Friday, February 24, 2006

Avenue Q leaving Las Vegas in May. The writing's been on the wall for some time; the play makes money, but not enough to make it worth Wynn's while to build a second theater for Spamalot. On Gambling With Mike Pesca suggests the conservative nature of the play led to its downfall (he also mentions that the Republican-bashing was way toned-down for Vegas). I think that class issues are more to blame: A $100+ Vegas show tends to draw an audience of financially-stable individuals, while Avenue Q tells the story of young people trying to get established in the real world. I suppose the same could be said about the audience at a typical performance of La Boheme, but then I don't think that opera contains puppet sex. In any case, the audience when I saw the show didn't seem to connect with the material; the elderly couple dressed to the nines seated next to me were not there after intermission. Of course, the detachment between the intended audience and the actual audience might have had some positive effect. For instance, see this review, from someone who was horribly offended by this show, which she felt was like an R-rated Sesame Street. This, of course, is the standard metaphor that pretty much everyone uses to describe the show. So apparently, this woman paid $110 or so to see a show without asking any of the hard-hitting questions like, "What's that?"

To reiterate my own review of the show, I found it somewhat amusing, and liked some of the individual numbers very much. But I found the whole thing rather smug about it's daring, while really saying nothing new. I'm sure they're very proud of offending a TripAdvisor member from Bridgewater, MA, but I think most people just appreciate the validation they receive from the show for being such edgy people. Vegas will get by without Avenue Q, and now maybe Avenue Q can reach an audience that will better appreciate its veneer of daring.

No comments: