The new musicals “Tammy Faye,” “Boop!” and “Smash” each cost at least $20 million to bring to the stage, and each was gone less than four months after opening. All three lost their entire investments. Lavish revivals of much-loved classics are also fizzling. On Sunday, a revival of “Cabaret,” budgeted for up to $26 million and featuring a costly conversion of a Broadway theater into a nightclub-like setting, threw in the towel at a total loss. A $19.5 million revival of “Gypsy” that starred Audra McDonald and earned strong reviews closed last month without recouping its investment. Even a buzzy production of “Sunset Boulevard,” which won this year’s Tony for best musical revival, failed to make back the $15 million it cost to mount.
Is every new show about one nutty lady?!
"Smash" was about Marilyn Monroe. "Boop" was about Betty Boop as you can problem guess. The rest of the shows named there are all about one central strong weird woman — all from more than a half century ago. It's quite unfresh! Why were they expected to succeed? Maybe because they think their audience is a bunch of old ladies. Of course, they want to see Audra McDonald as Mama Rose.One Broadway investor, James L. Walker Jr. of Atlanta, is so frustrated by the current economics that he’s litigating. After putting $50,000 into the “Cabaret” revival, he filed suit against the producers, alleging fraud. In an interview, Walker pointed out that the show has grossed nearly $90 million in ticket sales, plus whatever it made in sales of liquor, food and merchandise, and that he can’t accept that the investors who raised up to $26 million to finance the show have gotten nothing back. “How is that a good business model?” he asked.
Posts
75 comments:
Transgenders hardest hit.
Accounting is very tricky in show biz. People who get a share of profits don't usually get anything. Other people do okay.
ah they are using the Paramount studios accounting model
I know almost nothing about the finances of Broadway shows but if you are an investor in them make sure you get a share of the gross revenue and not a share of the gross profit. It still won't protect you from fraud but gross revenues are harder to conceal with "ledgermain".
Another Max Bialystock production.
So the show grossed $90 million, but it "lost" money. LOL. Obviously, the show was a hit - it just made less then projected. The solution - stop spending so much money.
And why should it cost $26 million to "mount a play". Its just people on a stage. And the play is revivial - its already been written and a hit.
Broadway will do better if it gets fresh new plays for its target audience, middle-aged women and Gays. What about a new musical about Rosie O'Donnell?
Easy solution: A Marvel superheroes musical.
Sounds like the new shows are all aimed at a gay target audience. Not surprising that they are still trying recapture the lightning that was 'Mame,' the original fag-hag.
"Is ever new show about one nutty lady?!"
This is the arts in America today. Democrat Party Woman-centric.
Good seats at a decent musical run from $275-450 per.
Dinner for two before the show ? Minimum $250 all in.
Parking $50 (plus the new mid-town surcharge).
I'll take Netflix, thank you very much.
Producers fought like hell in the 40s and 50s to keep actors from getting a percent of the gross. They wanted the actors to get a "percent of the profits". After being told that the box-office movie they were in never made a cent, the actors finally caught on.
then there was that denzel piece, whose tickets cost $900
Rosie is a perfect idea for a broadway musical. Strong gay woman fighting 'the system'. Her struggle to come out as Gay, her brassie humor. Her career ups and downs. Above all, her fights with Trump. Think of the Trump jokes!
Alternate title: Unfunny Girl.
So "Tammy Faye" is probably not a sympathetic portrayal of Tammy Faye Baker, unless the whole point is to make an ogre out of Jim Baker.
"Boop" is Betty Boop comes to life and experiences her "me too" moment at the hands of a politician who uses her and giver her now credit
And a show about theater kids, don't get me wrong, theater kids are fine, but it sounds like it was a bit of a mess, and didn't live up to the TV series it was based on.
But the shows that are inclusive of a wide audience seem to be doing fine, and the rehash of a TV Series, and the two political lectures, not so much.
"Where have all the good shows gone
Gone for wokeness every one
When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?"
Another Max Bialystock production
But have they tried bringing back Springtime for Hitler?
Google says 67% of Broadway audience are tourists. So it makes sense considering the cost of tickets that tourists want to see a show that has consistently received great reviews. New shows are for the other 33% who are within commuting distance of NYC. Even for the upper middle class the cost of theater tickets, dinner, transport, and maybe a sitter are extravagant enough to be an occasional treat. After all you can take the family on a weekend getaway for not much more.
well if they followed the film version with jessica chastain, she came off somewhat sympathetic, but pay couple a hundred dollars for a show in Gotham, seems dodgy,
"Another Max Bialystock production"
If only.
Sounds like movietheateritis
they used a complete unknown to play gillis, if you don't get him right, you lost the show
Were either Tammy Faye or Smash produced by Bialystock & Bloom?
you might as well right it off for tax purposes, the pics for Tammy look ghastly,
Instead of a show about one nutty lady, how about a show about a couple dozen nutty people:
Althouse, the Musical!
Tagline: “You never know where you’ll find your home.”
With Kelli O’Hara as The Professor
Ben Daniels as Meade
Nathan Lane as Trooper York
Alan Cumming as Titus
Patti LuPone as Inga
Craig Robinson as the Crack MC
Wendy McClendon as Wendybar
Hugh Jackman as Achilles
Bernadette Peters as Jamie
Lin Manuel Miranda as Kakistocracy
Neil Patrick Harris as Gadflly
Javier Bardem as Buwaya
Matthew Broderick as Howard
Tony Danza as Rocco
Kristin Chenoweth as Tina Trent
….and introducing John Mosby as himself!
Big production numbers include:
“Sunrise, Sunrise”
“Not a Dog…A Blog!”
“Madison Blues”
“Strewed Over With Hurts”
“Will You Blog Me? Will You Marry Me?”
And the big blowout closing finale, “We Got Nuttin Else To Do!”
It will run longer than The Mousetrap!
CC, JSM
All marvel movies are about NYC getting sttacked anyhow so serms like a easy adaptation for the aliens/mutants/conservatives to focus on attacking a broadway show. Could start off in classic broadway musical fashion then all hell breaks loose. Be fun and informative!
Or maybe our own Dave Begley could adapt his Frankenstein II as a musical. Give it the kind of Omaha flair that would get tourist audiences a fun evening out. Movie deals would definitely follow if successful.
"Smash" was about Marilyn Monroe.
"Smash" was a musical about making a musical about Marilyn Monroe. It was a TV series in the 2010. Stephen Spielberg was involved in producing the series and the musical.
Is ever new show about one nutty lady?!
Time for "Mame" and "Hello, Dolly" to be revived? "Funny Girl" was also a musical. Is Annie Oakley nutty enough for a reboot?
Ticket costs: Union labor results in high pay and drives the prices through the roof. This applies to Hollywood films and local dinner theaters too. It's akin to the megasalaries of professional sports.
Content of Broadway productions: We've all become saturated with the same set of standard plots, per 100+ years of Hollywood adaptations.
RCOCEAN II said...
So the show grossed $90 million, but it "lost" money. LOL. Obviously, the show was a hit - it just made less then projected. The solution - stop spending so much money.
9/22/25, 11:03 AM
No, its just more obscenely crooked accounting from the Hollywood/ Wall Street tribe. If you tried this in any other industry, you would be lucky to ever get out of prison.
Yet it doesn't matter to me: I look for every opportunity to avoid such people. There is no shortage of Asian entertainment to enjoy.
It says something that we used to have shows about strong women, like Funny Girl, and sci fi with a strong female protagonist, like Sarah Conner, and nobody batted an eye, but if you did it today, you know they would make it as "Funny Grrrl" and it would be about all the bad things that men did to stand in her way, or Sarah Conner would have super powers that would make her able to crush the Terminator with a mean look.
My play-writing rules of thumb --
Rule of thumb #1: One-word show titles with exclamation marks rarely excite the audience, though material adapted from classic literature have been exceptions.
Rule of thumb #2: Animated theatrical cartoons were produced as short subjects for good reasons. Avoid.
Rule of Thumb #2b: Besides, the good ones are still under copyright. The Mouse sucks in any case.
Rule of Thumb #3: Writing a parody of self-parodical source material is like mixing acids and bases.
Rule of Thumb #4: Always start with the title. A good title is more than halfway to riches.
My next project is a musical adaptation of Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Working title: Rotten!
it looks like they aimed for a 'more selective audience' and they found it, but again bialystok and bloom seeme to cooking the books,
Pris'ners of love, blue sky above,
Can't keep our hearts in ja-il.
its interesting the Norsemen, was a more realistic version of the way Hamlet would have been presented,
The problem with the arts today is that the industry has become so sophisticated and noble it has outgrown all its customers and can only exist in an etherial plane.
You know damned well that if they did the play today, it would be called Ophelia!
RCOCEAN II said...why should it cost $26 million to "mount a play". Its just people on a stage. And the play is revival - its already been written and a hit.
That's my immediate question. Why should it cost more than a few million to put on a show? They're not doing anything that needs to cost a lot.
Same with movies--why does it cost 100's of millions of dollars to make a movie? Other than action blockbusters where lots of stuff gets blown up, why can't you tell the story for a small fraction of that?
Althouse, the Musical!
Now that would likely garner a Tony or two!
After the Greenlet I Frankenstein, which is kind of a guilty pleasure, with Bill Nighy chewing the scenery as a gargoyle, opposite Aaron Eckhart as the Monster, stuck in the 21st century (they gotta get better agents,)
and Frankenstein 2, isn't even under consideration hrumpt
Even Wicked! is about an odd woman. The phenomenon is not surprising as it seems to be the same thing happening in action movies, as male characters are replaced by female characters, because female! (No regard to what the female is doing, whether it makes sense for her to do, or if it is a good look for women).
“Althouse, the Musical!“
Instead of a whodunnit it’s a whodinnit. And I hope this isn’t a spoiler but… in a real plot twist—no one get naked!
in particular the Witch is made to be sympathetic, yeah I hate that, I wasn't crazy about into the woods, either,
Althouse! the Musical? Sounds like a hit! Somewhere in there, there should be a song about breast blogging. I imagine an opening song and dance number called Cruel Neutrality to kick things off, and then the showstopper- Civility Bullshit! It could work...
Broadway needs rent control and Affordable Healthcare Reform reform.
Can Sir Archy come back as narrator? Or at least a blogging cockroach?
Rosie O'Donnell and Roseanne Barr are in the waiting room to eternal life, heaven or hell. They make their cases in dialog and song (no dancing, unless a chorus is added for diversity actors, otherwise two-person show till the last word comes from on high). Both should work cheap, profit guaranteed (with straight accounting). Free publicity guaranteed by fist fights in the lobby.
Isn't Tammy Fay the woman young gay people's grandparents would have hated if they hadn't become grandparents by not being gay?
Would anyone in Althouse! The Musical wear shorts?
I think the Drunk Shakespeare version of R&J that I saw last week cost about $100 to make, not including the cost of all the dildos (I'm assuming they were borrowed from cast members). Most of that money went to the mezcal. It had some quite funny moments, which is not really a thing I thought I'd say about R&J.
Though actually, nerd that I am, I did LOL in the middle of English class in high school when I read the bit the nurse says about how Juliet's father, when Juliet had fallen and hurt herself as a wee lass, told her that when she was grown, she'd fall on her back instead, "and the little wrench left crying and said Ay!"
I'm honored and excited to be played by the great Bernadette Peters!
I'm sure there are many factors at work. Is "Baumol's Cost Disease" one of them?
Baumol's cost disease explains why the expense of a live Shakespearean play increases faster than inflation over time, even with no increase in the number of actors or length of the play. It is a core principle of cultural economics, first described by economists William J. Baumol and William G. Bowen in 1966.
The "stagnant" sector: Labor-intensive services, such as live theater, music, education, and healthcare, have little room for productivity gains. It still takes the same number of actors and musicians the same amount of time to perform a Shakespearean play or a classical string quartet as it did centuries ago.
The rising cost of labor: Because workers can earn higher wages in the high-productivity manufacturing sector, salaries must also rise in the stagnant service sector to attract and retain talented employees.
The inevitable price increase: Since the performing arts cannot offset rising labor costs with corresponding increases in productivity, they must raise ticket prices to cover their expenses. This is the "cost disease".
Shakespeare as an example: A production of Hamlet today requires roughly the same number of actors and the same amount of time as it did in the 17th century.
Productivity remains constant: Unlike a car manufacturer that can automate its assembly line, a theater company cannot produce more plays per actor.
Wages increase: The actors, stage crew, and other theater staff still need to earn a living wage that competes with what they could earn in a more productive industry. Their wages must increase in line with general economic growth.
Relative price rises: Over time, the cost of the labor-intensive play increases faster than the price of manufactured goods like cars or TVs. This is because the price of manufactured goods is falling in relative terms due to productivity gains.
Broader implications
The theory helps explain why costs for many essential and cultural services—including healthcare, education, and government services—tend to rise faster than inflation.
It highlights the financial pressures on non-profit arts organizations that must balance rising labor costs with keeping ticket prices accessible to the public.
tcrosse at 11:03 AM for the win!
paminwi said...
"Would anyone in Althouse! The Musical wear shorts?"
Rhhardin, of course.
that seems like a tautology, what makes a broadway actor player be worth as much as one in 1990
'Twas the nurse's husband, a coarse commoner, not Lord Capulet, who made the jest about Juliet.
Jamie:
There are more jokes than the Nurse's in Romeo and Juliet. The founder of the American Shakespeare Center likes to shock visiting student groups by pointing out that the play begins with a whole string of dick jokes.
There's also a comic scene that is almost always cut - I've seen probably 6-8 productions, and only one of them included it. After Juliet is found (supposedly) dead, the musicians who were supposed to play for her wedding come out and complain about the cancellation. Amusing in a somewhat twisted way. Knowing she's not really dead (not yet) helps.
That's because the new shows SUCK. Just a bunch of preaching at the audience.
The political preaching of Broadway is vile and unwelcoming to the traditional Broadway audience but I learned yesterday someone’s bringing back Ragtime big time…good luck with that…
P.S. If you're anywhere near the Shenandoah Valley, or willing to drive that far, said ASC is doing an excellent production of Romeo and Juliet right now. I think I mentioned before that they cast a Juliet who could pass for 14 years old, and a Romeo who also looks quite young. They finally uploaded pictures from the performance, so you can see for yourselves here: link. It runs until mid-November, along with Two Gentlemen of Verona, with the same actors plus a live dog, in the cast (pictures not uploaded yet).
"Would anyone in Althouse! The Musical wear shorts?"
OMG yes!! There has to be a musical number on this topic, complete with every ghey man on Broadway dancing in short shorts on stage. That's gotta win a Tony!
The general crime and political situation in New York isn’t much help. Now that I know assassination in New York is a modest felony…
Meade: "And I hope this isn’t a spoiler but… in a real plot twist—no one get naked!"
Speak for yourself, sir. CC, JSM
Those aren't "Dick Jokes" - they're sex jokes.
I haven't watched many (any?) musicals in years. Which is interesting because I was raised loving musicals. But then, we had great plays to see and listen to when I was young.
I've long felt that what passes for great musicals these days are more or less like Top 40 hits on radio. There are few, if any, great songs that come out of them, nothing that sticks with you. The storylines are almost predictably preachy.
And so, the expected boredom with the whole thing has begun to set in while the costs to produce them keep raising. And I'll say that, if you can't even draw people from New York, New Jersey, Connecticut to pay to see them anymore, who is your audience?
Paddy O: Yes, Sir Archy! He could be played by Warwick Davis in a roach costume, kind of like the Lion King stage musical. CC, JSM
One of the most eminent Shakespeare scholars and practitioners in the country thinks they're "dick jokes" and some anonymous guy who fills a comment section with at-best-mediocre comments insists they're actually "sex jokes". Whom should I believe? I'm going to stick with "dick jokes".
In Althouse the Musical, the chorus line would be Men in Shorts.
"the Witch is made to be sympathetic, yeah I hate that"
I do not particularly like the message of Wicked, which is just another inversion of traditional good and evil, intended to undermine the concept of actual evil. That message has been ubiquitous over the past 30 years, and is now stale and predictable. However, as a musical, Wicked is enjoyable and the music is very, very good.
Some music suggestions for the growing Althouse! production song list:
‘We Got Nuttin Else to Do’ sung to the tune of ‘There Is Nothin’ Like a Dame’
‘Sunset, Sunset’ sung to the tune of ‘Sunrise, Sunset’ (naturally)
‘Madison Blues’ sung to the tune of ‘Madison Blues’ (of course, but with different lyrics)
Whiskeybum: And of course "Gee, Professor Althouse" based on "Gee, Officer Krupke." We're depraved on accounta we're deprived! CC, JSM
Oh, I almost forgot:
'Cruel Neutrality' sung to the tune of 'The Bare Necessities'
tommyesq said...
“Althouse, the Musical! Now that would likely garner a Tony or two!”
Well, they did cast Tony Danza, so that’s one.
I just home they don’t cut any of his lines.
Foose said...
'Twas the nurse's husband, a coarse commoner, not Lord Capulet, who made the jest about Juliet.
Sheesh, of course it was! 🙄
Yes, that was the only dirty joke I got at that tender age.
I can hear the lineup of songs for “Althouse! The Musical”
“The Quest for 3000”
“Men in Shorts”
“Don’t garner my attention”
“Honey, I’m with boring”
“Cruel Neutrality, the way through life”
“That’s Civility Bullshit”
The stage backdrop would be a sunrise over Lake Mendota.
rhhardin -- Henry Fonda in "On Golden Pond"
n.n.'s lines displayed on a screen on stage. n.n.'s identity is not revealed.
If you’re looking for a late act tearjerker, feel free to use this: https://youtu.be/6BCoyWAmv0Y?si=8A0kAwDZOhyEOwum
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.