‘Carrie’ Back Again On Broadway: But Why?

COMMENTS (14)

• Sounds weird, I know, but might have a chance if re-tooled. It’s largely believed that a big factor in the original’s fiasco was the poor production design and awful costumes.

  Comment by Jack — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 8:38am PDT  Reply to this post

• Off-Broadway, though, isn’t it? The NYT piece seems to indicate that; also, that losses were $7 million. But what’s a million among friends, eh?

  But interesting — I hadn’t known it didn’t sink until midway through; I assumed the totality was junk.

  Comment by Randee — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 8:53am PDT  Reply to this post

• why on earth would MCC think this would work with the same 1988 creative team, with the exception of the director? it was a flop then, and no matter how much lipstick you put on those slaughtered pigs, those pigs are dead –it didn’t work. the original/new score was written by composers (Gore and Pitchford) who haven’t had a hit on their hands in 20+ years. the book writer was a screenplay writer, never a playwright, and his adaptation was a structural joke. come on producers, do something different. start from scratch. give it new “blood” by finding a genuine creative team.

  Comment by dirtybird — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 8:59am PDT  Reply to this post

• Mike, the Lortel is MCC’s off-broadway house. This is coming back because it’s a camp cult classic, musical theater fans are obsessed with the glorious badness that is CARRIE.

  Comment by moxie the maven — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 9:06am PDT  Reply to this post

• Carrie reviving on Broadway is big news. It playing a small Off-Bway house really isn’t. I think it’s a good fit to bring back such an infamous title amongst theater fans…

  Comment by Bart — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 9:24am PDT  Reply to this post

• There’s a reason Ken Mandelbaum’s book about the biggest musical flops ever is called “Not Since Carrie.”

  Comment by Roger — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 10:29am PDT  Reply to this post

• Certain stories just seem to work better in certain formats, for “Carrie” film is definitely bettter than stage. On film you can do more justice to the supernatural aspects( using FX ), than you could on any stage production.

  Comment by Rich — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 11:38am PDT  Reply to this post

• I have heard bootleg recordings of Carrie, both the UK cast with Barbara Cook and the US cast with Betty Buckley, and parts of it are just plain thrilling. I would be very interested in seeing a revival of Carrie. I don’t know if it really can be fixed, but I’d love to see what they do.

  Comment by incredulous — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 12:08pm PDT  Reply to this post

• the why question? simple- john buzzetti- he wanted to see it happen and he is simply the best agent in ny to get things done. it was a passion of his along with his director client- tell me that george lane would be able to do the same thing? (or his ex-gersh cohorts seth and joyce?)

  he really is unstoppable in the best possible way

  Comment by anthony Thompson — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 1:34pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Mike, apparently you missed ‘Carrie’ becoming a small theater cult classic. Runs of the show in small venues throughout the US and Canada did great business with people showing up with tarps and wearing raincoats in hopes of getting to sit within the range of thrown buckets of fake blood.

  I don’t have any greater hopes of the revamp having success than you do, I think they are more likely to kill the splatter camp element that created the small surge of cult success off the beaten path, but I think that this is at least part of the justification being used to get the ball rolling on the reboot.

  Comment by Chris in NM — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 2:31pm PDT  Reply to this post

• I was lucky enough to see ‘Carrie’ on Broadway after it opened and a day or 2 before it shut down. It was unlike any theatre experience I have ever had. The audience loved it, and were on their feet throughout it. The last number of the first act (I remember How those Boys Could Dance) by Betty Buckley & Linzi Hateley was both fantastic and exciting. It still needed some work, but was not the disaster its been labeled (albeit by people who have never seen it, nor heard its music).

  One has to remember that Carrie opened during the ‘big musical’ era of imports from London’s West End (Les Miserable, Phantom of the Opera, Starlight Express, et al). The critics hated nearly everything (except ‘memorable’ shows like ‘The Will Rogers Follies’), and it was a very competitive environment. Also, at its’ heart, ‘Carrie’ is a camp musical, and most likely fits off-Broadway with a much smaller budget (and a more fitting audience).

  I think it’s a wise decision. Needless to say I will be back for a second viewing.

  Comment by Michael — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 2:33pm PDT  Reply to this post

• You’re right, Anthony. It makes perfect sense that a flawed, sham piece of musical theater was pitched by a similarly flawed, sham of an agent. He’s lucky to be in the same breath as those agents you mentioned.

  Comment by Susan Stiner — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 3:14pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • Really? name how many best musical nominations in the past 5 years george lane has garned for his clients? or what clients remain with joyce (that haven’t gone to george)? or how many people actually know who seth is?

    Comment by anthony Thompson — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 7:03pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Makes me wonder how much my original never-worn Carrie sweatshirt from the original production will go for -

  Comment by Claire — Wednesday October 6, 2010 @ 7:00pm PDT  Reply to this post