Friday Tidbits- The Addams Family is going on tour

The Addams Family producers announced today that they are planning a national tour in the fall of 2011. It seems like a pretty unusual move to make this announcement only one month into their Broadway run, and may speak volumes about their belief in recouping. If they feel like the bad word of mouth is killing their advances beyond this summer, a tour might be the best shot to reclaim some of that 16.5 million dollar investment.

Meanwhile, somewhere in New York Michael Riedel is already thinking of new ways to bury the show.

"The Addams family will September of next year, in what is sure to be referred to as the next 9/11 disaster".

"The Addams family tour will launch in New Orleans, a city that has already suffered enough and doesn't need further punishment".

Wait for it, you'll read all about it next week.

-It was also announced today that last year's fringe festival hit, Abraham Lincoln's Big Gay Dance Party will get a 6 week off Broadway run at the Acorn Theater this summer. The show chronicles the case of an Illinois school teacher whose school play treads into the issue of Lincoln's sexuality. It is a three act piece that shows the story from the pespetive of three different characters. Each night, the audience votes as to what order they will see the show in.

I had mixed feelings on the show when I saw it last summer. The concept was cute for about the first act (from the perspective of a journalist covering the story). By the time, the second act (from the perspective of a local politician) was done, the show seemed contrived and preachy. There apparently will be a new director and creative team overseeing this Acorn production and I am interested to see if the show keeps the same buzz that it had at the Fringe Festival

Can Raul Esparza's new show make the "Leap" to Broadway.

The much talked about stage version of "Leap of Faith" is finally ready to premiere this summer in Los Angeles. The show is an adaptation of the moderately successful 1992 Steve Martin film, about a flim-flam faith healer (Martin modeled the role after televangelist Benny Hinn).

The show, which has been in development for 4 years, features a score by Alan Menken, and was originally set to be directed by Taylor Hackford, best known for his work on the film "Ray". At that point, Hugh Jackman's name was also attached to project in the Steve Martin role, while Kelli O' Hara and Sutton Foster have been attached to previous readings.

Since then, Hackford has withdrawn from the project and has been replaced by Rob Ashford (Promises, Promises). Ashford has also confirmed that Raul Esparza will be starring in the LA production.

This should be an interesting project to say the least. The gospel influenced score would seem to be right up Menken's alley and should lend itself nicely to big, Broadway, production numbers. In fact, Hackford's original interest in the show was said to be largely due to how impressed he was with the music. The bigger question for me is whether Esparza is right for the part ??? I greatly admire his work, but don't know if I picture this being a good fit for him.

Below is a youtube clip from the movie. What do you think?? Can Raul pull of the role?? Is he a big enough name to carry an original Broadway musical?? And after you watch this clip, isn't kind of obvious that this is "Music Man" with a gospel choir???

What we learned from the Outer Critics Circle Nominations

If today's news from the Outer Critics Circle is indicative of what's to come when the Tony nominations are announced, we may be headed for a big controversy in the best musical category.

First, a little background. This is the first year since 2000 that the Tonys will not be presenting an award for "Special Theatrical Event", a category deemed necessary when Susan Stroman's dance show, Contact, won best musical ten years ago despite being a dance show with recorded music and no live vocalists. The award has been a valuable way to acknowledge shows that were neither plays nor musicals, such as Billy Crystal's 700 Sundays, Liza Minelli's concert at the Palace, and Will Ferrell's George W Bush one man show.

The Tony committee elected to abandon the award this year, which just so happens to be a season where the most buzzed about shows have been "special theatrical events". Two productions, in particular, were nominated for "Best Musical" by the Outer Critics Circle earlier today. The docu-musical Sondheim on Sondheim, and Twyla Tharp's Frank Sinatra tribute, Come Fly Away. The first show is a glorified cabaret, repackaging Sondheim's entire catalog with no original music to be found. The second is a dance piece that utilizes prerecorded vocals over a live orchestra. Are these shows in the spirit of what the "Best Musical" category embodies?? Probably not. Is either one going to be talked about in 20 years the way that last season's Billy Elliot and Next To Normal were?? Not a chance. Is one of these shows likely to win a Tony over Memphis or American Idiot?? Perhaps, and there sure will be some ticked off producers if that happens.

At the end of the day, this is a function of it being a bad year for musicals. The best offerings came courtesy of revivals like Finian's Rainbow and La Cage Aux Folles, while new shows like The Addams Family and American Idiot did not live up to the hype. The biggest loser in all of this is probably the producers of Memphis, a show that received solid reviews, but hasn't done huge box office business. It could stand to benefit the most from a Tony win, one that would have been easier if it weren't up against non-musicals in their category.

What do you think? Should the Tony Awards bring back the "Special Theaterical Event" category?

All we need is a little patience...

No, it's not a suggestion to produce a Guns N Roses jukebox musical, but it could be a direct message to the producers who seem eager to get their shows to New York before the product is ready.

Yesterday, as I was editing my Sondheim on Sondheim review, I kept going back to how many times songs and shows require rewrites to get it right. Before he gave us "Comedy Tonight", Sondheim wrote "Forget War". Before he gave us the masterpiece that is "Being Alive", there was "Multitudes of Amy's" and "Happily Ever After". Even a genius songwriter like Sondheim is going to strike out on occasions before hitting the grand slam.

To listen to his narratives throughout the docu-musical, it would appear that his shows were given more time to come together at their out of town previews, through trial and error. Songs were rewritten, scenes were reworked, and roles were re-cast. The process might have been tedious, but very necessary.

The biggest question is this. Are today's playwrights and producers giving their shows the same level of time to incubate??? Or are they such slaves to their own production schedules that they are rushing a show to Broadway before it's ready. It's almost equivalent to a mom-to-be asking for a C-section at 7 months into the pregnancy because she just wants to be a mom right now.

There is evidence to suggest that a creative team's patience will payoff in the long run. No show in recent memory has received more critical praise than Next to Normal, but it was a 7 year journey from it's first workshop to opening at the Booth Theater. In fact, during it's off Broadway run, the show was heavily criticized by some for failing to strike a proper balance between pathos and comedy. The show went back to the regional level, where it was reworked at Arena stage. Comic songs and glitzy production numbers were replaced with numbers more emotionally compatible with the book. That version of Next to Normal received rave reviews, and has gone on to be a critical and financial success.

Rock of Ages went through considerable changes after out of town performances in LA and Las Vegas. It was three years before the show would open in New York, where it was nominated for 5 Tony Awards and has now been optioned as a film with New Line Cinema.

On the other end of the spectrum, there is The Addams Family, which was killed by critics during it's Chicago previews. Directors were fired, show doctors were brought in, songs were rewritten. But the whole process happened in 90 days to meet an April timetable to open. The result is a show that's often times funny, but comes across like a patchwork quilt of creative visions that nobody could decide on. With 16.5 million dollars at stake, and A-list talent in place, didn't the show deserve more time to be polished??

I was amazed to read that Shrek would be opening in London, after going through extensive rewrites from it's failed Broadway run?? Really?? Dreamworks waited until AFTER the show failed to fix the problems with the script? For the record, I very much enjoyed Shrek, but they never were able to figure out how to stage the very expensive dragon sequence after the show was panned in Seattle.

I'd love to hear from some of the insiders who read this blog. Is there something I'm missing? Is the cost too great to delay your opening to fix the material? Is it more expensive than losing your investment if the show fails??

Looking forward to your comments and emails on this.

Review- Sondheim on Sondheim

Sondheim on Sondheim is the most high profile, and comprehensive, of this year's birthday celebrations for the man who is arguably the greatest songwriter in the history of Broadway. Even the Sondheim works that have been commercial flops over the years are still analyzed and studied line by line like it were the Zapruder film. While we know much about his body of work, we haven't known too much about the man himself. This review gives us a peek behind the curtain and into the mind of Sondheim.

Let's be upfront--- the Show isn't for everyone. Casual fans will probably leave asking why they had to sit through a song that was cut from Gypsy, rather than hear any of the well known showstoppers from the production. But this is precisely the thing that sets this review apart from other Sondheim inspired tributes.

While the "stars" of the show are technically Vanessa Williams, Barbara Cook, and Tom Wopat, there is no bigger star on the stage than Sondheim himself, who narrates his life story and career on cleverly designed LCD screens, laid out like Scrabble tiles across the stage. Much of the interview footage was recently taped in Sondheim's New York apartment, but also includes archived material from old television appearances on programs like the "Mike Douglas Show".

Younger Broadway fans like myself will automatically be struck by the fact that there was a day when television talk show hosts had Broadway composers as guests to talk about their craft. It's nearly impossible to imagine Stephen Schwartz being invited to discuss Wicked with Ellen Degeneres or Jay Leno in this day and age. Some might say that this speaks as to the irrelevance of Broadway with mainstream audiences in 2010. I prefer to think that it's because there is no composer in the last 30 years whose work is as well crafted as Sondheim.

Over the course of the show, we learn that the genius didn't always happen on the first try. The cast performs the original opening song from A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum as Sondheim explains the difficulty of writing a song that was catchy, but also set the proper tone for a relatively bawdy (at least at the time) comedy. We also see treated to all three of the original endings for Company, before Sondheim settled on "Being Alive" (breathtakingly performed by Norm Lewis). Sondheim certainly gives the impression that much of his work had been reworked extensively before their Broadway runs, in an effort to get it right. I wonder if that much care is still put into the musicals of today. One has to imagine that the "Addams Family" creative team would have benefited from extra time to sort through it's script and music issues before being rushed to the Lunt-Fontaine Theater.

The only downside of the show is that some of the numbers don't make sense when staged out of context. "You Could Drive A Person Crazy" is supposed to be a song of frustration sung to Robert by three girlfriends. Instead, we see Tom Wopat and Barbara Cook awkwardly try to sell themselves as a married couple. Tom Wopat is equally awkward when paired up as a love interest to Leslie Kritzer, who is half his age, and played his daughter in last year's flop A Catered Affair. In fact, Mr. Wopat is largely responsible for most of the evening's misses, none bigger than him wandering aimlessly across the stage feigning anger during "Epiphany" from Sweeney Todd.

The female leads are far more effective. Vanessa Williams looks stunning, and is totally in her element with a goose bump inducing version of "Losing My Mind". Many younger theater goers I know have been critical of Barbara Cook's performances in the show. At 82 years old, her voice isn't what it once was, but nobody in the cast does a better job of finding the emotional truth in Sondheim's lyrics than she does. Perhaps it's something about people who have lived long enough to endure every experience of human life, because Angela Landsbury is stealing the show a few blocks away in A Little Night Music.

But the evening's most touching and poignant moments are when Sondheim opens up about his family. In great detail, he explains how Oscar Hammerstein was the biggest male influence in his life. His relationship with his mother was far more strained, as we find out that his mother called giving birth her biggest regret in life. James Lapine seamlessly segues that story into a stirring performance of "Children Will Listen" from Into The Woods.

It's a shame that the Tony Awards have eliminated the "Best Theaterical Event" category, because Sondheim on Sondheim is certainly deserving of the recognition. Then again, it's not like Sondheim needs any more accolades than the one he already has---- living legend

Grade: A-

The "Glee" Phenomenon- is Broadway going mainstream??

Ken Davenport recently blogged at his "Producers Perspective" site about how Broadway is no longer producing any crossover hits for top 40 radio. While I disagree with Ken as to the extent that Broadway influenced the pop charts back in the day, there are a handful of showtunes that crossed to the mainstream.

In 1971, Judy Collins version of "Send In The Clowns" was a top 10 hit at adult contemporary radio. The soundtrack to Jesus Christ Superstar spawned "I Don't Know How To Love Him", which was a minor US hit for Yvonne Elliman in the 70's. Murray Head's version of "One Night In Bangkok" from the Chess soundtrack, managed to climb into the top 10 on the Hot 100. Stephanie Mills went to #1 on the R&B charts with "Home" in 1989 (years after she performed the show on New York stages). The most recent win came when Madonna's remix of "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" landed on the dance charts in the mid 90's. While they are all nice, individual stories, it's not exactly overwhelming evidence to suggest that Broadway was ever a consistently important piece of the pop music landscape.

Nevertheless, the theater community is buzzing today after hearing that the latest Glee Soundtrack would debut at #1 on next week's Billboard Charts. With such beloved theater stars like Lea Michelle and Matthew Morrison being a prominent part of the show, it proves that Broadway can once again rule the charts, right??

Well, kind of.

The album that will top the charts is a CD of Madonna cover songs, not showtunes. In fact, in their three combined soundtrack releases, you can only find three Broadway songs represented on the playlist. For every "Defying Gravity", there is five Journey songs.

Glee is successful because of the same formula that has worked for Mama Mia, Rock of Ages, and the recently opened American Idiot. Take a catalog of previously successful pop music, and "swish it up" (thanks Sue Sylvester") for the Broadway stage. The formula is commercially successful, but it doesn't mean that Broadway is dictating pop culture. Instead, it's imitating it.

That isn't meant as a negative. "Glee" is tremendously important for Broadway in the sense that it has given mainstream credibility to some very talented stage performers. At some point, Lea Michelle is going to head back to the stage and be a massive box office draw. That's going to be great news for producers, investors, and more importantly, the other actors and crew members who will stay employed because they are in a show with someone that audiences are paying to see.

In the meantime, let's not hold our breath waiting to hear Lady Gaga cover "Defying Gravity" on you local top 40 station anytime soon.

Tuesday Tidbits- A "Little" Problem for "Night Music"??

If you and I were to put together a list of 10 musicals to revive that were certain to pack houses, we likely wouldn't have included "A Little Night Music". In fact, I doubt it would have made a top 25 list. However, through some very savvy and inspired casting decisions, the shows producers have done big business despite mixed reviews. The team of Catherine Zeta-Jones and Angela Landsbury have overcome a rather shoddy directing job by Trevor Nunn, and have provided a formidable 1-2 punch at the box office. However, their contracts are up in June, and neither one is staying on with the production.

This creates a precarious situation for the future of the show, which probably needs around another 5 or 6 months of big houses to get closer to recouping. The production is good, but not strong enough to without a big name on the marquee. How do you replace an Oscar winner and multiple Tony winner?

According to reports yesterday on PerezHilton.com, the producers are negotiating with the real life mother/daughter team of Gwyneth Paltrow and Blythe Danner. It's certainly an interesting idea, especially if Gwyneth's role in the upcoming "Iron Man 2" revives a career that hasn't included a commercial, mass appeal project since 2002. It would seem to all hinge on whether people still care about Gwyneth? Or is she perceived as the "woman who is married to that guy from Coldplay"? Time will tell

In Other News:

What happens when the budget for your "Spiderman" musical matches the budget of the film franchise? You end up with a dark theater with lots of posters and no stars. Alan Cumming has officially dropped out of the show to take a role on an ABC TV Series. Spiderman is allegedly still opening next February at the Hilton Theater.

-Tony nominee J. Robert Spencer has announced that he is leaving "Next to Normal" in May. Perhaps this is wishful thinking on my part, but this seems like a perfect time for the amazing Brian D'arcy James to return to the show. He originated the role of Dan in both the Arena Stage and Off Broadway incarnations of the show, before leaving to play the title role in Shrek.

By the way, does Mr. James still kick himself over that decision? I'm in the minority of people who loved Shrek, and loved his performance in particular. Still though, one show went on to win a Tony Awards and a Pulitzer... the other lost the gross national product of Tanzania for it's investors.

Love Theater? We've got an app for that. Oh wait, just kidding.

One of the radio stations that I manage here in Sacramento is currently in development for our own Iphone application. Listeners will be able to listen to our radio station on their phone 24/7, as well as access video content and podcasts from our website, see an up to the minute feed from the DJ blogs, connect with our social networking sites, and more. Will this make an impact in the monthly radio ratings? Perhaps not, but it is a powerful marketing tool that keeps us top of mind over our competitors, and keeps us relevant in the ever-busy lifestyle of today's youth culture.

I don't say this to brag because, to be quite frank, my parent company should have been rolling these apps out for their radio stations 18 months ago. An estimated 22 million people purchased Iphones in 2009, and that number is going to double in 2010.

If radio stations are late to the party, then Broadway producers are light years behind. A recent search for Broadway related Iphone applications listed only a handful of results, none of them particularly impressive. New York producers are sinking $100,000 a week into TV campaigns for "maintenance marketing" in an age where many viewers are fast forwarding through commercials on their DVR. Yet, there is a relatively inexpensive way to connect with not just the New York audience,but tourists who have already made plans on how to spend their theater dollar before they get to the city....and nobody is taking advantage of it.

If I am the producer of "American Idiot" and I know that the sustainability of my show hinges on getting younger, and possibly, first time theaters goers to the St James theater, I am immediately getting an Iphone app started for my show. Imagine downloading an app where you could preview songs from the soundtrack (with a link to buy the CD and download it right to your phone). You could include video footage of the "sizzle reel" with show clips, and Green Day fans can watch interviews with Billie Joe Armstrong discussing how great it is to be a part of Broadway. You could link to the twitter page for the show (ask the Next to Normal team how vital that has been to their marketing). Most importantly, there is a direct link to Telecharge to buy tickets.

Maybe some smart producer could even develop a partnership with Apple to sell tickets directly through an Itunes account??

Come on, Broadway! I realize some 1960's musicals have been brought back to the stage over the last year, but it doesn't mean we have to keep using 50 year old marketing strategies too.

How to Lose Money on Broadway Without Really Trying

It seemed like in the 1990's, the best way to have a sure-fire hit in New York was to stage a revival. Shows like "Cabaret", "Annie Get Your Gun", and "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" all did big business. In fact, the "Chicago" revival is still running at the Ambassador theater 15 years after it opened, even spawning an Oscar nominated film version in the process.

Conversely, over the last decade, there is an equally long list of revivals that did not recoup their investment. Some of them, including the 2002 version of "Into The Woods" and the 2005 version of "La Cage Aux Folles" won tony awards. Others, like last year's "Ragtime" and "Finian's Rainbow", garnered rave reviews from critics, none of which translated into money at the box office.



It amazes me how some Broadway producers don't learn from past mistakes. For instance, does anyone believe that Kelsey Grammar is still a big enough star to guarantee huge houses for this season's "La Cage", when the show just failed 5 years ago? How about the revival of "Promises, Promises"? There is no bigger female star on Broadway than Chenowith, but there was also no bigger star than Bernadette Peters in the 90's, when she was paired with a fading TV star, and a Neil Simon script. "The Goodbye Girl" turned out to be one of the ten biggest flops of the last 20 years. Now, fast forward to 2010, replace Martin Short with Sean Hayes, throw in dated Neil Simon material from 40 years ago, and we could have another recipe for failure.


What are the two reasons to do a revival?? Most theater people will tell you this:


A) Because you are stunt casting with an A-list star (Angela Landsbury and Catherine Zeta Jones are proving to be a formidable combination right now in "A Little Night Music")

B) The source material is totally relevant to today's theater audience (The Diane Paulus revival of "Hair")


With all these things being said, there was an official announcement today that Daniel Radcliffe will return to Broadway next year in a revival of "How To Succeed in Business Without Really Trying". Don't get me wrong, the theater nerd part of me is intrigued. The businessman part of me??? Eh... not so sure.


The show was last seen in New York in the mid 90's, when Des McAnuff staged it as a star vehicle for Matthew Broderick (and John Stamos after him). The show received generally positive reviews, but closed after a 15 month run, just missing out on recouping it's investment. So what has changed in 2010? The star of the world's biggest film franchise, Daniel Radcliffe, will be on the marquee.

Radcliffe's name was also on the marquee of last season's "Equus", a show that got great reviews and didn't recoup. Of course, one could argue that younger Potter fans weren't going to get mom and dad to spring $125 a pop to take them to see full frontal Harry (not hairy) nudity onstage. But are we sure that they are going to want to pay that amount to see a story about a young man trying to scheme his way up the corporate ladder? Furthermore, is there any evidence that Daniel Radcliffe is even a draw away from the Potter movies? It's not like he's done any commercial films other than that.

Naturally, we have to wait and see how this all plays out. Maybe director Rob Ashford has a concept that will totally reinvent the show and it will be the greatest piece of art of all time. History has shown us though, even if this is an artistic success, it may not be a financial one.

N2N wins a pulitzer

The Broadway community is buzzing about "Next to Normal" winning this year's Pulitzer Prize for drama. Does the show deserve this honor? Is it true that most of the Pulitzer voters didn't see the show until the day before they cast their vote?? Did it sway their opinion? Is N2N too "commercial" to win such a prestigious award?

As for me, I don't know and I truly don't care. My question is this:

Can Alice Ripley accept on behalf of the show??

Because let's be honest, last year's Tony speech was deliciously overindulgent and the true highlight of the whole evening. Enjoy a few minutes of someone taking themselves entirely too seriously.

I can't help but wonder what other political leaders Alice could quote at the Tony Awards.

"There is a quote from George W Bush that says JUSTICE ought to be FAIR"!

Or maybe she could share a quote from California Governor, Arnold Schwartzenegger.

"There is a quote from the 'Governator' that says DON'T be economic GIRLIE MEN"

Maybe she'll step outside of the box and use some quotes right from pop culture.

"There is a quote from Lady Gaga that says GA GA OOH LA LA... watch out BAD ROMANCE"

Next To Normal is a tremendous show. Alice Ripley gives an amazing performance. But do you get the feeling that maybe it's because there's a lot of Diana in her already???

Just saying.

Green Day Takes on Broadway

My Northern California theater friends may already be acquainted with "American Idiot", as the rock opera premiered down the road at the Berkeley Repertory Theater last fall to rave reviews. The show has been tweaked, pimped all over MTV, and ready to open later this month at the St James Theater.

"American Idiot" is inspired by Green Day's 2004 concept album of the same name. Despite selling 17 million copies worldwide and winning the Grammy award for "best rock album", the CD was met with tepid reviews. In fact, Rolling Stone initially said the album was "a mess, although the songs are tough and punchy enough to work on their own". Entertainment Weekly said it was "based on a musical theater concept that periodically makes no sense".

As a Broadway show, continuity is not really the problem. It is staged expertly by Michael Mayer. The biggest problem with "American Idiot" is that we've seen most of it before. The show, in a subtle way, steals a little bit from other "Teen Angst" show that has come before it.

-Young man is seduced into a seedy underworld by a drug dealer?? We already saw that with the Acid Queen in "Tommy"

-Young man falls in love with a fellow drug addict. They make mad love after shooting each other up. Yep, saw that in "Rent"

-Young people being shipped off to fight in a war that they didn't choose? Diane Paulus' tribe did it better in the revival of "Hair".

-Elevated platform in the center of the stage?? Mayer used the same concept in his Tony winning "Spring Awakening".

There is one other significant issue with "American Idiot". The source material was Green Day's middle finger to the Bush Administration in a year where the apathy of the young voter had reached an all time high. In fact, among the sound clips used in the shows opening is the former President saying "you are either with us or you are with the terrorists". However, a mere 4 years later, Barack Obama was able to mobilize many of these "slackers" and convince them that "Yes, We Can" create change. One can argue exactly how much his administration has accomplished, but you can't argue that, more than ever, the young generation is taking part in the process. It's for this reason that parts of "American Idiot" just don't feel current.

The story is most effective and poignant as we watch the journey of Tunny, who joins the military and gets deployed to fight overseas. Part of this is because of our current administration's policy in Afghanistan, part of it is because Stark Sands (taking over the role in NY), is the most compelling presence and the best singer on the stage.

Despite an overall negative tone towards the prospects of young people, the show still has an amazing energy, largely in part to a passionate cast that is giving every fiber of their being to the performance. The orchestrations by Tom Kitt (Next to Normal) are magnificent and played wonderfully by the 8 piece band onstage. The choreography amazingly combines a grunge club mosh pit with classical dance. Then there is the music, featuring a multitude of ear candy, radio hits, composed by Green Day's Billie Joe Armstrong.

In five years, "American Idiot's" greatest contribution to Broadway might not be the piece itself. The matinee I attended was brimming with theater newbies--- Green Day fans who would otherwise never see a Broadway show. My girlfriend and I were approached in the lobby by two girls asking us "how much we paid for a Playbill". The theater needs "American Idiot", much like we needed "Tommy" and "Rent" before it, to serve as an on ramp to the theater for new audiences.

Grade- B

In Defense of "The Addams Family"

It seems like the fashionable thing in New York right now is to bash the new "Addams Family" musical that just opened at the Lunt-Fontanne Theater. In fact, "the most powerful reviewer on the planet", Ben Brantley, might have written the most scathing critique ever for a show not named "Glory Days". If you only read the reviews, you would think people would be screaming for the exits like a Max Bialystock show in "The Producers"

However, when I attended the final preview last Wednesday night, a funny thing was happening around me in the mezzanine. It was the sound of laughter. I dare say the audience was actually enjoying what Brantley called a "ghastly musical". I attended the show with my girlfriend (a die-hard theater snob) and a friend from Sacramento (a prominent local theater director in that city). As we left the theater that evening, the two of them graded the show anywhere from an A- to a B+.

Is this to say that "Addams Family" is a great show? No. Did I personally think the show was a B+? No. Will the show win a Tony for best musical?? Not a chance.

The critics aren't incorrect in addressing the problems with this production. The story is unfocused, with a storyline that's already been done better in shows like "La Cage". The score by Andrew Lippa is uneven. The entire second act feels like an episode of "Oprah's Favorite Things", designed less to advance the plot, and more to pacify the egos of the top tier Broadway actors (YOU get a song... and YOU get a song...and YOU get a song).

"Addams Family" is by no means a perfect show--- but it is still a fun night, with many laugh out loud moments. In many respects, it is the inverse of last season's atrocious revival of "Guys and Dolls", where the producers wasted money stunt casting actors who were completely wrong for the show. Lauren Graham played Adelaide like she was Corky Thatcher in "Life Goes On". The actors were so bad, that they dragged down what is essentially the quintessential Broadway musical. However, in the case of"Addams", it's fun to see what happens when great actors elevate bad material. The majority of the evening's laughs are provided by Nathan Lane, who earns every bit of his reported $30,000 a week paycheck finding jokes that other actors couldn't. Kevin Chamberlain provides an act 2 highlight with his song "The Moon and Me". The always reliable Jackie Hoffman makes Grandma Addams a 60's Woodstock stoner. Critics might say that Chamberlain's song is gimmicky and Hoffman is over the top, but they got huge laughs all night. Isn't that what matters? Carolee Carmello's act 1 song, "Waiting" is a great moment that gives some color to an otherwise one dimensional character. I imagine that this is why, as a producer, you spend the extra money to hire A-list, proven talent. They just might be good enough to save your show.

On a different note, I think "The Addams Family" will also be a powerful study in how much clout reviewers still have in this day and age. Do theatergoers really care what Brantley thinks about a show? Or will they pay the money to make their own judgement? Theater snobs who read reviews may very well never go see "Addams". Then again, perhaps a musical based on an old cartoon isn't something that's in their wheelhouse to begin with. That's why those patrons have "Next to Normal" to masturbate to.

Remember, very few movie critics will say nice things about an Adam Sandler project. Yet, Sandler has a remarkably steady track record of films that make big money at the box office. His work may seem a little "lowest common denominator", but it appeals to families and middle America. Based on the standing ovation I saw last Wednesday night, I'm willing to guess that the tourists and families like the show. If there are enough to shell out $125 a pop, maybe this show won't die a slow and painful death...even if that's how the "Addams Family" would prefer to go.