02/05/2007
Broadway's Gay Audience Missing in Action?
That's what the theater community is wondering after Douglas Carter Beane's critically-acclaimed play The Little Dog Laughed failed after making a transition to Broadway:
"The hunger of gay men to see their lives reflected onstage and in other entertainment forms has been diminished by increased visibility in mainstream culture. [Second Stage artistic director Carole] Rothman isn't so sure gays are a natural bet anymore. She compares the shift to casting trends: "I've noticed recently that actors don't want to be labeled as black, Hispanic, gay, whatever. I'm seeing that now a bit with audiences, too. They don't want to be ghettoized. It's a feeling of 'I'm just a person. Don't label me.'"
What do you think? What kind of plays are you looking for?
Are gay auds trading B'way for TV? [variety]
You may have missed...
On Broadway: The Little Dog Laughed [tr]
On Broadway: Spring Awakening [tr]
Posted 4:25 PM EST by Andy in New York, News, Theatre | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Maybe the story was just not that interesting?
Posted by: m | Feb 5, 2007 4:53:52 PM
$75 dollar tickets.
Posted by: FASTLAD | Feb 5, 2007 5:08:43 PM
I haven't seen it (LDL) and while I hear it is good, I still don't feel like spending $100 bucks on a story that sounds familiar when I can stay home and watch TV which is just excelling these days. While there are a few shows that I'm glad I went to see (Spring Awakening, Company, The History Boys), I've now seen too many plays that I've regretted, many that were selling to the "gay" crowd (and sadly, they chump people by that marketting).
Posted by: Vance | Feb 5, 2007 5:10:23 PM
I've been to NYC three times since this play opened, and while I'd like to see it, other shows came out on top when making choices, or we didn't seen any shows on the trip.
And perhaps the point Vance is making is part of that process of choice. While I don't often see gay plays, I've certainly seen my share of gay themed movies which haven't come close to the standard of quality I hope for.
Interesting.
Posted by: Eddie | Feb 5, 2007 5:25:42 PM
I've seen it. It's not a great play. It's entertaining but it's not a gret piece of writing. Julie White gives a phenomenal performance and I would say it's almost worth it for that alone. Almost.
Maybe I'm reading too much into this but are these people saying that we as a gay audience are supposed to patronize a play -- or a movie or tv show -- simply because it has gay characters? Or because some guy take his clothes off?
I think the point is that there are more and more gay characters in theater, film and TV and we no longer have to settle for the one portrayal per year, regardless of whether it's any good.
Posted by: David | Feb 5, 2007 5:44:00 PM
The show was far from perfect, and I'm not even sure I actually related to any of the "gay" content (obviously it takes more than two men kissing to make something "gay") .. but you can't get Julie White's comedic brilliance through only two dimensions.
And come on, you never have to pay more than $50 for a Broadway show if you don't want to. :)
Posted by: MattGaymon | Feb 5, 2007 5:50:54 PM
You mean the whole theater district isn't a big, gay ghetto?
I was in NY a few weeks ago and LOVED this play. I'm surprised to hear people didn't enjoy it. I saw it on a Friday night and it was a very gay crowd in my little corner, and maybe that helped because I thought it was a scream and very well done. Julie White was the standout, of course, but I thought Johnny Galecki and Tom Everett Scott were really good, too. The writing CRACKLED and if I spend an evening where I get to laugh and laugh, well, that's worth whatever price.
PS Are we too proud to use the TKTS booth? I walked up about 10 minutes before show time, got a ticket for $45 and walked over to the theater. I did the same for "Company" (LOVED that, too...am I just easy? No, it was Raul) and "Grey Gardens".
Posted by: Michael | Feb 5, 2007 6:16:20 PM
In my excitement, I think I ignored the question at hand, but I'm more than happy to consume any targeted content as long as it's quality.
If you build it (gay), I will come.
Posted by: Michael | Feb 5, 2007 6:18:40 PM
I would like to point out that the gay characters are a closeted actor, a mean spirited (though very funny) lesbian agent and a hustler whose sexuality is questionable. While the play is funny and entertaining in a snarky way--it doesn't reflect my life onstage--or anyone else I know.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 5, 2007 6:30:15 PM
The play had also had a very successful off-Broadway run, and I think a lot of the audience who were going to see it had already seen it before it transferred.
Also, it isn't a particularly good play. Julie White is absolutely brilliant, but the other three actors can't hope to rise to her level. There's a noticeable drop in energy when she's not onstage.
I enjoyed it, had a good time. Worth full Broadway ticket prices? No way, but a trip to the TKTS window will fix that.
Posted by: Roscoe | Feb 5, 2007 6:51:23 PM
Yeah, but they are a closeted actor yearning to be free, a hustler with a heart of gold, and a mean-spirited lesbian agent who you'd KILL to have a weekly lunch date with. It was a hoot, y'all. Not a particularly good play? I thought it was much more cohesive than many things I've seen recently (even on that trip...5 shows in 5 days) and the dialogue was postively laden with tasty bon mots. OK, I'll stop. Maybe I am easy.
Posted by: Michael | Feb 5, 2007 7:01:13 PM
"increased visibility in mainstream culture" WHERE? Big Momma's House?
QUEER EYE? PRJECT RUNWAY? I saw it and really enjoyed it....but it is another insider play and doesn't speak much to the gay community at all. Maybe we just don't feel like paying 75-90 bucks to be pandered to
Posted by: MCnNYC | Feb 5, 2007 7:13:50 PM
I thought the Variety article was reaching. I saw this play at its former venue and it's not a great play. It's very slight and wildly overrated. I don't think gay people are abandoning Broadway, I think Broadway has already abandoned gay, straight, bi and ? people by offering so, so many middling productions for high prices. Even the stuff I see that I think is okay or pretty good feels overpriced by a lot. People bemoan that Broadway could die for lack of support, but it would be suicide with the crap (this play is NOT crap by any means...just didn't blow me away) it's been offering for several years.
Posted by: Matthew Rettenmund | Feb 5, 2007 7:21:10 PM
The word of mouth I heard on the play was mixed. I think people are reluctant to pay Broadway ticket prices for a show that is questionable. I would see it Off-Broadway or if I could get discount tickets (maybe) but when I get to New York I have limited time so I want to chose something I have higher hopes for.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 5, 2007 7:28:20 PM
I saw it before it transferred -- it's not a "gay play" in the sense or style of "Love! Valour! Compassion!" or "Angels in America". But it's a good -- not great -- play with an outstanding performance from Julie White, who is amazing. I'm in step with most of the other gay men I know who are abuzz about mainstream theatre these days, it's all about "Company" and "Coast of Utopia." Which would indicate that we care about seeing quality, challenging works of theatre that are well done and that don't seek to compartmentalize us . . . or any other group, for that matter. Right now, I'm looking forward to "Journey's End" and (especially) "Frost/Nixon."
(And for those who don't want to pay 100 bucks for a ticket, check out theatremania and broadwaybox dot coms.)
Posted by: kimmer | Feb 5, 2007 7:51:04 PM
I know I SHOULD like "Coast of Utopia". I really WANT to like "Coast of Utopia". I fell asleep during Voyage. Maybe I would have liked the parts I slept through?
Posted by: Michael | Feb 5, 2007 8:17:03 PM
Andy,
To anser your question "What kind of plays are you looking for?", I'm sure you know what my answer is going to be.
I cannot recall the last time (if ever) there was a well-written play about gay African Americans, Asians, Hispanics or any other diverse culture. We get thrown into musicals with a hodgepodge of "quirky" characters, but never is there a play with depth, meaning and relatability about a particular ethnic culture. Of course it won't happen because "minorites just don't go to the theatre". So we get stuck in all these stupid
'chitlin' circuit" plays that are basically throwbacks to minstrel shows of yore.
God I hope that will all change someday.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Feb 5, 2007 8:25:08 PM
The problem is the play just isn't that good. The gay characters are complete stereotypes and simply not interesting to watch. The only one interesting to watch is the agent character and she's basically just an ongoing joke about a stereotypical hollywood agent. It's a trifle of a play which is why it is closing. I am gay and I saw it but I wouldn't tell anyone else to see it gay or straight. Certainly not for Broadway prices. A bit more substance please.
Posted by: Mark | Feb 5, 2007 9:00:42 PM
A gay play? Or a play with gay people in it? The "gay story" has been told. There has to be something more to it to get us interested. Brokeback had a historical angle, QaF was about our community trying to overcome debauchery (at least some were) but it had the debauchery in it too.
It needs an angle, and a core of compelling content, not just gay men in bed.
Posted by: Frank | Feb 5, 2007 10:28:43 PM
I'll only see a gay play if Jake is in it and he's naked. :)
Posted by: stan | Feb 5, 2007 11:27:48 PM
I just saw the play the other evening and I think it's as simple as the story not being very good. My feeling was that the subject matter wasn't dealt with in a new and innovative - I came away thinking this is so 10 years ago. Give us a great play and we will come. Word of mouth is key and this one as far as I can tell didn't have it.
Posted by: Richard | Feb 6, 2007 2:16:39 AM
Everyone gay doesn't live in NY. I actually have a life that doesn't include coming and going to NY, ever. I have many other things I need to spend my money on, and, shockingly, it precludes traveling to NY to see plays. As provincial as that may sound, there are gays out here who don't give a rat's ass what happens on the Great White Way.
Posted by: Bill | Feb 6, 2007 8:51:52 AM
I think it's unfortunate that it's closing so soon. I heard great things from friendsa who saw it. However, i work with a small gay theater company in Buffalo NY. It closing means perhaps we will produce it next season therefore bringing it to people who don't have as many options as in NYC. Just pissed I missed Jonny galecki
Posted by: Chris | Feb 6, 2007 9:05:56 AM
Seen the Dog 3 times....all for the amazing and wonderful Julie White. Delivery like this (along with over-the-top writing) doesn't come along that often. I too will see it if you build it...gay; but Little Dog, Spring and The Dirty Talk are all reasons we continue to live in Manhattan.
Posted by: John | Feb 6, 2007 9:30:22 AM
Andy, we wouldn't like to see Ton and Johnny in bed together? Yeah right. The plays not that good, the acting is great, but there's so much to see this season and the dollar only goes so far. If I was 'guested' to a performance I would have waited on this one too. The producers should have left it off b'way for another year and let it come to a full boil.
Posted by: lexxicuss | Feb 6, 2007 9:39:02 AM
Maybe I'm missing something here, maybe this is just a discussion about a boring play that trivializes homosexuality. If anyone thinks there is a decline in gay audiences, gay humor or sensibility, try the second act of "Grey Gardens" --- total camp. "History Boys" was sensational. "Boy from Oz" put Hugh Jackman in the spotlight along with the gay lifestyle and our coming of age (and coming of AIDS). "Take Me Out" not only put the gay agenda center stage, it did so with half a dozen naked men showering right in front of you! I think the real problem is that Broadway faces the same challenge that it's always faced --- economics. This play had very little "buzz" other than having a couple of guys in bed together.
Posted by: Richard | Feb 6, 2007 9:52:31 AM
I think it's rather absurd that Carole Rothman thinks The Little Dog Laughed didn't have the most succesful run on Broadway because the gays didn't come out in droves. The play, although witty, fun and showcasing a brilliant performance by Julie White, is really mediocre at best when it comes to thematic content. In addition the choice to move the play to a larger venue on Broadway was probably a bad one - it could have run much longer at 2nd Stage where it started.
I think gay men, myself included, would come to a play in droves if it were showing "our lives reflected onstage", which this play, frankly, does not. Put an Angels in America type play on, and all sorts of people will come to experience that beautiful transcendence that happens with exceptional theater.
And really, where is the truth of our lives really being represented in mainstream media? There have been a few serious entries of late, but sister please - gay men aren't home watching Will and Grace or Queer Eye and feeling represented.
Posted by: Zglass | Feb 6, 2007 9:59:29 AM
Broadway has abandoned everyone except for tourists.
I live in NYC, and used to love the theater. Well, close proximity to Broadway has cured me of that. So much of it is overpriced crap, and the plays that do have gay content are stereotyped to the point of being offensive.
I fell for the hype about History Boys, and saw it last year. Let's see: a pathetic gay kid who ends up a recluse. A pedophile who ends up dead. A closeted priss who ends up crippled. And everyone pining for the hot straight boy. Jesus Christ! The only reason I didn't walk out was because I was attending with friends from out of town.
I'm not falling for the hype again, so that I can see - oh boy! - a closeted actor and an ambiguous hustler. How many times have we seen that storyline?................
Posted by: Gregg | Feb 6, 2007 12:43:59 PM
The problem with this kind of play is that there isn't any fantasy to it. Two boring people in bed. I think that if you have a character change like in the play Hosanna the appeal is of surprize and excellent acting. Staging etc. Costumes, lighting. It's to bad that the director didn't have a friend to tell them it sucked before it was staged.
I got my money back.
Just a thought.
Posted by: Dr. Pat | Feb 8, 2007 2:51:34 AM