The unusually ugly who-gets-how-much-credit-for-a-big-Broadway-musical battle was officially resolved on Wednesday, when the commercial producers of “Natasha, Pierre & the Great Comet of 1812” agreed to revise the show’s Playbill to give more specific credit to Ars Nova, the nonprofit theater that commissioned the show.
3 comments:
I'm glad that an agreement was reached, particularly because this battle was so unnecessary public and messy. It has brought to light a very interesting issue, however, in that the theatre where a new Broadway production grows its roots should probably be receiving a little bit more credit than just being a line item in a list of producers. Perhaps I'm not understanding the whole story, but I'm not really sure why a decision was made in the first place to only list Ars Nova as a producer rather than giving them a section on the front page billing. Because a decision like this was made, it makes me wonder how much this production on Broadway would really be the "Ars Nova production of Natasha...". It's an interesting point to consider. If changes are being made and the cast is switching up (a cast that never had performed in the actual Ars Nova production), can it really still be called the "Ars Nova production of..."?
Like Brennan notes, I agree that this case points to an interesting dynamic in which the developing artistic team likely deserves more credit than they usually receive. However, I would be interested to see the criteria by which that credit is determined because, if enough changes about the show during the transfer, then I do not know if I agree that the originating company should be anything more than a back page producer in the program. If the entire cast turns over but the director stays the same and retrains the whole cast, does that imply enough of a change that the show is no longer in its original form? If the set has to be redesigned and there is a dramatic change in concept during the rehearsal process before the Broadway opening, does that mean that the show is different enough to warrant away from crediting the original LORT theatre? This may not be the case, but I think there is flexibility here that the article does not really mention because it is referring to the resolution of this one specific case.
I am so happy that an agreement was reached! However to get to this point was very disgusting. The tactics used by the broadway producers were disgusting. Not letting the staff come see the show, scheduling the cast recording on the same day as the gala. It is very disheartening to see that a producer would do that to its artist in the show. Everyone in the cast has remained very neutral which is good that they didn't take things to social media. Karan said that they deserved less of a billing should have been handled way before the show started previews. If he had problems he should have said something. Instead he went behind their backs. I am glad that everything is resolved.
Post a Comment