That’s just from tickets, of course. I don’t know how many t-shirts and things they may be selling.
But isn’t the big money in the national touring company along with additional productions overseas? Can they reproduce this show out of town?
T-shirts and hard hats.
There were quite a few articles in the Times in the past few months about the ethics of reviewing a show like this during previews. My reading of these and the review makes me think that one reason for running the review now was that people were paying money to see a turd because of the lack of reviews. Remember, the show had to be pressured to put the fact that it was in previews in the ads.
I don’t know how much of the audience is there hoping to see an accident, and I wonder if the Times review will reduce the box office. I’ve been following this pretty closely, and I had no idea it was this bad at this late date. It has been noted that having so many previews cuts down rehearsal and rework time, so one wonders if they even really want it to open, especially because they are making money now.
Over 70 years ago my mother saw Hellxapoppin’, where they dropped stuff on the audience. Maybe they’d do better following Joan Rivers advice of dropping a cast member on the audience every so often, just to keep the interest up, and open that way.
They should cut halfway through the all flying harness cables, and publicize it, and put in gambling concession in the lobby. The biggest payoff will be for accidents where the cables aren’t deliberately damaged in advance.
Also, perhaps a ceiling of upward pointing spikes over the orchestra pit. Ooh, maybe have all the musicians wear those German WWI spiked helmets!
The Broadway World site has harvested links to all the reviews it can find of Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark/Fun/Lights/Music, etc. If you want to see some fine writers break out the most poisonous of pens, read these links. The best IMO are the UK Telegraph and the Washington Post, with winner’s laurels to Scott Brown (not the nekkid Senator) of NY Magazine:
Brown has also captured the feeling of a longtime theater fan watching a disaster unfold with the creators seemingly helpless to lift a finger and fix the problems people have been whining about for more than two months: Spidenfreude. I intend to work this into as many conversations as I can.
It sounds like that would be very hard.
Love it.
The Times has another article today explaining why it chose to review the show yesterday. I didn’t realize at the time that a bunch of other papers also ran reviews Tuesday. I haven’t read any others, but the front page of (I think) the Daily News said the play is “dead on arrival” [in much bigger print, of course] unless changes are made.
Someone put together Spider-Man reviews in a minute on YouTube.
Here’s an article from Michael Riedel back in January on the prospect of this early review.
Is it just me, or is the sub-title of the show just exceptionally dumb?
“Turn off the dark”? What does that even mean? What does it have to do with Spider-Man? It’s vaguely poetic sounding gibberish.
No idea but I always get that song “Turn out the Light” from Scarface in my head whenever I read it!
It’s on Wikipedia:
In other words it’s an interesting malapropism (or similar mis-speaking) that the writer liked, so he made up a connection to Spider-Man. Which would be OK if it was a better title.
Or if the connection made any sense: Spidey isn’t trying to “bring light back to a dark world”, he’s trying to redeem himself for his failure to save his Uncle. He’s driven by guilt, not by trying to make the world a brighter place. So it fails on that level.
Also, if you have to explain the title, it’s a bad, bad title. Any title that needs a footnote fails. 
Unless you argue that he’s trying to turn off the dark…IN HIS SOUL!!! 
In which case, you’re back to the “If you need a footnote to explain what the title means, you fail!” rule. 
The producers have announced they’re going to fix the title of the show. Opening night has been delayed for four weeks and it’s going to cost $8 million to come up with a new one.
“Spider-man: This show is still in previews”
Maybe not so good on a t-shirt.
Unless you can play significantly bigger houses, charge significantly more for tickets, or pay significantly less to your actors, touring isn’t necessarily more profitable than staying in New York. You incur huge daily expenses in hiring lots more technicians, truck drivers, housing for the cast and crew, and renting very large venues to perform in. You’d be surprised how many local people get brought in to help load and unload a traveling show, and all of them make better than minimum wage, especially if they’re union. I helped to load Spamalot into and out of a venue last week, and I think there were thirty or thirty-five locals like me helping, and honestly, that’s a fairly small, cut-down production (only three trucks). Touring is expensive to do, and while there’s money in it, there’s not as much in it as simply having a Broadway hit on Broadway in the first place. That goes double or triple for this show, which will be extremely expensive to tour. And besides, tours don’t do very well unless people actually want to see the show, and Broadway bombs don’t draw the out-of-town crowds the way hits do.
How about “Spider-Man: The Musical Adventure”?
or
“The Spider Man” (with the famous songs “Mary-Jane the Librarian” and “Seventy-Six Evil Foes”)?
or “The Web And I”?
or “Web Side Story”?
It is going to take that long since they will be spending 30 hours a week getting the old title to as many people as possible, leaving very little time to work on the new one.