'Glory Days'... Just Passed You By

R Sat, May 10, 2008 at 07:25 AM EST

I never liked Rent. I didn't think it was that good to start off with. I think the glamour is gone from musicals. Now the producers put anything together and throw it against the wall to see if it will stick. There's no quality to it.

? Fri, May 9, 2008 at 01:04 PM EST

Part of the problem was the publicity. I live in NY and follow what's on Broadway fairly closely. I hadn't even heard of this show or about its opening. A show like "In the Heights" (which had some mixed reviews) not only had an off-bdwy run to build up an audience, but also a big advertising campaign. Without well known actors and any advertising to speak of, how would they have gotton an audience?

dsquaredfromasquared Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:42 AM EST

I saw Glory Days at Signature Theatre in DC/Arlington before it moved to Broadway. I enjoyed it, but I always saw it as more of an Off-Broadway show than Broadway. Maybe if it had started there it could have lasted longer and built an audience before moving to a Broadway-size venue with Broadway-sized expectations.

paige Fri, May 9, 2008 at 09:23 AM EST

passing strange is gonna win best musical at the Tony's this year in case you dong know...

Houstonian Jen in DC Fri, May 9, 2008 at 02:56 AM EST

The interesting thing about Spring Awakening was that it was not selling well...until it walked away with Tony Awards. When I saw Spring Awakening in January, the audience was packed with teenagers, parents who probably had no idea what they were getting into, and a bus load of senior citizens. A different audience than it had when it first opened.

I feel like the same exposure will be necessary for shows like In the Heights and Passing Strange (I'll be back next week, cast!) to find a long-term audience.

...and to To Andyroo, I think you're underselling Passing Strange. That particular angle of the classic 'artist finds himself' tale is absent on the stage (and yes, I see alot of theater). I still think the show has a fresh perspective and the entertaining format. The theater and opera junkies who I saw the performance with were pretty amazed by the performance.

To Andyroo Fri, May 9, 2008 at 02:10 AM EST

hey Andryroo, you obviously don't get to a lot of theatre because there's nothing new about Passing Strange, in it's structure, maybe i applaud you trying to pimp a good show. Don't make it sound like something it's not, yes it's a concert within a story, but it's a tried and true way to tell the story telling. I do say that the performances are awesome if the book's first act is just one long this is my life type of monologue with story in it, the second act makes up for it with a strong "cliche" but still effective ending. But you're totalling overselling the piece.

Me Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:22 AM EST

If they put the male cast in their tighty-whities, it would have been a huge hit. I'm just saying!

Andyroo Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:10 AM EST

I've seen Passing Strange 6 times. I could barely sit through Spring Awakening once.
This is where I am coming from... can American Musical Theatre continue? Yes. Is it important to find the new direction it should take (ie ALW and Stephen Sondheim's shaping of the 80s)? Yes. The structure of In The Heights and Spring Awakening are based on the same old structure. Passing Strange is based on a rock concert. Not in the way Mama Mia or We will Rock You is... it is litterally a rock concert. It is one of the most amazing shows I've seen in almost 30 years. Why? Because you don't feel like you're watching a broadway show. You feel like you are watching a 2 1/2 hour music video - a musical with a story and a story with a musical. Will people go? I don't think so. They aren't. It is too new. It does not fit in the "type of musical" check-box. It does not appeal to "Eric F"s wife because it isn't cats or Spamalot - but it might appeal to Eric - Go see it, see something new. GO

adam807 Thu, May 8, 2008 at 04:47 PM EST

Well, you mention Spring Awakening, which was only a year ago. And In The Heights is doing well this season. The "youth musical" (can Rent still qualify for that description a decade into its run?) will be fine, as long as it's GOOD. Glory Days wasn't.

paige Thu, May 8, 2008 at 04:10 PM EST

i heard Bono was composing that spider man musical- as much of a marvel fanboy I am, and i do love Julie Taymor-- i really do hate Bono so i dont know...

Grace Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:53 PM EST

Did anyone else hear that Julie Taymor ("The Lion King," "Across the Universe") was talking about staging a "Spiderman" Broadway musical, starring Evan Rachel Wood? I'm not kidding. That's either going to be an enormous special-effects-laden success or a colossal failure . . . if it ever gets off the ground.

Crystal Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:46 PM EST

I think we just need to remember that Avenue Q and Spring Awakening are both fairly new shows. It’s not like there’s been a huge drought or something. I still can’t believe they didn’t update Chorus Line with a few modern dancer struggles and kept the dated 70s stuff (albeit classic, I know, I love it, but seriously?).

Anyways, I saw 13 here in L.A. and it is a lot of infectious fun. Are they keeping the L.A. cast NineDaves? The male and female “leads” (it’s very ensemble) were quite, quite good.

Broadway Baby Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:41 PM EST

Broadway was forever changed in the 80s and has become 'event' theater more than anything else. I think there will always be an audience for musicals but unless they can translate well to the Las Vegas strip then they would be best placed off-broadway and on tour.

Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:33 PM EST

This was the most pointless post ever. Everyone who cares already found out the show closed yesterday. Youth musicals and American Idol contestants on Broadway are two topics that I've seen addressed in numerous places, so if you're not going to bring anything new to the table, why bother writing?

paige Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:30 PM EST

fading pop stars were doing broadway before american idol rejects did

kate Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:27 PM EST

I don't think Glory Days was a bad show (it did well in DC), it just overeached. Had it gone off Broadway it may well have done a lot better. I'm sad it closed as I was planning on seeing it next week.

I'm not sure what American Idol has to do with youth musicals, not all the Idols who have done Broadway did them. And as far as Fantasia goes, she was definitely brilliant, but I would never risk another show on her with her terrible attendance record. Say what you will about Clay Aiken, but, unlike Fantasia, he has an admirable work ethic and performed night after night even while recording his new album during the day.

paige Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:27 PM EST

oh ok Grace, I see what youre talking about. I agree about Rent, that show is way past its prime and the movie was a bad idea from the green light. I am shocked as s*** that Grease is still around. Who the hell wants to see that?! I thought thatd close considering the whole reality tv gimmick thing. i guess i was wrong. Tarzan shouldve closed after 1 day and any vampire musical they feel like springing up. ITS NEVER GONNA WORK! btw Snarf- "the greys", classic lol

Snarf Thu, May 8, 2008 at 03:20 PM EST

I have an idea! Murder She Wrote - The Musical starring Angela Landsbury (the greys will flock to it in droves)

Grace Thu, May 8, 2008 at 02:47 PM EST

Oh, paige, the reason I mentioned "Cats" was to answer the above question (shows you wished had closed in one night). And I agree with Mozz: the producers must've thoughts that 23/4-year-old writers would come with a built-in audience. Not necessarily. Judging by the pictures alone, it looks like an amateur throwback to Rent, which is past its prime.

NineDaves Thu, May 8, 2008 at 02:39 PM EST

i think the title certainly hurt glory days, among other things (i can't comment on the show itself, since i couldn't make it to opening, er, closing night). but is the youth musical doomed? i don't think so. besides spring awakening, there's also legally blonde, wicked, grease, hairspray, and cry baby - all appealing to a youthful audience. and that's just on broadway - off-broadway is filled with tons of young shows (saved, alterboyz, etc). you can even get younger, with the disney musicals (little mermaid may have gotten terrible reviews, but it's selling really well). and with more youth-centric musicals on the way (including 13, a new musical set to begin this septemeber with a cast of all teenagers), i think glory days' demise came down to bad marketing and a heavy year of new musicals (8 will compete for 4 tony spots - that's huge, considering we've had years of 2 best new musical nominees because THEY WERE THE ONLY NEW MUSICALS).

dan Thu, May 8, 2008 at 02:34 PM EST

There are always events/shows/people that I read about and genuinely want to see succeed. I read about this show a couple months ago and decided that it was worthy of my anticipation. I'm incredibly stunned that it has shuttered so. And I'm sad because I will 1.) never see it [at the Tonys, even...], and I'll 2.) never get the chance to listen to the CD that was not produced.
I AM the target audience for this musical (since I just finished my Junior year in college), and I wish I could spend $97.50 to keep it afloat, but it's not going to happen on a college budget.

I have no idea why i wanted Glory Days to succeed. It could be as unsatisfying as the reviewers make it out to be, but I would still want to see it for myself. Now I'll have to watch some forward-thinking community theatre troupe try and pull it off. Ew.

paige Thu, May 8, 2008 at 02:33 PM EST

Mozz is absolutely correct- the marketing scheme was all about how young these writers are. i personally dont give 2 sh**s how old the writers are- as long as theyre good at it. i do have a question though, why even bother mentioning Cats? Cats has nothing to do with the target demographic this article was about- but to answer the question about Cats- the reason why it went on for so long was 1) tourists 2) children and 3) excellent marketing campaign!

Mozz Thu, May 8, 2008 at 02:10 PM EST

It seems to me that Producers thought the show would sell because they could market it as written by 23 and 24 year olds. hmm?! Did they stop to consider if it was good? I mean, I have a 9 year old niece, she makes up her own songs and stories, some of them are pretty damn good. Can we set I said up a meeting with the producers? cause dewd, she may just be the next "closed" thing.

Elizabeth Thu, May 8, 2008 at 02:06 PM EST

This show may have done well off-off broadway or off-broadway. But let's face it, Broadway is about the spectacle in musicals and brilliant unparalleled writing in its plays. (this has been a banner year for the theatre in NYC.) but It has no room for mediocrity, or for amateurs and small musicals are not what I pay one hundred dollars for; that may work in D.C. but New York, way too much at stake.

George Lang Thu, May 8, 2008 at 01:58 PM EST

The fear that "Glory Days" was a Springsteen jukebox musical was my initial fear, too. I sincerely hope Springsteen never grants license for such an atrocity.
http://blog.newsok.com/staticblog/

Eli Thu, May 8, 2008 at 01:47 PM EST

The state of theatre musical or otherwise is not doomed. It just has to be good theatre. Quality work will always find its audience, it made take time, but the cream rises to the top. you want to see a young man create Amazing theatre, Go see IN THE HEIGHTS!!! that is youthful and stunning all at once. You put GLORY Days next to IN THE HEIGHTS, and Glory looks like the crap that it is.

Sarah Thu, May 8, 2008 at 01:46 PM EST

How can you ask "are youth musicals doomed" without citing one of the BIGGEST Broadway hits of the last few years--Spring Awakening. Now, it's not my favorite show, but no one can deny the talents of the young people in it nor the enthusiasm young adults have shown it. And many teen girls cling to their Wicked cast recording just as much as they oogle David Archuleta pictures on facebook. So, please. Examine both sides of the story before asking such a question.

Winona Thu, May 8, 2008 at 01:33 PM EST

Broadway's starting another ebb in the neverending ebb-and-flow cycle. It'll have a resurgence again soon, I'm sure... there will always be young people interested in theatre, it's just getting it out to a wider audience that is the problem.

And I, too, assumed that "Glory Days" was a Springsteen musical, along the lines of Billy Joel's "Movin' Out".

Grace Thu, May 8, 2008 at 01:22 PM EST

I found "Cats" to be endless obnoxious. How it became one of the longest-running musicals in history is beyond me. But I don't think that the youth musical is dead yet -- just look at last year's brilliant "Spring Awakening." As soon as the right people come together and turn out something that clicks with the younger generation, Broadway will see another heyday.

Eric Friedmann Thu, May 8, 2008 at 01:18 PM EST

I really don't know d*ck about Broadway musicals (I leave that knowledge to my wife!) but I would rather see more original stories (about youth or whatever) give it a shot on stage than see another big bullsh*t musical production based on a movie. As an example, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" is one of my favorite comedies, but I absolutely hated "Spam-a-Lot". I'm through with paying to see those kinds of shows.

Frankly, when I first saw the title of GLORY DAYS in the paper, I thought it was a show based on the songs of Bruce Springsteen. Can you blame me?