At any Broadway show, the rustling of programs is a familiar sound. The audience reads the actors' biographies and is excited to find out about their previous performances and successes. These paragraphs are often littered with impressive resumes, but in some cases the most read resume looks a little different than the others.
As I sat in the audience, engrossed in my program, I saw a hand raised high in the air in the row in front of me. “Will Daniel Radcliffe be at the stage door?” they asked. The heads of the surrounding rows all turned in anticipation of the usher's response. They further stated that they cannot guarantee that any cast member will leave the theater through the stage door after a performance, let alone a specific cast member. This explanation was met with disappointed looks from all the “Harry Potter” fans in the audience.
Radcliffe is currently starring in “Merrily We Roll Along” on Broadway and has received considerable media attention for the role, although not all positive. Variety writes: “He's fun and has moments of brilliance – but he doesn't have the stage presence of veteran Broadway actors Groff and Mendez.” Radcliffe has appeared in Broadway shows before, but doesn't have the deep traditional training or long theater resume his co-stars. The review also states that “the dissonance is not helped by the fact that Gilmour dresses him a bit like Harry Potter, with an argyle sweater vest, high-top Converse sneakers and large glasses.” It's distracting and one wonders whether Radcliffe is the draw for Broadway audiences when the musical itself – since it is real art and not commerce – might not otherwise be.”
MERRILY WE ROLL ALONG: Audiences await the appearance of actor Daniel Radcliffe, who stars in a Broadway musical.
Originally created by Stephen Sondheim, “Merrily We Roll Along” only ran sixteen official shows on Broadway before it was canceled in 1981. Since the show is written in reverse chronological order, it's not particularly easy to follow and has a complex villain “art made for the purpose of money.” This show was certainly not written to ensure the audience's convenience, since it reinforces the idea that every decision you make will have long-term effects beyond your control. The beginning of the story is only shown at the end, leaving the audience in a state of confusion for two hours and 45 minutes. The performance was captivating – it definitely deserves its place in a Broadway theater. However, many audience members seemed more enthusiastic about Radcliffe's performance after the show, when he auctioned off a prop that had been used during the performance for the Broadway Cares/Equity Fights Aids charity. Some said it was the “best part of the show” as they left the theater, with many pulling out their phones to document the experience. The prop was a piece of paper found in a typewriter that was eventually sold for $5,500. Unsurprisingly, the theater has been packed since the show reopened in October 2023. “Merrily We Roll Along” has been extended until July 2024, instead of its current March release.
Radcliffe certainly isn't the only celebrity face currently gracing Broadway stages. Grant Gustin, star of “The Flash,” recently debuted in the newly opened show “Water for Elephants.” This musical, based on the novel published in 2006 and the film made in 2011, is filled with a cast of spectacular circus performers who have previously appeared on stage with companies such as Cirque du Soleil. Before becoming a television star, Gustin appeared in other theater productions, such as the national tour of “West Side Story.”
Celebrities like Gustin are the best case scenario for Broadway shows because they have both a stage past and a name that draws audiences from far and wide because of their work on the screen. However, this is not always the case as celebrities like Colleen Ballinger, who starred in Waitress, made their Broadway debut after becoming famous. Typically, these runs are much shorter than those of more experienced pros like Gustin and Radcliffe, who, as of press time, will remain with their respective shows for the entire duration.
Another example of these short-term celebrity appearances that garnered a lot of media attention was the addition of Jordan Fisher and Lola Tung to the cast of “Hadestown.” This show was Tung's Broadway debut and in an interview with The Broadway Show she said, “I almost felt like I was intruding… Coming out of the television world right before that, I thought, I don't want to be there. “Anyway, I don't want to screw anything up.” Fisher has appeared in several Broadway shows in the past, but was sympathetic to Tung's statement. He explained that he came to Broadway the same way she did and that it was nice to see the film almost a decade later. Tung appeared on Broadway for less than two months, beginning in February 2023 and being replaced in mid-March. Fisher started at the same time but extended his run through September 15, 2024 with a small leave of absence for most of April.
The same idea of short-term celebrity appearances can be seen worldwide, with international celebrities such as Joe Sugg appearing in musicals on world stages. Sugg was cast in Waitress in London's West End and held the role for just over a month in the fall of 2019. Fans traveled from far and wide to catch a glimpse of his performance.
A San Jose State University dissertation paper by Douglas Santana states: “This new trend of hiring artists less for their theatrical talents and more for the potential economic gain that their name or image could bring to the production shows a new and different one Emphasis for Broadway Shows. “In the 21st Century.” The trend discussed ostensibly poses a challenge to the “authentic theater experience” but, alternatively, could also have a positive impact on the theater industry's finances and enable the opening and sustaining of new and long-running shows , as it satisfies both the audience and the box office.
While there is much debate about how much the shows themselves benefit from these stars' appearances, no one seems to question what financial impact they themselves are having. In a Variety article, Robert Hofler explains: “Many Hollywood stars expect to switch mediums and take roles in Broadway plays that earn more than a regular star.” Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane received money for their appearance in “The Producers” each make $100,000 a week, but the truth is that most stars end up taking a pay cut — at least compared to what one might earn in film or television. ” This truth highlights that many of these artists are actively choosing the opportunity on Broadway, prioritizing it over their own personal bank accounts. Does this sacrifice give them the right to take on a major role without serving their time in the Corps?
Many often discuss the influence of these stars on the ticket sales of these Broadway shows. Is it okay if the majority of spots are taken by people supporting their favorite star? In an article published by New York University News, Sarah Nichols stated, “Audiences who attend celebrities on Broadway cheer at the actor's mere appearance and automatically make the show about the star rather than the play itself.” They applaud the fame that is “The actor's past performance, not his current performance.” That statement proved true on March 29, when Radcliffe was greeted with loud cheers as he took the stage. Does it affect the viewer experience if the people around you aren't as engaged with the content of the show?
In the conclusion of an article by Faith Maciolek, she stated, “Overall, the act of stunt casting has proven to be a risky money-making tactic, as some celebrities are better received than others.” However, there are generally more stars who perform well on Broadway , as stars who drive down box office returns.” This statement shows that, although not appreciated by many Broadway fanatics, it has not had a negative impact on the industry as a whole. Broadway employs many people, not just those who appear on stage. Is it worth it if one person loses a chance at a role to a well-known celebrity, but hundreds of others are offered increased job security for a period of time? Does this affect the integrity of the theater arts or does it contribute to the industry's ability to thrive in an increasingly difficult economic climate?
In a telephone interview, Blake Ross, former editor-in-chief of Playbill, explained: “Theater has been dying since the beginning of time… but it will never die because it is the ultimate art form and the ultimate live experience.” This idea can prove itself as any day prove true when audiences stand, applaud and cheer after live performances around the world. Even though celebrities are used to gain audiences, the fact is that there is an audience to gain. Even if it's not popular with everyone, theater is thriving because of this casting format and will continue to thrive in the future.
Comments are closed.