Do the producers of Leap of Faith have any faith in Raul?

[winston89]

So, the producers at Leap of Faith are stuffing into the playbills surveys for the audience to fill out. On said survey, they were asking the audience what got them to want to come to the show. It was a multiple choice question and they had various options. Even Menkin himself was one that you could have checked off. But, they didn't list Raul Esparza there.

If an actor is getting above the title billing, that my be a reason in and of itself why someone might go see a show. I think that by the producers acknowledging that the composer of their show would be a draw for people to go but not their star, gives off the impression that they have no faith in their star.

[everythingtaboo]

I don't think any actor would want to have his performance or draw being valued via multiple choice questionnaires.

[dramamama611]

I think you are looking at this as more than the average theater goer. THAT person won't think too much about why he isn't listed -- if at all. I doubt that he is a "name" amongst the average audience member, either.

[Gaveston2]

As somebody who has worked in marketing and has written and tabulated such surveys, I think it very much reflects SOMEBODY's thinking when your name-above-the-title isn't included. I mean, why is Esparza's name up there if not to sell tickets?

And it's not as if the results of that survey have to be made public. They could have included Esparza and then told him whatever results they thought would best keep him happy. (At the theater where I did marketing, those results were guarded like state secrets.)

That being said, I think it's quite possible the slight was unintentional. They are testing their various marketing efforts in order to decide where to spend their advertising budget in the future. For example, if Esparza is already heavily advertised and they plan to continue doing so, they may be trying to decide if they should put more emphasis on Menken as well. Or if they think the market is already saturated with Esparza, they may be trying to decide where their efforts have been lacking.

Still bad form, if you ask me. (Unless, of course, Esparza thought the whole thing was a beauty contest and asked not to be included.)

[Jane2]

This makes no sense to me. It transcends theater. Why would the producers of ANY project hire someone to head their project in whom they had no faith?

[tazber]

It's a ridiculous assumption. I'm sure that they are looking for the elements to capitalize on in their ad campaign for summer tourists.

The fact that Raul is not well known enough to non-theater crowds has nothing to do with his performance or the producer's "confidence".

And I'm sure they will be touting his Tony nomination should he get one.

[Gaveston2]

I don't think it's a matter of "lack of faith" in anybody. As tazber suggests, they may believe that those who know Esparza are already aware of his presence in the show.

The omission is still tacky, imo. But that doesn't make it deliberate disrespect.

[Hest882]

I don't think no having Raul specifically there is that bad, but you'd think they would have had a question that said "to see a particular actor" with a write-in to specify. Otherwise, they've excluded from the survey anyone who might have come to support friends or family in the production as well as fans of anyone on the stage.

[humbugfoto]

Winston, were =any= of the actors mentioned on that survey?

[winston89]

humbugfoto

No, they don't mention any of the other actors by name. But, you were able to write in a particular performer.

With that said, I agree with Gaveston2. Sure, you can say that Raul wasn't totally left out of the whole thing, what with you being able to write his name in and all. But, I do think it doesn't look totally good if you're willing to include the composer but not the actor who is staring in your show.

[tazber]

Alan Menken isn't just any composer. He has pretty big name recognition.

Had the composer been, say, Tom Kitt or William Finn I doubt that they would have been included on the survey.

[TimesSquared]

Just so you know, Esparza's name is not above the title to sell tickets.
His name is above the title because he had enough pull to get it in his contract.

The producers obviously wanted him in the role since he's done every incarnation, therefore they agreed to above-the-title billing even though he's fairly unknown outside the theater world.

[wonkit]

And nominations for dumb-sh*t question of the decade on BWW: winston89.

[winston89]

I was only asking a simple question. No need to get testy.

[PalJoey]

why is Esparza's name up there if not to sell tickets?

Because his name was above the title on Company.



Billing on Broadway is just like billing in Hollywood: If an actor achieves a level of billing once, his agent is able to demand it the next time.

That goes on until the actor bombs out so badly that no one wants him. Then it's comeback time.

[SondheimFan5]

If they had a write-in spot for a performer, than there's no reason to argue about why Raul specifically is not listed there.

But it's also a contractual thing that they likely aren't going to change - Esparza's name appears to be at ~ 30% above the title so they're not going to change that to greater or less.

Regional theatres do this all the time, and I have seen it done before on Broadway and at Encores. It just gets results a little faster than the Billy Elliot - Spiderman - Priscilla - Sister Act audience "focus groups." It can actually be very, very helpful, believe it or not. I know I've said it before, but lets not bash a show til it opens or at least til the last week of previews.

Also - I have seen ads on Facebook by the Leap of Faith producers heavily promoting "SMASH star LESLIE ODOM, JR." even though he is just in the ensemble for Leap of Faith. Whatever sells tickets I guess......

[RippedMan]

It's just weird because he's not famous at all outside of Broadway. I'd say Sutton Foster is a better known theater performer, and yet her name hasn't been above the title - on a marquee at least.

[bk]

Because the creatives can't figure out how to fix their own show after eight years? Please. Do the work. Others before you have done the work and turned crap into hit, and all without surveys and focus groups. They did it because they were a) talented, b) could, and c) knew they had to. If they cannot figure out what's wrong, then they should perhaps move on to a show they understand.

So, let me help: Get rid of the framing device - it is pointless and is hurting your show.

[wonkit]

I have seen the questionnaire in full. It appears, if anything, to be a means of defining how to target the advertising and publicity for the show, rather than modify the show itself. Given how few people fill them in, I doubt it is even a significant enough sample to give a clear direction for creative choices anyway.

[bk]

Then I misunderstood what the purpose of the questionnaire was. But we all know they also do them the other way - Spiderman specifically did, and we can only pray that focus groups don't become an insidious thing as they have with films - I hope they go the way of the dodo bird and soon.

[Gaveston2]

"Just so you know, Esparza's name is not above the title to sell tickets.
His name is above the title because he had enough pull to get it in his contract.

Good point (and paljoey added to it). But it isn't either/or. Unless somebody here helped to negotiate the contract, we don't know whether the producers ONLY bowed to an agent's demand or whether they also thought Esparza's name would sell tickets to Broadway regulars. Although it may require some adjustments, it doesn't usually cost a producer any money to give someone star billing.

And while Esparza obviously isn't Daniel Radcliffe in terms of celebrity, he seems to have VERY loyal supporters here at BWW.COM.

***

In my comments above, I didn't realize the form included a blank to write in the name of the performer one came to see. That probably isn't the best way to flatter your star, but it is quite different from omitting performers entirely.

[Copperfield2]

Esparza's name may not be above the title to sell tickets but he's the only reason I bought a ticket to see the show. Not to hear a new score by Alan Menken. And I know I'm not alone. But I'm not saying though that there are a lot of people out there like me.

[winston89]

I guess that was why I was a little annoyed as well. Copperfield, I'm with you, I went to see Raul. I got my ticket knowing well that this show hasn't gotten good word of mouth from what I have read here. However, the one saving grace for me was that I would get to see Raul in a musical again. And, we all know that it's been a good long while since he was in one. I guess that's why I was annoyed to not see his name there. I

I guess I was a little annoyed to not see Raul's name there because I was looking at the handout during the intermission. At that point I didn't think the show was that good. And, I felt that Raul was the glue that was holding an otherwise faulty show together. And, I was thinking at the time that I was likely not the only one there that wasn't there for his performance as well.

[Bettyboy72]

"I guess I was a little annoyed to not see Raul's name there"

Then why didn't you just write his name in-you said that was possible.

If the theatre was full of Raul die-hards, hopefully they would do the same.

I really don't understand why you're so disturbed.

Of course they have faith in him, but he's not selling tickets to anyone other than theatre aficionados. He is an acquired taste, not an out and out crowd pleaser.

[ken8631]

Only reason we went was to see Raul. Wrote that on the questionaire....

[Patash]

I don't have a great desire to see the show, but if I did go it would be primarily to see Raul. I guess I'd better not go then, since I won't be able to honestly answer the survey!