MovieChat Forums > Funny Girl (1968) Discussion > FUNNY GIRL Revival 'Postponed'

FUNNY GIRL Revival 'Postponed'

posted 13 years ago by Harold_Robbins
2 replies | jump to latest

The producers are unable to raise the $12 million they feel is necessary to do it right. I'm not surprised, as I never gave this revival much of a chance anyway. Streisand wasn't yet a superstar in 1964 (had the word even been coined yet?) but she was apparently already well-known enough to carry a troubled $500,000 - $600,000 production on her shoulders - I've said since this new production was announced, and before Ambrose was cast, that FUNNY GIRL is not really a show so beloved by audiences that a revival will succeed without a high-caliber, high-profile star- FUNNY GIRL is no longer a show that will make a performer a star - it's a show that needs a star to carry it. My guess is that 'postponed' will turn out to mean 'cancelled.'

http://www.playbill.com/news/article/156212-Los-Angeles-and-Broadway-E ngagements-of-Funny-Girl-Postponed

"In my case, self-absorption is completely justified."

[–] xox_harrypotterfan_xox 13 years ago

This is one of the reasons why I'm surprised that the producers didn't choose someone with more fame and popularity, like Lea Michele, for instance. I'd never heard of Lauren Ambrose, although I was semi-curious to see how well she'd measure up to Barbra Streisand.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]