if I got only one shot at seeing a certain production (say, on Broadway, where ticket prices are higher etc.) I wouldn't be a bit disappointed to miss out on the performance of a lead that later goes on to be nominated for a Tony, etc.  On the other hand, if I get the chance to see a show more than once because a) it's on near where I live and b) I get access to more reasonably priced tickets, then bring on an understudy run so I can see different takes on a same role, etc. 

On the whole this umpteenth attempt by the producers to "test the waters" feels more and more like a poor idea.  The fact that they even think that they need to run this idea past people who are already fans of the show tells you that they're absolutely not confident that a Broadway transfer is the best idea... and they're seeking validation and approval from people who are already their adoring audience, so what exactly do they think they can prove with the "data" they're collecting? 
 

Is there someplace online to get a cast list for today's matinee? I forgot to get one at the theater and want to confirm who I saw. (Mainly, I want to confirm the actor who played Hester and the one who played Montagu.) Thanks.

Thank you!  I'm going back today (and bringing four friends who haven't seen it), so it will be interesting to compare.

Saw again yesterday. Had Holly on for Ewan and Jonty Peach on for Hester.

Both were great, but it's interesting how much Holly's Montagu has changed. I wonder if previously she was just trying to emulate Natasha's Montagu but now she's decided to play it as her own? The "manly" voice has gone and Montagu is much more camp. It's hard to explain, but the OTT caricature is gone - which is a bit of a shame, to be honest? I felt it took a lot of the humour away. Of course, she was still wonderful.

Jonty Peach though is phenomenal, right? Actually out of this world good. The subtleties in his Hester were wonderful. I've seen Sean, Christian and Jak as Hester before and I actually think Jonty might be the best yet? Just wonderful.

Have to say, though, that it all felt slightly flatter than usual? The singing particularly seemed off (It's almost as if their voices didn't "gel" together? I can't explain, but several people around me made similar comments at the interval). Perhaps it was more of a sound issue than an actor issue, though. 

Rest were principal (this was the matinee)

Holly Sumpton (u/s Montagu)
Sean Carey (Cholmondeley)
Chloe Hart (Bevan)
Jonty Peach (u/s Hester)
Claire-Marie Hall (Jean)