Jump to content


- - - - -

Biggest Musical Theatre Flops Ever ?!


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#31 jamescrispy94

jamescrispy94

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 527 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 12:05 PM

The last Cameron Mackintosh Oliver! tour with Russ Abbott and Gary Wilmot. Wasn't it cancelled halfway through due to low ticket sales?

#32 Matthew Winn

Matthew Winn

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 2898 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bletchley

Posted 30 September 2012 - 12:06 PM

View PostJamiem, on 30 September 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

That's your opinion

(I do hate it when people say that (likewise with "I'm entitled to my opinion"), because it gives the impression that they think those words somehow nullify everything that has been said against them and frees them from the need to present any arguments of their own.)

Your posts so far seem to suggest that you think "flop" and "biggest flop ever" are synonymous and that any show that doesn't make a profit is a one of the biggest flops ever. Given that only a minority of shows recoup, that would mean that over half of all musical productions ever to reach the stage would qualify.

What's your definition of "biggest flop ever", and how does it differ from just "flop"?

(Edited to add...)
Or are you taking "biggest flop ever" to mean "big shows that had decent runs but still failed to recoup"? (In which case, why not say that?)
I have always hated eggs. I remember back when I was a sperm I tried to head-butt one. It did not end well.

#33 Jamiem

Jamiem

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 630 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 September 2012 - 01:11 PM

All we were doing was exchanging what some people might find interesting information, and they did -
I was not trying to answer an 'A' level question

#34 Titan

Titan

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3362 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 01:51 PM

It would help if the original poster clarified their definition

#35 FireFingers

FireFingers

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 499 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 September 2012 - 03:28 PM

Lord of the Rings is an interesting one. A lot of the technical people behind it view it as a "concord moment", the pinacle of technical theatre that hasn't been supersede since. Going round Autograph sound they have more pictures of that show than any other.

#36 MusicalTalk

MusicalTalk

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 30 September 2012 - 05:06 PM

LOTR was certainly a technical triumph.  There's no denying Warchus, Howell, Kieve, Nightingale and all the other amazing talent involved in that show (and many others) are talented... the issue was the story was too long for an evening in the theatre.  It still lasted a good amount of time and many people were able to see it.
MusicalTalk - The UK's Musical Theatre Podcast
http://www.musicaltalk.co.uk

#37 DanielWhit

DanielWhit

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2293 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:26 PM

View PostJamiem, on 29 September 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

Wizard of oz
Marguerite
Dreamboats and petticoats
Evita
Every transfer from the chocolate factory

View PostJamiem, on 29 September 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Avenue q
Million dollar quartet
Betty blue eyes
Mary poppins
Cabaret
Saturday night fever
Crazy for you
Pricilla queen of the desert

Avenue Q? That can't have not recouped!

I'd also be extremely surprised if Crazy for You didn't, its set up costs beyond the Open Air production were minimal (which made money in itself) and if it didn't make money for the company it would have not had lasted six months.

Dreamboats and Petticoats may not have been that great a musical (in my eyes) but it surely also made money, else tours wouldn't still be mounted and there wouldn't be a new rumour of it coming back into town.

I know little of the stories for many of the others to be sure about. Of which production of Evita do you speak, e.g.?

#38 Titan

Titan

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3362 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:45 PM

Id be more surprised if crazy for you did recoup in such a short time

In a way avenue q wouldnt surprise me, ticket price was always low and sold well on the day. Id imagine it covered its running costs bit actually pay off its investment and go into profit? Possibly not. Dont forget before they changed the pricing structure, early in the run it did struggle

#39 Titan

Titan

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3362 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:46 PM

The last west end revival id assumed as it was a big of a flop


#40 Jamiem

Jamiem

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 630 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:58 PM

View PostDanielWhit, on 30 September 2012 - 07:26 PM, said:




Avenue Q? That can't have not recouped!

I'd also be extremely surprised if Crazy for You didn't, its set up costs beyond the Open Air production were minimal (which made money in itself) and if it didn't make money for the company it would have not had lasted six months.

Dreamboats and Petticoats may not have been that great a musical (in my eyes) but it surely also made money, else tours wouldn't still be mounted and there wouldn't be a new rumour of it coming back into town.

I know little of the stories for many of the others to be sure about. Of which production of Evita do you speak, e.g.?
Avenue q didn't pay back, every time it moved, it cost a lot, remember
Crazy for you lost everything
Dreamboats.... Who knows really, with a Kenwright show, no investors, no public accounts
Evita, the original West End paid 8 times it's money back and the Grandage one lost money





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users