BRING IT ON Moves Up Broadway Closing Date to Sunday, December 30

[Rob]

Click Here to Read BRING IT ON Moves Up Broadway Closing Date to Sunday, December 30

[jeffmiele]

Any chance Big Fish will cancel us Chicago run and open cold on Broadway. I hear they need a high fly space for the show and the St. James would be a perfect theater.

[frogs_fan85]

They would have to recast the lead role as Norbert Leo Butz is going to be in DEAD ACCOUNTS through February.

[qolbinau]

Great. Recast with Michael C. Hall. (is he still tied up with DEXTER?)

[RippedMan]

I think it would be wise not to move too quickly - look what happened to Leap of Faith last year. It needed some time to be reworked.

I wonder what will take the St. James. Such a great space, but so difficult to sell.

[Mildred Plotka]

Hall would be filming the final season of Dexter, and unable to do it in the Spring.

[ClumsyDude15]

I wonder if Bring It On will go back on tour - it'd be sort of silly to not use that STRAIGHT FROM BROADWAY buzz to good use.

[bdn223]

Bring it on was always scheduled to go back on tour come February...so peoples guessing game of whats going to replace it is somewhat unjust. Jujamcym likly knows whats going to replace it and has had the St James booked since the end of Summer. If Into the Woods can get Amy Addams back it will likly take the James, other options include Nutty Professor and Allegence.

[ClumsyDude15]

Thank you so much for that tidbit about the show going back on tour - I am really glad it will continue on and be able to be seen elsewhere.

[somethingwicked]

bdn, though the original talk was always that the show would go back out on the road shortly after finishing on Broadway in the spring, as the article says, they're now talking about waiting until the road markets begin their 2013-2014 season programming next fall. As of now, it is not booked in any further cities, let alone anytime as soon as February.

To be honest, I've been told that the re-launch of the tour is actually not yet a sure thing. The incentive to do it would primarily be for the show to play a lot of the secondary markets that the original incarnation missed the first time around, but the producers are being diligent about checking interest from those markets to see if it's worth their while. Given the fact that the cheer work involved makes future licensing for the show next to impossible, I'm sure they're going to want to wring as much profit out of this production of it as they can, and another year in additional cities would provide exactly that.

The other element to consider is that another run on tour would most likely necessitate an almost entirely new company, and that's a huge undertaking to keep in mind, both in terms of re-rehearsing such a complex piece and finding another crop of talent who can meet such unconventional demands.

[darquegk]

You don't think they'll license the show because of all the cheer work involved? I think that's one of the reasons they WILL license the show. It'll rarely be done extremely well, granted, but anywhere where the dance and cheer programs are going strong, people will say "We should do BRING IT ON- we've got the talent for it!"

[finebydesign]

"I wonder if Bring It On will go back on tour - it'd be sort of silly to not use that STRAIGHT FROM BROADWAY buzz to good use."

Firstly there is no "Broadway Buzz" about Bring It On. The reason the show was there in the first place was a strategic budgeting move. One of the biggest reason is that the Bring It on Tour does not have to go dark, still pay staff and then pay for rehearsals when the tour remounts. Essentially this is just another stop for the tour and the cost-savings is strategic.

There is a huge investment here and it's not like the planning for Rebecca.
Read more about Fela and Bring it On tours on Broadway

[ClumsyDude15]

I meant in the sense that you could hype up the buzz for the tour going back out with the tag line - "STRAIGHT FROM BROADWAY". I'm aware this was basically just another tour stop, like the Hair: Summer of Love not too long ago, it's as you said a strategic profit saver.

I would think that it would venture back out on the road because as you and another poster mentioned - there's profit to be made and markets that the tour didn't hit last time that they could make money off.

[somethingwicked]

darquegk, I disagree.

Between the athletic events they cheer for and their own competitions throughout the year, I'd venture to guess it would be incredibly difficult for cheerleading squads and drama departments in high schools to collaborate on a theatrical production. Besides, even if that was possible, that's still only amateur productions of the show. Regional theater licensing would still be next to impossible, which again, cuts down on future profits.

[Wildcard]

I guess if they want to milk it, they should make a Direct to Video version of the musical the same way they did those endless sequels to the movie. That would actually be a DTV I would look forward to. It shouldn't cost too much either since no unusual infrastructure would be needed to film the scenes.

[somethingwicked]

Wildcard, oddly enough, the musical is almost entirely based on one of those direct to video sequels.

BRING IT ON: ALL OR NOTHING (which was the third one, I think?) starred Hayden Panettiere as a privileged cheerleader who is forced to relocate to an urban high school, where she has to win over their resident diva (played by Beyonce's sister Solange) and eventually join their squad to face off against her old team in competition. There's even a former friend on the lead character's old squad who assumes her place as captain and turns out to be a scheming psycho.

Pretty much the exact same plot as the musical.