Overproduced shows?

[jamiekennywicked]

I've always wondered, when people say shows are "over produced", what do they actually mean? On the Road To Broadway documentary a few of the critics mention Wicked was over produced. I imagine, due to the spectacle, but wouldn't that be at the fault of the director? (I'm not saying Wicked is overproduced, I'm quite a fan)

[mallardo]

Wicked is certainly not overproduced. Trying to think of one that was - Love Never Dies, maybe?

[MusicalBoy]

About half of Love Never Dies looked overproduced, the rest looked cheap and empty.

Of course, when they changed the colours of the geometric prints on the swimming costumes in that big rehaul they had, it all looked much better....

[ThankstoPhantom]

Overproduced means that a show's spectacle is clearly to put money on stage, rather than to serve the story. Witches of Eastwick at Drury Lane is reportedly an example of over produced. There was apparently no reason for a musical comedy to be as big as it was, and that seemed to become clear, especially when it was sized down at transfer.

[MusicalBoy]

The Dragon above the proscenium in Wicked is often mentioned in conjunction with this topic.

[Princeton Returns]

I think Sister Act could have been, it didn't need the fancy sets and if it had opened at a more mid sized theatre with a simpler set it may have run longer. Ghost possibly too, although there is the argument there that without the fancy staging you wouldn't be left with much.

Legally Blonde on Broadway id say was, the West End production got it much better and due to clever producing ran longer

[Nickhutson]

Wicked is a bit over produced because the story only really has about 4 or 5 important characters all wandering around on a big, empty stage with a new lighting cue every 2 seconds. But - people like big shows, so I find it not to be an issue.

WOE was certainly over produced - which is why it worked better when it moved to the Prince of Wales Theatre, but ultimately didn't sell because of 9/11.

Shrek on BWay (along with Legally Blonde) waas over produced. Clearly putting cheaper shows into the West End works wonders!

I wonder if anyone can think of any plays that have been over produced? I think that's a more interesting angle.

Whilst I LOVED every second of Hitchcock Blonde, I was a bit overwhelmed by the production values; completely digital set and a swimming pool under the stage! Awesome!

[jaqs]

Lord of the rings.

[ChiChi]

Before seeing the show and only seeing clips on line I was under the belief that Wicked was overproduced. But when I saw the show, I realized that sometimes it is nice to watch a spectacular piece of theatre. I also felt the same way when I saw Phantom, and felt just so for many years until quite recently. I finally accepted that you can have both spectacular shows that contain (or should contain) all of elements necessary to make a musical. But I also have the greatest appreciation for shows that don't and in many cases should not incorporate spectacle into their structure.

I guess I feel that there is plenty of room for both types.

[ClapYo'Hands]

On the play front, I thought Frankenstein was over-produced.

[ChiChi]

The dragon in Wicked is TOTALLY just for spectacle. It really serves no actual purpose to the story.

[Phantom of London]

'Lord of the rings.'

Did you know that the main producer for 'Lord of the Rings, couldn't have a better start to producing shows, he actually cut his teeth with the Really Useful Company.

The loss for the show was so big, I don't think it has ever been announced

[wetheatreboy]

I think someone's mentioned it, but Legally Blonde was definitely a classic case of something being over-produced on Broadway. The costs of the show were too high for it to keep running. When it transferred to London quite a bit of the set was cut (to make it fit the Savoy, but also to save money). Because set-up and running costs were lower it could afford to keep running a lot longer.

In my opinion an over-produced show is when the costs are too high to keep the show running successfully. Therefore I wouldn't say Wicked is necessarily over-produced. Mary Poppins could be classed as over-produced as it was the high running costs which forced the show to close. If Poppins was originally put on with the set that is touring I imagine it would still be running.

Sister Act - again already mentioned - I would count as over-produced.

It's a very fine line between producing a show you want and one you can afford!!

[kz3475]

Yeah I'd agree that Wicked isn't overproduced, but things like the dragon are really just for the spectacle. Its a shame since the dragon actually had a point in the book, but don't get me started on the differences between the book and stage.
Lord of the Rings is the only show that comes to mind when you think of the term overproduced!

[Huss417]

I'm still trying to figure out what show is WOE?

[CONAries]

Witches of Eastwick I assume.

[Huss417]

LOL,

Thanks ConAries. Maybe it is an age thing but does it take that much longer just to type the full name of the show? : )

[The Scorpion]

Sunset Boulevard, even though we all adored that mansion and that staircase and those gorgeous costumes.

Seriously, it was ridiculous for the show to be produced such that it could only break even at 85% capacity! WTF?

[mallardo]

I guess Ragtime also falls into that category - in its gigantic original production. But having said that, every production I've seen of it since has fallen short. It worked BIG.

[Nickhutson]

And speaking of that... BIG certainly comes into this conversation. I quite like the cast recording, though!