Broadway Rejects Conservative Plays
by Larry O'ConnorThe New York Post ran a story this weekend with a very encouraging headline: RIGHT TURN ON B’WAY? Michael Riedel’s article revolves around two new plays that are being shopped around for a home. One is a one-man play about Ronald Reagan.
“Reagan” is a one-man play that doesn’t portray the 40th president as a fascist. It’s by Lionel Chetwynd, whose scripts for television and film include “The Hanoi Hilton,” “Color of Justice,” “Kissinger and Nixon” and “DC 9/11: Time of Crisis.” …. Chetwynd declined to comment on “Reagan,” except to say with a laugh, “It will change lives and the course of history.” A copy of an early script portrays Reagan as thoughtful, determined, sly (when necessary) and winning. Talking to the audience from the main room of his California ranch, Reagan explains his journey from FDR Democrat to conservative Republican. Along the way, he offers a spirited defense of conservative principles. At least three top directors have passed on the play because, says a source, “They can’t stand Ronald Reagan.”
The other play cited is “Girls in Trouble (Formerly Three Abortions)” by Jonathan Reynolds.
In “Girls in Trouble,” Reynolds presents a balanced view of pro-lifers while taking some swipes at the NPR crowd. The play ends with a harrowing confrontation between two women — one pro-life, the other pro-choice — that’s not for the squeamish. “Thus far, its claim to fame is that it’s been turned down by all the theaters in New York,” Reynolds says of his play. “It was commissioned by the Long Wharf, but they wouldn’t put it on. There was a theater in the suburbs of Washington, DC, that said they wanted to present the ‘other side’ of the abortion debate. But when they read it, they said it would “infuriate our audience.” Oskar Eustis, the head of the Public Theater, told Reynolds that his staff “didn’t go for it,” but that he would take a look at it himself.
Forgive me for not jumping up and doing a victory dance quite yet… It has always seemed a no-brainer to me that a positive telling of the Ronald Reagan story would be a hugely popular hit. Not only is his story compelling, inspiring and quintessentially American, but he was and continues to be incredibly popular. The drama contained within the pages of Peggy Noonan’s “When Character Was King” screams for a stage adaptation. I hope Chetwynd’s work does Duke justice… the fact that many directors have turned down the piece is a sign that it does.
But, to me the real story in this article is less about the plays that are being shopped as it is a story about the doors that are shut to plays that have this kind of content. My favorite passage is Oskar Eustis at the fledgling Public Theater. The staff of the Public “didn’t go for it.” Hm. The staff of the Public has succeeded in running the once thriving non-profit to the brink of bankruptcy in recent years. Maybe we, the theatre-going public don’t go for your staff, Mr. Eustis. And what a weak-kneed response, too. Can anyone imagine the original founder of The Public Theater… that titan of New York non-profit theatre Joe Papp, saying that his organization would not produce a play because “his staff didn’t go for it”? No, Papp would be a man and take the responsibility himself.
I think it would be instructive to take a look at what Eustis’ staff DID “go for” in the 2008 and 2009 seasons. Perusing their website you will see that these seasons’ plays are chuck full of diversity. You can’t GET any more diverse than the Public Theater right now. Black, White, Native American, straight, gay, male, female, Latino, Asian… diversity, thy name is Eustis. So, what is missing? How about diversity of THOUGHT AND OPINION?
The diversity that is being celebrated at the Public Theater is the laziest kind of diversity. Diversity of appearance. Big deal. It’s like Eustis is at a dinner party and he makes himself feel good by saying “Some of my best plays are black.” I thought the over-educated, uber-intellectual, non-profit theatre staffs were a little more interested in being challenged with new ideas. I thought they are in favor of “speaking truth to power.” I thought maybe the staffs at non-profit theatres, fresh from Yale Drama School and NYU’s Tisch School of the Arts, were originally drawn to the non-profit theatre world so through their art they could give voice to the voiceless and speak for those who do not have an outlet to speak for themselves. Instead, Mr. Eustis’ staff give us “Why Torture is Wrong, and the People Who Love Them” and “The Good Negro.” Yes staff, those plays will truly be intellectually challenging to your well-educated, upper-class, liberal, New York audience. Truth to power, my brothers and sisters! Pat yourselves on the backs; you should be so proud.
Is it cool that there are a couple of playwrights getting attention for shopping conservative-themed plays in New York? Yes. Is it really cool that the New York Post wrote an article which pretty much ridicules the New York intelligencia for not having enough room in their club for even one play every few years that doesn’t preach to the secular choir? Yes. Is it enough that these plays have been written and are talked about even if they never get produced? Hell no. Let’s not let this story end here. Apply the pressure to Mr. Eustis and his staff now. If there is room in the budget for “Tales of an Urban Indian” then there should be room for a positive play about Reagan or a play which dares to suggest that maybe abortion is wrong.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
96 Comments
If the fact that there are actually conservatives plays being shopped around is news that shows you how bad things are.
[...] the original post: Broadway Rejects Conservative Plays This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
"Duke"?
So when are you going to open up your own theatre to make the big bucks on plays like these?
Conservatives are too busy to do things as inane as attend a play. Boorrringg. Leave it to the gay mafia
I think he meant "Dutch."
All decisions are based on the likelyhood of there being an audience for the work. These plays should do a national tour first, beginning where a more conservative audience would be found. New York should be the final, not the first stop. If the play makes money, then everyone will suddenly fall in love with it. I believe the term you may be serching for is "Capitalism".
"It’s like Eustis is at a dinner party and he makes himself feel good by saying 'Some of my best plays are black.'” ROFL! Hey, look at me! I'm diverse!
They're not going to help us. Why should they? The unpleasant truth is that if we want to see conservative plays and movies, we will have to produce them ourselves. That's what the left did two generations ago. But here's the real problem: conservatives are tightwads. They do not want to give significant amounts money to the arts. They want to invest their money "sensibly" and hold on to it so they can pass it on to their children. And some wealthy conservatives feel that it is somehow morally wrong to produce message art. They feel that the information exists in the form of books, and if people do not want to read, they deserve the fate that awaits them. The enemy is . . . us.
What's funny is that the left keeps claiming that we are the power in this country, but we can't even get a play produced. Where's the vast rightwing media that we keep hearing so much about?
I heartily agree with Stage Right as far as it goes but the New York theater is only the tip of the iceberg concerning this issue. Conservative playwrights are not only shut out of Gotham but also have no entree into regional and local theater across the country. Try getting "Reagan" or "Three Girls in Trouble" produced in Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Atlanta or Miami. You would run into the same dismissive culture and attitudes as you would in NYC. The same rule applies, probably ever stronger, to influential university theater programs and dramatic societies. They will willingly embrace anything with titles like "I Heart Che Guevara" or "All Men are Misogynistic Raping Sadists" but would regard "Girls in Trouble" as radioactive.
The problem goes much deeper than NYC. Try getting these plays produced in important regional or local teaters and you would run into the same attitudes that you do in Gotham. The same applies to university theater programs and dramatic socieites. All of these venues are run by people who share the same dismissive mindset and the same prejudices as their brethern in New York City.
But not every play starts purely as a Broadway product. Hit shows like 9 to 5, Drowsy Chaperone–even Wicked–started in smaller towns, put on by smaller but every bit as professional theaters, built word of mouth, and eventually transferred to Broadway. It's not out of the question for these two plays to do the same. Besides–doesn't David Mamet have a play running? And doesn't he have his new play, "Race" arriving soon? It'll be a hit, then more conservative stuff will be in vogue…at least until "Spider-Man" opens. ;-D
A Conservative play on Broadway. What a quaint idea.
The late, great Charlton Heston once said the problem with movies as an art form is that film, as an industry, is a business, and that the problem with movies as a business is that film is an art form. Does anyone doubt that part of the reason movies, and by extension, television, comic books and even network news and newspapers continue to see lower profits and fewer viewers because, for the most part, the liberal view is dominant. Sure, the internet had taken its share of the audience, but, to cite an example, comic books, even as late as the early (yes, pre-internet) 1980s, that sold in the 200,000 was considered a strong seller. Today, most comics are lucky to sell 100,000. And the collected editions/graphic novels, once the mainstay of the companies over the monthly titles, are losing sales. Speaking for myself as a conservative, I have no intention of shelling out upwards of $5 (for one monthly title) when I know the person is a liberal and spews out liberal bile month after months. (Aside from the writer's political view, I have found most stories by any such writers I have read to be self-righteous, preachy, and, worst of all, boring.
Continued from previous comment:
The point I am trying to make is that both the entertainment and news organizations tend to be interested in only preaching to the choir, which has hurt their sales and will continue to do so. If they truly want to stay afloat financially, they should heed the words of Douglas Cramer, the head of Paramount's television during the late 1960s. Cramer stated that to be successful, one has to cater to the audience. He cited Happy Days in particular, saying that if a TV audience liked the Fonz and the producer of the show "couldn't stand the son of a bitch," the producer gives them the Fonz if he wants to stay in the business.
Continued from the previous comment (I know, I got long-winded):
As for the Reagan plays, it's probably just as well that no libbies are interested in producing the play, because I doubt any of them would try to produce an even-handed view of Ronaldus Magnus. One of the reasons I have refused to watch any movie or television show about Richard Nixon (yes, such as Frost/Nixon) is that the people involved clearly have no interest in finding out what made the man "tick." To a great degree, the same can be said about Reagan. With the possible exception of the play that documents the great man's journey from Roosevelt Democrat to conservative icon, no play, movie or TV show will ever do him (or, for that matter, Nixon) justice and treat them fairly.
With respect, I have to disagree. Conservatives are not Tightwads. Witness the level of contributions to charities.
What they are not interested in is giving money away to something that probably will fail.
Truth be told, this is the first time I have heard of a conservative play. Where the owners of the play are making their mistakes is going to the liberal establishment to see if their play can pass muster. It can't, because of the content is anathema to the sensibilities of the liberal establishment. What the owners are asking of these producers is like asking an Evangelical Christian to embrace abortion. It ain't gonna happen.
My suggestion is to go out to the small towns to find an outlet. Seek out small town mayors who want to establish that their town is considered conservative.
The thing is, neither liberals or conservatives should be consciously trying to make "message art". The goal should be to make GOOD art, and let the ideological chips fall where they may. If we truly believe in our message, it will come through in the ultimate product anyways. Think about all of the Iraq "message" movies of the last few years: In the Valley of Elah, Rendition, etc. They were chock full of liberal ideology about the war, but they all failed miserably in the theaters because no one, not even liberals, wants to sit through a full-length infomercial about our "failures" in Iraq. On the conservative religious side, we have things like "Left Behind", the result of which is only the Christians who believe the message are watching them, because they know it's "safe" to watch, never mind how preachy it is.
I do agree that conservatives are far too careful not to invest in mediums other than the written word. But again, someone needs to come up with a good idea, not just a "safe" one.
But comic book sales have fallen almost directly due to the popularity of video games, don't you think? Kids gather and trade Pokemon with the fervor that they did comics 30 years ago. Comics fell off for the same reason jacks and hoop-and-stick sales are down. Kids found stuff to do that was way more fun. My meager comic buying (and I am far from a kid) plummeted last year once gas hit $4 a gallon, and I'll pick up a book now and then, but nothing like I bought in the early 90's. And when I go to my local shop, there aren't little kids in there–everyone is 20 and up, even though the store has a decent kiddie section. Comic books just aren't part of the kiddie zeitgeist anymore.
Flyover country would be very pleased to 'open' new and exciting plays by nationally known playwrights like Lionel Chetwynd… and that is where they should be shopped. New York is no longer the ultimate in theatre. It has given up that position by birthing lefty agit prop. Its money is made by Andrew Lloyd Webber now.
Films with a powerful moral theme ("message" movies) can be extrodinary and successful. The problem is they are very difficult to write. It requires a keen sense of irony and drama – and I have found that conservatives lack a sense of irony. Their material is almost always "on the nose" and thus suitable only for true belieivers, as you point out. This is a quality issue, and I think it's because that young people who show true creative talent (rare to begin with) are hussled to the left before they are mature enough to recognize propaganda for what it is. Our side is then left with drek (the best example being the terrible film "Forgotten Heroes" being held up as a fine conservative film).
On the nose…. It sounds like you write. Have you come up with a play?
So, it won't sell in NYC? Who cares? It WOULD sell in Walla Walla, Bend, Missoula, Flagstaff, El Paso, Dubuque, Sioux Falls, Middlesboro and a thousand other places small enough to still have a heart left in them.
The theater crowd isn't anything that challenges their pro-queer, pro-abortion, pro-drug abuse, pro-militant feminism mindset. It's truly disgusting to see what's happened to many of the popular theater productions (with noteable exceptions such as Wicked and Lion King) that cater exclusively to liberals and criticize anyone who disagrees with their perversions.
Whoops. I meant to start it with "The theater crowd isn't interested in anything…" My passion got the best of me.
So you're gay if you would never miss the chance to see King Lear performed?
'There was a theater in the suburbs of Washington, DC, that said they wanted to present the ‘other side’ of the abortion debate. But when they read it, they said it would “infuriate our audience.”'
I thought liberals went ga-ga over art that challenged its audience.
Joel – I'm a writing student here in LA. I'm taking screenwriting classes at UCLA, and this year I'm completing my first project a non-political documentary called Fatty. It's been a learning experience. I have found that leftist beliefs are common here, BUT you'd be surprised at how often people freely admit that they know only one side of the issues, the common refrain being, "It's not my fault – that's what my professors taught me." I have many ideas for features – a dark comedy, a thriller, a political drama, and a highly-political idea for a new kind of documentary that is part narrative and part "reality video." I am convinced that the two major problems facing conservative filmmakers are: lack of real talent, and wealthy conservatives who refuse to give significant amounts of money to a film. The left did not have these problems, and that's why they dominate the arts. I believe things CAN turn around – but only if we make it happen by shear force of will.
Conservatism can work on the boards like it has (when produced) at the movies. John Milius' "Red Dawn" was a HELL of a good movie and written and directed by a Hollywood conservative. Sure it's been a quarter century since "Red Dawn" but it can be done.
Inconceivable.
Glenn I'm a college student also, albeit a slightly seasoned one age wise, and I practically DARE leftist professors to grade me below what I've earned based on my vocal conservatism in crowded classrooms. To their credit I haven't had a grading problem with a liberal prof yet…Godspeed bringing "alternative" conservative views to our theaters and airwaves.
No, they only like art that challenges the hillbillies who live outside of the great metropolises. . . you know, regular Americans. After all, what good is art if it doesn't make you feel superior to the great unwashed?
Liberals go ga-ga over art that challenges conventions and morality- but not their conventions or morality.
Christian dogma- bad.
Liberal dogma- unquestioned ,unexaminable, unimpeachable Truth.
Here is the $64,000 question. How many rich Conservatives do you think live in LA? Most of them have left for better business climates.
Hey, most of the "rich" liberal actors and actresses have also left as well.
Oh, and it is their fault for not educating themselves once they realize that it is one-sided. It is intellectual laziness that is the problem. Not liberal professors.
Thanks, James. I'm 49. I'm in the unusual position of possessing modest amounts of money, business experience, and NO family obligations. This gives me the time and energy to harrass UCLA instructors. But seriously, I have found that entrenched lefty producers ARE giving me a fair hearing and treating my ideas seriously. Many of the older ones understand that creativity has more or less gone out of style in Hollywood, AND the industry is currently ignoring a HUGE market in the flyover states. They know all that – but they also know that just about all of the emerging writing and directing talent is on the left. Without sounding cocky, I am trying to be the exception to that rule – and I believe I am making real progress.
Futunately, I appear MUCH younger than 49, so there is good reason to believe that the ageism that kicks in at 50 (35 for TV writers) won't block me for maybe ten more years.
Thorien: I was particularly proud of writing that line… thanks for noticing!
Will you all please add me as a friend on Facebook? I am working on a few ideas to get things mocving in the direction you are taking and I would like to keep you all "in the loop".
Or, you can e-mail me directly: stagerightblogger at gmail dot com (get it?)
No kidding. I made time to visit a local production of Taming of the Shrew the other night. They dared to suggest (in the playbill) that the premise wasn't quite as mysoginistic as we have been led to believe. And this was put on by local university cronies! Maybe there is a light – way, way down at the end of that long tunnel
Liked your dinner party conversation but moreso liked 'How about diversity of THOUGHT AND OPINION?'
My new mantra. . ."How about diversity of thought and opinion". Brilliant Stage, thank you. So do we write letters, send emails on the contact us link of a website? Does it even matter if Jane Q Public or John Doe writes that we want this type of substance?
How can you be sure that there is a real, ticket paying, audience for "conservative" plays? Unless someone is willing to take the huge financial risk to invest in conservative productions, we will never know. And all the limited available evidence to date is that such an audience does not exist.
You have got to be joking. Witness the plays put on during the Summer in Sacramento. I would say most of them are Conservative. They are still popular and a big draw.
I live in a metropolis. Does that make me "challenge challenged?"
If the regular audience of plays is liberal, perhaps they fear they'd loose thier regulars. Without gining any new thearrter goers. But that's the rub isn't it?
Conservative Americans get tired of being insulted and bashed, so they stay home, while leftys keep going for a steady diet of "we hate them" plays designed to pander to their ignorant prejudice. If we can show that regular American views can outsell the moronic liberal mainstays, if it's a business,.. and conservatives do outnumber admitted liberals,…
They won't allow us in, we have to kick in the doors and show who's got the bigger audience.
They only challenge the audience when they know it won't actually lose them money to do so.
Where's Milius when we need him?
My wife watched Conan the Barbarian for the first time last night and now she wants to see more of his stuff.
If you have to ask, then clearly you aren't with the "in crowd." Sorry. . . not pate for you.
Maybe Plays and Theatre are a declining industry across the board. It is very hard to start up a new venue in a terminally declining industry. As the pie continues to shrink, only the most established and well capitalized businesses are able to make money. NYC theatre tickets are enormously expensive, because live theatre is a very labor intensive profession with a lot of very expensive unions. I doubt that conservatives would pay $50-100 for tickets to any play, even a conservative one. Perhaps some conservatives could organize low budget plays that would run at a local Irish pub, but that is about the extent of it. And the most you could charge is a $10-15 cover charge which would barely pay the performers chump change.
Globally, it might be better for Conservatives to push harder on the internet. At least the web is an expanding industry, and it is best not to allow the liberals to monopolize the web the way they monopolize the MSM. But right now, liberals do dominate the web. And the only place conservatives dominate – talk radio – is also a declining industry. And once Clear Channel goes BK, and new localism regulations are imposed, that decline is likely to become terminal.
As an aside I went to Disney World in Orlando last week. We went to the American Experience in EPCOT where they celebrated American Presidents as told by Benjamin Franklin and Mark Twain. They went from FDR to JFK to Clinton and Bush making some speech together to Obama.
Completely ignoring Ronald Reagon and the ending of the Cold War. The left feels that now that fewer people of Adult age have lived through the 80's that they can make Reagon irrelevant by ignoring them. We need to make sure it does not work. Perhaps for those who have been to Disney World and seen this at the American Adventure in Disney World should call or write Disney to complain about this partisan breach of etiquette. I have.
I have to disagre that conservatives lack a sense of irony. Sure, some do. But far more leftists lack irony than right wingers, in my experience. Or maybe it's just better to say that only seven people in America even know what irony is anymore anyway!
Oh well. Other than that, I agree with what you said, but for reasons that have nothing to do with irony.
It's not technically an etiquette breach unless Mark Twain spits tobacco juice on you and Ben Franklin farts. (etiquette is manners in polite society, and yes, I had one of 'those' grandmas who was very particular about such things. Sorry.) And I think you mean Ronald "Reagan." Never been there myself. Was Reagan part of the exhibit in earlier years? I imagine they 'rotate' the presidents.
Diversity, oh, that is when you like what the libs like. Otherwise, no go.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
It is called a metaphor. There is no "rotation" of Presidents. This was the American Experience at Epcot that was supposed to be about the great moments in our countries history. Lincoln is the only Republican president that was mentioned in any detail. Teddy Roosevelt was mentioned in passing but only to acknowledge who set up the parks. To state one is giving a history of America and exclude Ronald Reagan who is the most significant President in the 20th Century is Partisan in the extreme. That is rude and last time I checked "rudeness" was a breach of etiquette. Since we are nitpicking the dictionary definition of etiquette is "The practices and forms prescribed by social convention or by authority." which can be different from "manners".
And yes I mispelled Reagan's name. Shame on me. I forgot that one can never err if one is a conservative without some Liberal nitpicking it to death. But I guess I should be properly chastised by someone who imagines what happened and not my own eyes. By the way you should have capitalized etiquestte and Sorry is not a proper sentence. I can be pendantic as well.
Every bit of this stuff is happening today, because conservatives slept their way through the past 40 years, instead of taking a stand. We let the liberals take over the education system virtually unimpeded. Why are we surprised at the hostility today? Sixty years ago, it was common knowledge that there was a battle on for the hearts and minds of America. But the message fell on deaf ears. The history is there, if only we would go back and learn it. President Kennedy, for instance, would be a far right extremist by today's popular standard, in his attitude toward the threats to our republic from within.
It's "pedantic." And don't assume I'm liberal. (lowercase–it doesn't need to be capitalized, btw.) It's not necessary to capitalize 'etiquette' in a parenthetical statement. "Sorry" is used as a statement and can stand on its own, like "Hooray!" or "Congratulations!" "God bless!"
Dumb question. Who cares? As long as he is understandable…………..
Comics aren't bought by kids because comic book publishers pissed away their main audience chasing the 'adult/collector' market. Video games just filled the gap.
I did not assume you were a liberal.
My statement read "I forgot that one can never err if one is a conservative without some Liberal nitpicking it to death."
But I make a point about Reagan being purposely left out of history and your comments are to nitpick any grammatical errors, engage in pendantic arguments and assume that what I state must be somehow not right based on evidence that is imagined.
I should consider you a Reagan Conservative then I guess.. Well this is a "tactic" used by liberals to deflect the substance of a discussion away from the main point. And the beginning of a sentence is required to be capitalized. In witten forms there must be Subjec t and a Verb so your second criticism depends on the form. Since I am not allowed the use of metaphor yor made it formal. Such as when you write stereo instructions.
Free Speech for me but not for thee, thus spake the leftist Democrat.
So, they only like art that challenges people who will never see it?
"Free Speech for me but not for thee"
Was it Mussolini or Stalin who first made that statement? Or was it further back?
That's wild. You sound like me! I'm 49 and I'm also fortunate enough (having spent 25 or so years in the car biz) to pause, relax and finish my education. I take day classes full of wide eyed kids, even though I am a senior ( I always tell 'em that I put the "senior" in senior!). I can't wait for grad school, I even sent myself to Europe this last month like the kids from the wealthier families do! In fact I was heartened by many off the kids that are good students and frankly not poor, they understand economics and are NOT automatic Democrat Obamatrons, for the most part. And ya, thank God for genetics from my Mexican Mom's side. Still have hair and it's still mostly brown, all my own teeth and not too many wrinkles! 50 is the "new" 30!
Actually I mispelled the word looking it up in the online dictionary. Ask.com corrected it for me.
But I left in anyways just to see if this guy would copy my post to word or read every word backwards to find some error.
I guess the point that Reagan must be forgotten is a big push for liberals is proved by the need for this stealth attack on my post.. But he is not a "liberal". Just someone who does not like founder of modern conservatism. I know the motto is DFTT but I can't follow it unfotunately I don't have that kind of self control. Maybe Andrew Price has a seminar I can go to for that. He is our Master Bloger here at BH. It's only a few months before his P goes so high that BH has to make him a contributor to match his celebrity.
Read about the exodus out of NYC…the richest people there are shouldering a HUGE tax burden and some are moving their primary residences out of Manhattan. Typical liberal thinking…wasn't it the NYC subway system that was losing riders, so RAISED the ticket price to compensate? Brilliant…really brilliant…
I don't know…'Wicked' seemed pretty much like an anti-Bush, gay allegory to me.
Anyone who doubts that politics trumps economics for Hollywood (and the allied performance "artiste" crowd) need only look at the massive success of a "conservative" film like The Passion of the Christ, versus the financial bloodbath that befell all the Hate-Bush-Hate-Iraq films. Wouldn't a profit-driven industry have tried at least ONE additional movie appealing to the Christian+Family crowd before investing untold millions in box office bomb after bomb criticizing Bush???
I sure thought so… and I was completely wrong. Heck, MSNBC (and its parent company, GE) seem to be perfectly willing to commit financial hari-kari before they take a clue from Fox and change their line-up.
Actually, this is the part that freaks me out the most– these people are willing to lose their shirt to keep their ideological purity! And we're not talking about just Keith Olberman making decisions for himself. These people are throwing their investors, their stock holders, their fellow employees… everyone under the bus, just to prevent another Bill O'Reilly from arising, or a piece of Christian oriented family entertainment from being made. It's extreme to a point of being frightening.
It shouldn't be that hard…I watch box offices figures for fun…what does predictably well? NOT LEFTIST POLITICAL CRAP! Pixar, goofball comedies, even Sandra Bullocks latest Rom Com is doing well. Name one anti-U.S./ Iraq flick that has made box office? None. "Milk"? Has it finally broken even? How about "W"? They even rushed it to release while he was still in office, pushed the hell out of it, and what? Crash and burn at the B.O. "Frost and Nixon"? Except for people trapped on overseas flights NOBODY would have seen that masterpiece…
Would they hafta stop refering to Broadway as the "Great White Way"? Sounds kind of racist…somebody might be offended…
I just love it when a frustrated English major gets loose in here! They're soooo smart and stuff…
You are correct and I think it was because no sane person I knew really wanted a teaching career. It used to pay bupkiss, and to get abused by some snot nosed brat? No way, most conservatives gravitate to higher paying private sector jobs with a few valiant exception, like my brother…great screen name, by the way…
G.E. is really counting on "cap and trade", they are heavily invested in providing the "infrastructure" that "C&T" will require to be a CASH COW! Al Gore isn't the only vulture circling above the rotting corpse that will be American Industry. Meanwhile the Nero aka, the GOP fiddles and diddles and doesn't mount a defense of the citizens of this country…by the way, Mel Gibson made nearly 650 MILLION $$$$, 650 MILLION CLAMS on "Passion of the Christ". Good for him. I hope Jim Caviezel made a fortune also, he's an actor with principals…
Good evening BH posters. Stage Right do you know if the Lamb's Theatre is still open/operating? It was located somewhere on 8th Avenue. (Sorry-I don't remember the cross street. At the time I was there it was in the 1980's and in what was then known as the red light district.) The theatre became known as "the theatre where you can't say any bad words" and I believe it was where the musical Godspell had its initial run before expanding to a wider audience. If this establishment is still up and running this could be a prime venue for those willing to take the risk. We know we have the ability to produce excellent work; we just need to know when and where to "pick our spots".
+1 for the Princess Bride reference — always a good move.
Yes, just like they like taxes that they won't ever have to pay themselves.
Then he should have WRITTEN "Dutch," shouldn't he? Or is the internet a magical realm where competency is determined by the reader's ability to comprehend what the writer MEANT to say? Cretin.
Anybody want a peanut?
I had a feeling. You were right on. It encompases SO much of the yuppie college campus diversity squad's attitude, and apparently that of those who had to graduate and leave their happy little bubble of anti-war protests and Jacques Derrida-quoting pot-smoking parties for the real world, and ended up in theatre.
Hmmmmm stay tuned!
Michael, I appreciate your thoughts on this… but, my point is that all decisions are clearly NOT based on the likelyhood of there being an audience for the work. Especially in the not-for-profit theatre world.
Broadway just had a record breaking season in terms of gross sales, and many of the films in the past few years that have had top grosses or Oscar accolades started as Broadway shows.
But, this is not about which medium to use to get a message out… this is about the political ideology of people in power positions being used to marginalize and talented people because the subject of their plays do not fit into the orthodoxy dictated by the elite class.
The fact is that conservatives sure as Hell DO pay $50 – $100 for tickets to shows…. despite the fact that many of the shows they see end up insulting them and delivering a message that is completely antithetical to them
And the Executive Director of that theatre in Sacramento had to resign his position because he donated to the Prop 8 campaign…. {sigh}
The whole idea behind a non-profit theatre is to focus on good work that is not reliant upon the audience, neccessarily. But, now the decision makers at these non-profits have bigger agendas than just presenting plays it seems.
We need a theatre that will specifically focus on plays with a conservative theme and speaks to a conservative audience… the conservative audience that stays home.
Well, I could be wrong, but I believe Diversity is an old, old wooden ship that was used during the Civil War era….
I dunno J… you picked some "blue" cities for your examples (Houston might be the exception). Anything in a big city, theatre based, would definitely slide toward a liberal bend. .
Bring this kinda show to St.Louis and I'd be there in a heartbeat…
Basically, it's time to start doing as someone suggested, push them in the smaller, more conservative cities/locales and then work your way up to the big towns.
Or wind farms that block other peoples' views of the ocean.
I'm starting to catch on.
[...] Hospital” | Obama’s Single-Payer Health Care Nightmare Stage Right, Big Hollywood: Broadway Rejects Conservative Plays Michelle Malkin: Obamacare ground troops at the airport and The drug companies sell out and The [...]
[...] by the Federal Reserve? | Hearing Conducted May 12, 2009 (video) Stage Right, Big Hollywood: Broadway Rejects Conservative Plays NovaTownHall Blog: President Pantywaist Clinging G & G: Just Too Awesome to Fail GayPatriot: [...]
What's good for Milo Minderbinder is good for the Country!
Same for conservative directors. I was in fact hired to direct local musical theatre, but when the person hiring found out I was a conservative mormon, she fired me.
OK, so the writer made a mental slip, and, considering he likely doesn't have a staff of proof-readers, he would be unlikely to catch it. However, it is the internet, so it would be nice to see it corrected. Your tone, sir, is unnecessary. I'm not sure who you were calling a cretin, Stage Right or poakley, but it justified in neither case.
And everyone gets a share!
Well said, Stage Right. I think you would appreciate those short musicals I invited you to by Joshua Fardon at the Secret Rose Theatre in NoHo. Three performances remain. As a director, I will take on any material that is open to interpretation. Tell good stories well, and let the audience be the judge.
Sure
All us Conservative Elephants love peanuts!
Thank you
A one man play about Ronald Reagan would be awesome! The only thing that would make it better is if he were played by Gary Beach.
Look , you guys can't have it both ways. If you want to dislike Gays and Blacks, it's going to be hard for you to get anywhere on Broadway or in the pop music business. Stick with pro-military action movies and country music.
The poster above who described Broadway as too "Pro-queer" really sums it all up.
You must be logged in to post a comment.