www.broadwayworld.com: After ten years in the West End as a two-part theatrical event, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child will evolve into a single performance-format. The production will move to the version of the show currently performed by companies around the globe, including the Broadway production in New York City, where the reimagined one-part production premiered in 2021 and is currently breaking all major box-office records.
6 comments:
I had heard about this show in the West End and how it was over five hours because it was two parts rather than just one show. I would love to spend a day at the theatre, but I don’t know if I would have been able to sit through the run time of the two-part show. Since the one-part show was produced around the world, I figured that this production was also converted to the one-part show under three hours, but it seems I was wrong. It is special that it will be closing around its tenth anniversary. In this day and age, not many productions can stay open for that long, so it is definitely an achievement that it stayed open for as long as it did. The article also mentions how changing to only one part will ultimately make the show more accessible because of the shorter run time.
I got the opportunity to see this show in New York, and it was pretty spectacular. I did see the one show version, and as someone who was a big fan of the Harry Potter universe, I can say with relative certainty that there is no way this story has enough substance to justify two nights of this show. The technical elements are amazing, and I suppose getting to see it two nights in a row would be fun, but I feel like making this show a two parter was never necessary. So hopeful with this shift on the west end, slightly more people will get to see this spectacular show. I am also excited for this show to start touring so that I can see it again, despite the lackluster plot. The best part of this show is that it restored a lot of people’s faith that the future of theater is not just all projections and led screens, and that the magic of theater can still be real.
oh Jesus. Harry Potter and the cursed child runs at about five hours the idea of sitting in a theater, leaving the theater and coming back to see the second part feels weird what feels worse, is sitting in the theater to watch Harry Potter and the cursed child, a really crappy show made by J. K. Rowling, someone I don’t support, that she made for more money after her books and movies made millions, for five hours. My friend saw Harry Potter and the cursed child when it came to San Diego and the parts were about an hour or 90 minutes apart from each other enough time to go outside go to the bathroom get something to eat. Get something to drink. Spend some money in the theater maybe donate. A 2 1/2 hour show with about a 15 minute intermission? It doesn’t say. Sounds like a nightmare for the common theater audience. I don’t think this will work.
I think it makes a lot of sense for this production to be one longer part instead of two, especially since both parts combined aren't particularly that long(coming under 3 hours). I feel like in the modern day people are a lot more receptive to watch longer media in one single setting, a lot of films that were popular from 2020 and onwards were on the longer side and a couple were even 3 hours and up so i can see a world where this applies to theatre as well(you can say a lot of things about people’s attention spans being a lot shorter but i would say in general people who like film and theatre are receptive to longer content, however i can see an argument about people’s attention no longer being held the same in the current day). I also think they're doing this for the right reasons as well, it is more accessible to buy one ticket to see the whole story than buying 2 tickets
I first read this play when it was released, and it was in fact quite long. I never saw the full-length version of the play preformed but the structure of having basically a full show, a break, and then another full show is definitely different than most shows. I would imagine that it’s very difficult on the people running and performing in the show, because every time you do it, it’s like a two-show day. I also think that it can be difficult for audiences to get behind this, and that if the show didn’t carry the immensely popular Harry Potter brand name, then it would definitely not been able to survive at its length. I saw the cursed child on Broadway right after they changed it to the shortened version, and it still felt like a complete show. I think that from a marketing and longevity standpoint it’s the right move to shorten the show.
I have never seen the Harry Potter Chris Child on Broadway, but I've always wanted to because I've always heard of great reviews of the Pyro and the magic on stage, and the lighting, and how everything comes together to create this magical wizarding world. Yet one of the things that I've always been a wonder to me is why the play was split up into two different productionsI would take that as it would is really difficult to see both productions and would that mean you're missing so much of the show or is it meaning that you can see one show and it's connected to the other one but it's not that you need to see the show so that always bothered me. So I'm very interested to see that they have combined it into one production, and I think three hours is a long time to sit, but alsoIf the show is really engaging and people are on the edge of their seats, I think that people can sit for three hours.
Post a Comment