Comscore

Broadway hits have become critic-proof like movies!

chanel
Leading Actor
joined:1/28/04
Big names-versus-no-big-names has replaced raves-versus-pans as the barometer of a smash.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/dailymusto/2013/01/broadway_hits_h.php

Updated On: 1/24/13 at 11:43 AM
suestorm Profile Photo
suestorm
Broadway Legend
joined:1/15/13
thats a good thing dont you think? people are using their own minds. why should one or two reviewers hold the fate of millions of dollars and hundreds of peoples jobs in their hands
FINDINGNAMO, SNAFU, THEATERDIVE, JORDANCATALONO, LIZASHEADBAND, PALJOEY: You all claim to "IGNORE ME" I wish you would and stop constantly commenting on my posts. Thanks ...................................................................................................................................... The MOST POPULAR and DANGEROUS Poster on BWW! Banned by the PTA, PTC and the MEANGIRLS of BWW..................................................................................................................... ...Ukraine Girls really knock me out, they leave the west behind..........................
Wynbish Profile Photo
Wynbish
Broadway Legend
joined:4/27/12
I don't think that's the point of what he's saying. He's saying that many are attending a show probably just because a big name is in it, rather than maybe because Isherwood raved.
madbrian Profile Photo
madbrian
Broadway Legend
joined:6/1/06
I think the fact that many star vehicles are such limited runs contributes to this phenomenon. No one could wait for reviews to get tix to see Pacino in Glengarry.

I also think that at any moment in time you could make several contrasting arguments to try to figure out the fickleness of Broadway audiences.
"It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg." -- Thomas Jefferson
everythingtaboo Profile Photo
everythingtaboo
Broadway Legend
joined:5/5/04
It's all so sad. But I blame the high ticket prices - people simply "want their money's worth" and for a lot of folks nowadays, that doesn't always mean quality. They want something they can talk/brag about when they get home.


"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
Mister Matt Profile Photo
Mister Matt
Broadway Legend
joined:5/17/03
This article could have been written by anyone since the early 70s. Successful shows with mediocre reviews aren't a new phenomenon. Neither are critically acclaimed flops.

"Now, it seems, with out-of-towners desperate to see an epic, a spectacle, an event, and a movie star--and having to pay big bucks to do that--so-so stuff can run forever."

That's been a meme since the British invasion of the 80s. Same old sour grapes the academics spew whenever a show they don't deem "worthy" becomes a hit with the unwashed masses. The only thing missing was a venomous diatribe on jukebox musicals.

"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Updated On: 1/24/13 at 02:00 PM
bobs3
Broadway Legend
joined:4/8/12
Here's an example of how it works:

If Meryl Streep and Glenn Close had starred in THE ANARCHIST for a 12-week run instead of LuPone & Winger, it would have been the hottest ticket in town despite the bad reviews. Remember Julia Roberts in THREE DAYS OF RAIN and Hugh Jackman & Daniel Craig in A STEADY RAIN.
qolbinau Profile Photo
qolbinau
Broadway Legend
joined:6/29/08
Julia Roberts sold out her show in 2006...why is this new/insightful?
GavestonPS Profile Photo
GavestonPS
Broadway Legend
joined:6/10/12
Ethel Merman ran HAPPY HUNTING for 412 performances in 1956-57. Anybody seen a production lately? Or ever? (After Eight will be here in a moment to tell us it was genius, but I mean anybody else?) Star vehicles aren't new on Broadway.

Mister Matt is right that the same complaints could have been written any time since the 1970s, except that the willingness of stars to appear on Broadway actually seems to have increased of late.

But even 40 years ago, the audience that actually read newspapers and discussed theater reviews in order to make informed purchases was in decline. Along with ticket prices and other things, I'd blame television and the decline of newspapers.

That 60-second TV review doesn't provide the same fodder for discussion that the TIMES once did with an overnight review by one person and then a longer analysis by Walter Kerr on Sunday. (Maybe the TIMES still prints two reviews, but fewer people read the paper.) The TV review, IMO, gets lost among the other commercials.

And lacking any other guide, why wouldn't a patron spend his/her $200 bucks on a star vehicle?




Updated On: 1/25/13 at 07:58 PM

 
Advertisement