Isherwood's solo voice...

[BroadwayBen]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:19pm

It's interesting that Isherwood is a lone voice of high praise for BRONX TALE and RIDE THE CYCLONE.  Most of his colleagues were decidedly mixed to dismissive on both.  And then writing that for him NATASHA is better than HAMILTON...He seems intent on being alone in his views.   Thoughts?  I find I've grown really used to his writing style so I find him getting less interesting in the writing, but more interesting in his singular stances.  

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:34pm

I don't think he's intentionally being the "lone voice" - in fact, if he's doing his job correctly, he has no idea what the other critics are going to write and has independently formed his own opinion regardless of any "buzz" he might have heard.

Theater critics are just people. It's a personal opinion, nothing more.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:43pm

He also hated Fun Home, for the record.

I'm happy to start a kickstarter for him to open a yogurt shop like he promised, at this point.
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/07/theater-talkback-for-one-critic-its-a-rapp/
Updated On: 12/2/16 at 01:43 PM

[Andy51]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:44pm

Isherwood has been an outlier in connection with a number of shows over the years.  For example, I recall that after Brantley and many others lavished praise on Stoppard's Coast of Utopia, Isherwood went out his way (in the sense that he was not the reviewer assigned the show) to write a dissenting opinion.  I happened to agree with him on that one, but not so much with respect to some of his more recent reviews.

[Cfried]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:46pm

He also raved about Tuck Everlasting...

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:48pm

It's frustrating because I look up to Brantley tremendously, but if I see that it's an Isherwood review, I just close out of my tab. His opinions have become meaningless. 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:49pm

And wasn't Disaster also a Critics' Pick? There's a pattern.

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:50pm

This is high praise?!

"plain old pasta with red sauce"

"It doesn’t break ground or dazzle"

"certainly not without its formulaic or sentimental aspects."

[Kad]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:50pm

He's had some odd reviews lately, even for him. His takes on The Harvest and A Life were both supremely misguided.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 1:51pm

haterobics, it's a critics' pick. You can't argue a Critics' Pick.

Updated On: 12/2/16 at 01:51 PM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 2:53pm

He is a truly terrible critic. It is shocking that he is writing for the newspaper of record. He doesn't so much not understand theater as he appears not interested in understanding theater. 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 3:24pm

While Isherwood's reviews tend to be a little bit odd, I would take him over Brantley any day.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 3:45pm

And there we have it. 

Reviewers viewed individually mean little or nothing, especially out of context. A reviewer I usually disagree with is just as good as one I usually disagree with. A bad reviewer is one too inconsistent to be of any value. 

[GhostXmasPast]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 6:10pm

As a theater patron it is ultimately up to you to parse the words of a critic - and align yourself with those critics whose reviews align with your own experience and opinion.

that said, his comments about "Bronx" seemed far from lavish praise.  To me the praise seemed pretty tepid, and comparison of first / second acts would be a backhanded compliment t at best.  But he certainly didn't pan it.

[Mike66]

Posted: 12/2/16 at 9:41pm

GhostXmasPast said: "As a theater patron it is ultimately up to you to parse the words of a critic - and align yourself with those critics whose reviews align with your own experience and opinion


I have found that I am a Brantley guy -- not his writing, per se, but I like what he likes almost all the time.  Not the same for Isherwood -- sometimes yes, often no.  And I notice that recently, he has liked most of what he sees.

But I agree that his review here was problematic -- for me, reading it -- it didn't seem like "high praise" or a "recommendation" -- but there's that "critic's choice" mark at the top -- (boy, the producers must love those when they get them).  If I hadn't seen that and just read the review, I wouldn't think he was recommending it.

 

 

"

 

Updated On: 12/2/16 at 09:41 PM

[BroadwayBen]

Posted: 12/3/16 at 7:28pm

I disagree.  Isherwood's review of the show at Papermill is probably what got it to Broadway.  He likes the show.   I was also confused by his praise for "Tuck' and "Bright Star" when everyone else was mixed at best. 

[helvizz]

Posted: 12/3/16 at 9:16pm

I will never forget when he raved about Disaster (one of the biggest mess I've ever seen), made it a Critic's Pick and said Jennifer Simmard was the one who deserved the Tony. Those were his personal opinions, of course, but they differ from that of many theatergoers, including mine.

Updated On: 12/3/16 at 09:16 PM