Why Is Leap On Broadway???

[lupone76]

Back in the 80's and 90's there were less shows opening on Broadway but the ones that did for the most part were at least good. It's a case of quality vs quantity if you get my drift. Shows like Leap and Lysistrata would have never seen the light of day on a Broadway stage during that period.

[lupone76]

I remember back in the mid 90's how the musical Big was ripped to pieces. Compared to some shows today Big was a masterpiece in musical theater.

[Mister Matt]

Back in the 80's and 90's there were less shows opening on Broadway but the ones that did for the most part were at least good. It's a case of quality vs quantity if you get my drift. Shows like Leap and Lysistrata would have never seen the light of day on a Broadway stage during that period.

You must be one of those Starmites fans I've heard about. I thought it was just a myth. So what did you think of Metro, Mail and Roza?

Remember in the 80s and 90s when people complained that none of the shows were as good as the previous decades? And how every decade is always worse than the ones before? Selective memory is never actually true, but I'm sure it makes a person feel wise.

[JRybka]

Starmites has two songs that are good. The opening song and Hard to Be Diva. Oh and also Sharon McNight chewed the scenery every night.

[Mister Matt]

AND IT WAS BETTER THAN ANYTHING THAT GETS PRODUCED ON BROADWAY THESE DAYS!

[lupone76]

Mister Matt, obviously you missed the point. There were and there will always be flops but even the flops back then were better than the flops today. Leap, not to pick on it yet again is absolutely atrocious. I actually remember going to the theater and enjoying Legs Diamond, Mail.

[tmbyru]

I saw it first preview and usually love Menken shows but was also not impressed with the story. I think they should have stuck a little more to the movie. The songs were also very energetic which got exhausting after awhile. I did like the song the sheriff and Raul sang together at the Motel 6. It was the only heartfelt moment in the whole show.

I too don't know how long this will last, but am thankful for my color Playbill nonetheless. :)

[Eris0303]

It's nice to see that others see my point as it is clearly the opinion that matters.

I think I pulled a muscle from laughing

[Mister Matt]

There were and there will always be flops but even the flops back then were better than the flops today.

I guess there were flops you may have seen then that you enjoyed more than some flops you've seen now, but that's hardly any sort of factual declaration or a "sign of the times". You may have loved One Night Stand or Onward Victoria, but so what? It doesn't make them better shows than Lysistrata Jones or Leap of Faith nor does it have anything to do with the "quality" of Broadway from one decade to the next or what deserves to get produced on Broadway. They are just different shows that opened at different times. Any time I hear someone bemoaning the current state of Broadway and longing for the old days (the real old days, not the 80s and 90s), I wonder why they continue to see new shows if it makes them SO unhappy.

[lupone76]

I guess I continue to go with the hopes of beng pleasently surprised every now and again. The last time that has occured was 3 years ago with Next to Normal.

[bk]

There are, I think, two things at play here: One, the people who always say "the audience I saw it with LOVED it and cheered and gave it a standing ovation." This type of comment, especially during previews, must always be ignored - the house is stacked frequently during previews, and when there are hundreds of young teens in attendance whose only idea of how to behave and react in a theatre is based on how the audience behaves on American Idol, etc. of course you're going to get whooping and hollering, all of it completely meaningless and off-putting - it starts before one note of music has been played - as soon as the lights begin to dim. In other words, they LOVED it before hearing one word.

I think one of the reasons folks are taking such swipes at this is because of the VERY public developmental process, most especially the last workshop, where its creators were tweeting how amazing it was and how they'd fixed all the problems. Only apparently they haven't - and this is after, what, eight years? But when they put that kind of thing out there in the ether well then they'd better damn well deliver. Whether they ultimately do or not remains to be seen (after the GREAT workshop, they seem to have more work to do, although these days that kind of work never results in more than minor cosmetics, due to the technical aspects to which the show is tied).

[lupone76]

They needed a lot more revamping. The whole thing appears as though it was thrown together in minutes. It's amazing I remember reading how the original La Cage was put together rather quickly and yet it was so well crafted. Whereas, these shows which take so long to blossom never even bloom to their potential.

[tmbyru]

I agree bk -

You can always tell who is filling a show's house... theater goers or tourists who bought their TKTS tickets (not that there is anything wrong with cheap tickets - I saw this show on the $29 discount). Clapping after every song and screaming is usually a sign of an out-of-towner. This happened recently when I saw How to Succeed again and when I saw Newsies. I felt it was like this when I saw Lion King too.

Plus I was not excited about the use of cast members in the audience before the show, talking to us, messing with us, trying to get us to pretend we were actually at a revival.

[Mister Matt]

"the audience I saw it with LOVED it and cheered and gave it a standing ovation."

Oh, I saw that with my own eyes well after the openings of Big and Seussical, so it's not an impossibility. It's just not indicative of ticket sales. And what people consider "quality" around here is purely subjective. I saw audiences leap to their feet and cheer for Spring Awakening, but that had nothing to do with how I felt about the show. I just wanted them to get out of my way so I could leave.

[bk]

While I haven't seen this latest incarnation (I saw it in LA), the idea of this pre-show thing makes me want to vomit on the ground. I should think dispensing with that aspect immediately would be a first course of action. How can you take ANYTHING seriously after such a thing? Just stop trying to be "clever" and do your show - no framing device needed if the storytelling is solid.

[newintown]

I always think it helps to have a book writer with experience writing good musicals. This one was written by the screenwriter (because everyone knows that the screenwriter can turn his movie into a musical in a snap) and a playwright with one non-musical mild success and one musical flop (from 30 years ago) under his belt.

Producers seem to believe just anyone can write the most important part of a musical (the book); which may be why so many of them fail.

[lupone76]

Agreed tmbyru. I hate when they resort to the audience participation gimicks unless it's a show like Hair that actually lends itself to that sort of thing. In this case it was clearly used as a ploy to get audience members into a boaring show.

[Jane2]

I am not in agreement with those who decide they know what the audience is made up of and how they always react. I believe they are incorrect.

During both previews and regular runs, you will see every category of patron. I"m talking about all theater, not just LOF, which I saw at the first preview and saw in person who made up the audience.

And since I work at a theater, I see exactly who is in attendance every performance for many shows.

[finebydesign]

Back to the OP and the list of producers someone posted. After seeing it, I can't for the life of me figure it out. I've been to better first workshops. It looks very expensive. The whole thing is very curious.

[ABB2357]

I haven't seen the Broadway incarnation of LEAP OF FAIL (excuse me, LEAP OF FAITH), but the show was a huge mess in LA and required a lot of fixing to make it ready for prime time. It sounds like the faux revival concept is just as bad as Ashford's shockingly amateur attempt at ballet.

Interesting how little work of substance is done between productions these days, when there are rare examples (such as FOLLIES between DC and Broadway) that show how a few subtle but smart changes can make a huge difference.

[EricMontreal22]

"Remember in the 80s and 90s when people complained that none of the shows were as good as the previous decades? And how every decade is always worse than the ones before? Selective memory is never actually true, but I'm sure it makes a person feel wise."

Exactly. I read so many books written a while back on Broadway that went on about how the 70s were the death of the Broadway musical. Funny, as it's probably the decade with my favorite shows. Sure, some talk about problems with Broadway (huge ticket prices, etc) have weight, but...

[mc1227]

I always like to take something positive away from a show that is in previews understanding the amount of time, work and money that goes into it. For this show, I would say Raul does a great job with pretty mediocre material. However, for a show that has had as much production and workshop time, it just doesn't seem to work for me. I don't like to compare shows with each other because each show is unique to itself and God knows, we all have such different tastes. I have seen two other shows in previews and felt they were much better all the way around. All these shows have had standing O's, so I don't believe that's an indicator of the show's quality but certainly an indicator of the audience's enjoyment of it.

The bottom line is if they can sell tix, the quality is not the primary goal. It's no different than any other form of entertainment. Because we are theater fans, we like to hold that standard higher than most, but at the end of the day, its about $$. Unfortunate but true. So, the long answer to the OP question is that it's on Broadway to recoup some $$ that has been invested and investors want return....now, ready or not...

[EricMontreal22]

While I assume there's some validity to this--and God knows I'm no longer a teenager, I think it's not giving teens enough credit to complain that people who whoop during a show, or give it an automatic standing ovation are all teenagers... That's not been my experience (in fact, the times I've had the most trouble with audience members they've been middle aged women--but I suppose that's me being middle-aged-women-ist).

[Jane2]

Exactly Eric, and I'll bet that my whooping at the first preview was louder than any teenager or "country hick" who was supposedly there that night. I didn't see any of them, though.

[NoHSMisNotAMusical]

Oh yeah, another thread with lupone76!

Side note: I keep confusing Leap of Faith with Faith Prince's solo album.

[finebydesign]

To be fair to teenagers, I can't remember being at a show where people didn't give a standing ovation. After watching people sing and dance their hearts out for 2 hours it's hard to blame them for the show they were lucky to be cast in.

I too tried to take away something positive from the show and it is the theme. The show has a great message, "we can all change the course in our lives for the better" I thought some of the songs would be nice country-pop standards.

I understand Broadway has a history of flops but this one to me just seems too obvious, nobody walks away from that thinking "this is going to be a hit" or "the critics are going to love this."