Be careful before seeing Great Comet. What you should know

[VED]

Posted: 6/10/17 at 11:58pm

 I saw The Great Comet today and here are my thoughts (and warnings!):

When I walked out of Hamilton more than a year ago, riveted, I saw for the first time a huge billboard for a strange-looking new musical called “Natasha, Pierre and The Great Comet of 1812.” Judging by the audacity of what looked like an interracial couple in 19th century, Euro-centric garb, surrounded by an essence of steampunk-ish design flare, I thought it was bound to be a hit, possibly the next Hamilton. I got home, watched a few youtube videos about the original performance in the Meatpacking District and put it on my list of Broadway must-sees.  TV ads perpetuated my excitement, not to mention the community buzz, good reviews,  and of course, the Tony nominations last month. Everyone is talking about this show. So when I finally decided to rush the matinee performance today with a friend, the day before the Tony Awards, I had high hopes, even though I knew there was a chance the headliner, Josh Groban would be absent.

The best way I can describe this show is that it was honestly the biggest disappointment I’ve ever experienced in live theater. That is unfortunate to say, especially since I loved the music and the cast. But what anyone who plans on seeing this show needs to know is that you must choose your seats wisely. Where you sit will make or break your experience, and it certainly broke mine. In fact, my seat alone was the primary reason I walked away almost hating this production, feeling a bit cheated, lied to and led on.

To start, I got into the rush line shortly after 6 a.m. Saturday morning. I was 10th in line (not including the couple that magically appeared in front of me an hour or so before the box office opened and ordered two tickets each). After four short hours, and waiting for the magic couple to order their tix, my companion and I finally reached the box office. The kind woman behind the window told me she had a table with two seats available, with an obstructed view, stage right. I specifically asked if these were decent seats. “It’s obstructed view, but every seat is obstructed, you will have a nice view of Pierre’s Salon...yadda yadda yadda.” I sensed a bit of rigmarole in her tone, but considering a woman ahead of us in line, who seemed like she knew more about the show than us, literally lept for joy when she found out she got “the table,” I decided not to question the ticket lady on her assurance and took the table.

Warning: This was a HUGE mistake. Our seats at Table C, and particularly mine, at seat 1, have to be THE WORST seats in the theater, no, in any theater. Just to give perspective: the theater, in terms of seating, is divided into three sections: Mezzanine/balcony, the orchestra, and the main stage. The orchestra and stage have sub-sections: on stage, there are “pits” or circular sections with seats and tables. The “stage”, which is basically an elaborate runway of sorts,  pretty much wraps around these circular sections. There is also the “banquette” seating on stage, which is essentially stadium-style seating facing the orchestra section. In the orchestra there is traditional theater seating toward the back. But toward the front, in between the traditional theater seats and the stage (which is raised, by the way--important fact),  there are saloon/club-style tables and chairs. This is where we were seated, and where you must absolutely avoid.

Our table was behind a row of stools at a bar-like slab facing the stage. When we sat down, I noticed our level was lower than the level in front of us with the stools. One woman was already sitting in one of the stools, directly in front of my chair, but there were two more empty stools next to her. I knew then the view of the main stage would suck. I leaned over to my friend and said “I guess, this is what she meant by obstructed.” Little did we know, that was not even the half of it. Eventually an older couple arrived and sat in the open chairs, obstructing the view even more.

At this point we had no idea how the show would be performed and where the actors would be. I was told and read several times that action happens “all around” the theater, so it did not bother me as much that three full-sized adults were seated, elevated (as opposed to stadium-style leveling, which would make common-sense), directly in front of me, essentially blocking the entire main stage.

The older couple in front of us didn’t seem to care. In fact, they seemed overjoyed by the experience and seemed annoyingly satisfied with their poorly placed seats. Well, good for them, I guess. They probably paid hundreds of dollars for them.

As the first act dragged on, I became more and more pissed. It literally baffles me to the point of feeling cheated, why our seats even existed. Who thought this was okay to sell to people?! I get that it was a discounted “obstructed view” seat, but this was comically obstructed by the raised bar-style stool seating in front of us and the people sitting in them. I would say that of the entire first Act, I was able to see literally less than 30 percent of the show. It got to the point where I simply just sat there, pissed, listening to the music because I could see literally nothing but the backs of heads. The action that happened in the mezzanine and staircases were the pretty minor chorus shenanigans that carry the show.

I could have stayed at home and listened to the soundtrack and gotten the same experience. What did I pay for? Why was I there? To see an occasional actor make brief eye contact, only to be punished by the blinding stage light attacking my pupils once the actor moved out of the way? Or to see another couple having the time of their lives, swiveling in their bar seats and gleefully pointing like school children at whatever was going on the staircase above me? Perhaps to try to hear what the cast members hiding behind the curtain behind the bar next to our seats were loudly whispering about as they prepared to march onto stage?

Yes, the seats were literally a joke. But then there is the show itself. I expected Josh Groban to be absent, and he was, but so were Denee Benton (Natasha) and Lucas Steele (Anatole). Okay, fair, it’s the Saturday matinee before the Tony Awards, I get it, and the swings substituting for the cast were AWESOME, particularly Blaine Krauss playing Anatole, who I think has an amazing voice. And the entire ensemble seemed to give it their all.

But all that was completely overshadowed by the story and plot, or lack thereof. The Great Comet, particularly its first act, is essentially a steampunk-lite cabaret show. The producers could have renamed the show “War and Peace: An Abridged Cabaret," and saved ink.

That was essentially the “plot”: one of the several story lines in Leo Tolstoy’s "War and Peace," following a young, unbelievably naive countess, Natasha, betrothed to a prince at war, Andrey, until she is tempted and wooed by an incestuous playboy, Anatole, and his sister Helene. But there is no spoken dialogue, only song, most of which is sung with so much fanfare it is easy to miss key plot elements whilst chorus members are chucking things in your face and trying oh-so-desperately to get you to realize this is not your typical piece of theater.

This pretentious air about the entire performance irked me. Like La La Land, which I also hated, it seemed to be trying TOO hard to be a different and unique piece of musical theater. It’s hyper-aware of it’s own unlikeliness, and tries shamelessly to shove it in your face and make sure you are aware, too.There were a bunch of funny one-liners that seemed to be thrown into the songs, almost as if to intentionally distract you from the lack of substance, so you felt something positive. And the cast members lining the aisles throughout the show could have very well just stood there, yelling over any of the songs or whispering in your ear  “NO! LOOK AT ME!! LOOK AT US! AREN’T WE COOL! WANT A MARACA? GO AHEAD AND SHAKE IT! DON'T EVEN PAY ATTENTION TO THE STORY BECAUSE THERE BARELY IS ONE!”

The show was doing too much when there was not enough substance in the plot to back it up. The real show was the experience, not the story, and that felt cheap to me. It felt like a meal with unbalanced flavors. Sure, give me the bells, whistles and egg shakers, but balance it out with character development and story structure. Instead, we were quickly introduced to characters and, even quicker, forced to try to relate and empathize with them without really knowing them. Both characters Sonya and Pierre, for instance, had what sounded like, very emotional and powerful solos in the second act, but quite frankly I didn’t care about them. Sonya was literally in one or two scenes prior to her solo and by then I didn’t care about her, despite the fact that Brittain Ashford sang the you-know-what out of that song. And by now most know of the irony of the titular male star being a minor character, so Pierre’s final scenes seemed ironic. I could see, well hear, his emotion, but I couldn’t feel it because...who even was this person who is suddenly asking me to feel what he feels?. Their big moments fell flat because they were barely in the show prior to make you care about their heartbreak toward the end.

The Comet was not a bad production. I commend the show on its energy. I loved the references to other musical theater: Natasha and Mary’s mini version of "Loathing", The "Seasons of Love" style lineup in the mezzanine during the first act, allusions to Phantom of the Opera and Moulin Rouge, and others I may have missed.  I loved that the cast seemed to genuinely enjoy performing, too, even though, at times it came across as meta. The choreography was also as eclectic as the score. The music, singing and acting were phenomenal. But what good is any of it if I can’t SEE ANYTHING and there is no character development to FEEL anything. If I wanted to just listen, I’d queue up the soundtrack at home!

I walked away from The Great Comet feeling cheated.  I was sold a seat that shouldn’t be allowed to exist in a Tony-nominated, most-likely winning, Broadway show. I felt like the show over-promised and under-delivered, totally over-selling itself. It felt cheap, almost like a tourist trap that belonged off-off Broadway a la Paris’ Moulin Rouge. As I watched the older couple in front of me and a few others around the theater captivated by the exuberance of the entire spectacle, I couldn’t help but wonder if they were actually following along and enjoying the story as much as the bells, whistles and audience participation--the novelty of it all. Then again, for all I know, from where they were sitting, with a view beyond the heads and shoulders of folks seated in front of them, The Great Comet, live and in person, might actually feel like something more than just a gimmicky trap.

Updated On: 6/11/17 at 11:58 PM

[PaulWom]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 12:37am

A few thunfsthings: there is already a thread on Great Comet. No need to start an entire new one just to bash it.. That's very troll-like.

Second- I respect your opinion, and fully disagree with it. The story of Comet , of humans who have lost everything due to what is human nature- lust, selfishness, love (and in the case of Natasha, almost her life) for another human being - only to find redemption in helping another.

third- I'm sorry, but if the box office attendant told you the seat was obstructed view, then that's what it is. Their job is to sell you a seat. When I went my second time, I sat in a similar rush location on the other side of the orchestra. The woman at the box office made no bones about that it was obstructed. 

I'm sorry you couldn't see the action where you were sitting, but yes, most people CAN see in seats that are NOT sold as obstructed view. You could've gotten one of those. If you didn't like your seating location, then put a comment about it in the seating thread so people can know your views. Don't start a new thread because you bought an obstructed view seat and then got mad because it was obstructed view

[Rainah]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 12:57am

So you were sold seats you were told were obstructed, and then were pissed you couldn't see anything? You just sat there, pissed, instead of watching the show and then got even more frustrated when you didn't understand later plot points?

Comments about seats (Which ARE very useful) belong in the seating thread. Comments about what you thought of the plotline belong in the reviews thread; personally I will never understand people who spend money to see a show without doing their research first to know what they're getting into, but that's on you.

 

Things you genuinely need to be careful about when seeing Great Comet
- the strobe lights are the most intense I've ever experienced, and it's genuinely difficult to describe how intense and disorienting they are.
- You will not see every single bit of the show, no matter where you sit. There is not a single seat that lets you see everything, but some seats offer more than others
- If you don't like audience interaction, don't sit on aisles. Some aisle seats have more interaction than others

[PaulWom]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 1:01am

Also, about the strobe lights- the actors tell you that there are intense strobe lights in the first act, and if they are not for you, then you can close your eyes and just listen to the story until they're over

[Rainah]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 1:07am

PaulWom said: "Also, about the strobe lights- the actors tell you that there are intense strobe lights in the first act, and if they are not for you, then you can close your eyes and just listen to the story until they're over"

Yeah, that's what I'd recommend too. But I just like to make a note about it when I talk about Comet, because they're so strong. I brush off warnings like "intense strobe lights used during the show" all the time because they never seem that bad, so I try and emphasize: yes, they are very strong

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 1:20am

Maybe don't buy an obstructed view seat next time.

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 1:27am

My seats were fine and it was still a huge disappointment, it's disappointing from any seat! 

[PaulWom]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 1:34am

Oh, muscle23ftl, I thought we'd seen the last of you. The troll returns.

By the way, if you're going to insult the show, that isn't even a good insult. How would you know the show is "disappointing from any seat" unless you've sat in almost all of them? 

[theater_tech]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 1:37am

Oh man, I enjoyed reading this; I needed a good laugh.

[hork]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 2:37am

Welcome to the boards, and sorry your experience was so bad. Ignore the folks who have bizarre hang-ups about starting new threads.

[Brave Sir Robin2]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 2:48am

"This pretentious air about the entire performance irked me. Like La La Land, which I also hated, it seemed to be trying TOO hard to be a different and unique piece of musical theater."

 

Don't you compare Great Comet to that high-budget student film!

But in all seriousness, seating plays a big part in Great Comet. That being said, rush tickets are the luck of the draw. Maybe if you had better or at least different seats, it might have affected your point of view on the show! That being said, I know Great Comet is not everyone's cup of tea. Personally, it's one of my favorite theatrical experiences of all time (in ~20 years) and I hope it does well at the Tonys, but it's very divisive. Inventive works seem to do that.

[Sondheimite]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 2:50am

Imagine getting a rush ticket for Great Comet and still acting like a spoiled brat about an obstructed view seat where you knew it was obstructed view and still made the decision to buy it. 

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 3:21am

Why did you just let that couple cut in front of you without saying anything? 

[froote]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 3:32am

Sorry your seat wasn't good. Disagree about the story. I didn't think you needed to see that much of Sonya to be moved by her devotion to her cousin in Sonya Alone. As for Pierre, I feel he is developed plenty. Gets two big solos in the first act and in the second act we see him interact with almost every character. People can call this spectacle over substance but I can't listen to the final song without getting misty-eyed, so I can't say I agree. I don't think trying hard to be different is a bad thing, particularly when there's so much complacency on Broadway and people copying what has come before. 

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 4:19am

First off, ignore the people being jerks. That's what BWW is known for. Yes, they're obstructed view seats but when your seat is SO obstructed you can barely see ANYTHING, they shouldn't be sold, I agree. I remember people having similar problems when they rushed Once, some were saying they could see less than 40% of the show. I don't care if the ticket is $40, $20 or less. That's ridiculous to be sold when you can see that little.

I also rushed Comet last month and my seats were terrible. Also, even though the box office attendant said they were partial view, nothing was labeled on the ticket but that's beside the point. I was in the first row, stage right, all the way on the end. I saw just about 30% of what happened on stage as well. By far the worst seats I've ever had at a Broadway show.

I didn't love the show but didn't hate it, the music is growing on me. My big problems with it are Lucas Steele, who gives a terrible performance and Denee, who is just ok. No idea how they got their Tony nominations. Lucas especially, he was embarrassing and hit maybe a third of the notes he was supposed to hit. Just my two cents though.

[JBC3]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 6:51am

Well this sure was something. I cold feel the righteous indignation oozing from the post.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 8:01am

I absolutely love Great Comet.

But there has perhaps never been show on Broadway in which choice of seat is as imperative a predictor of one's level of enjoyment.  

Not only does one's view of the expansive and all-encompassing action differ dramatically depending on where one is sitting.  But also one's view of the extraordinarily bedecked theatre and the strikingly composed and house-integrated set and set-integrated house.

I didn't realize any of this when I got my mezzanine seat.  And I'm very grateful that I did and highly encourage it (but of course not everyone in the house can be there, to state the ob).

Updated On: 6/12/17 at 08:01 AM

[Bean2]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 8:04am

We sat in the last row of the banquettes yesterday. It was an amazing experience, especially for my daughters who love theatre and are 12 and 14. 

[Lot666]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 9:17am

n2nbaby said: "First off, ignore the people being jerks. That's what BWW is known for."



n2nbaby said: "Yes, they're obstructed view seats but when your seat is SO obstructed you can barely see ANYTHING, they shouldn't be sold, I agree. I remember people having similar problems when they rushed Once, some were saying they could see less than 40% of the show. I don't care if the ticket is $40, $20 or less. That's ridiculous to be sold when you can see that little."

The first time I saw Groundhog Day, we were in the center mezzanine, about 5-6 rows back. The rake at this location in the August Wilson is all-but non-existent, so the lower 30-40% of the stage was continually blocked by the people in front of us, yet the seats were sold at full price with no warning.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 9:46am

I love the show, but my view has never been obstructed. 

I think your tone is what people find objectional....the posters here KNOW there are some seats that the view is awful.

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 9:56am

Lot666 said: "n2nbaby said: "First off, ignore the people being jerks. That's what BWW is known for."



n2nbaby said: "Yes, they're obstructed view seats but when your seat is SO obstructed you can barely see ANYTHING, they shouldn't be sold, I agree. I remember people having similar problems when they rushed Once, some were saying they could see less than 40% of the show. I don't care if the ticket is $40, $20 or less. That's ridiculous to be sold when you can see that little."

The first time I saw Groundhog Day, we were in the center mezzanine, about 5-6 rows back. The rake at this location in the August Wilson is all-but non-existent, so the lower 30-40% of the stage was continually blocked by the people in front of us, yet the seats were sold at full price with no warning.

 

"

That's ridiculous. I'm sorry that happened to you. Also, the girl sitting next to me at Comet DID pay full price and she had the same view as my boyfriend and I. When getting a cheap ticket I expect to not see everything but when you can barely see ANY of the show, the seats should not be sold. End of story.

 

[greenifyme2]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 10:15am

The first time I saw Groundhog Day, we were in the center mezzanine, about 5-6 rows back. The rake at this location in the August Wilson is all-but non-existent, so the lower 30-40% of the stage was continually blocked by the people in front of us, yet the seats were sold at full price with no warning.

 

Yes, THANK YOU! Glad I wasn't the only one to notice this! My friend and I won the Groundhog Day lottery and were in row G of the mezz. We sat down and immediately realized the same thing about the rake, and the view was terrible! I assumed that's why they were lottery seats and guessed they weren't full price seats. We noted that the people in front of us, however, had a fantastic view.

My mom was coming into town, and I really wanted to take her to the show and make sure we had good seats, so I went to the box office to purchase them at full price (but without having to pay the fees). I did my research of what was available, and there were 3 seats in center row F that I specifically requested 2 of. The guy selling me the tickets gave me a very hard time. He really wanted to sell me row G (I assume because he didn't want to leave a single in row F). I told him "No thank you, I sat in row G last time and the view was obstructed due to the slope in that area of the theater. I'd really like to be in row F". And he lost his mind.  He really made me question myself wondering if my friend and I were crazy in our observances. He went on and on about how I should "make sure to stop by the box office after the show to inform them that the view really was any better" etc etc. I asked if he had sat there and he said no, and I told him to go check it out. Ugh. Jerk. Anyways, he begrudgingly sold them to me, our row F seats were amazingly perfect, my mom could see perfectly and loved the show. I'm glad I stood my ground!

On other notes, I have a ticket for DEH for September that I'm pretty sure is obstructed view even though it didn't say anything when I bought it, nor is it on the ticket. After being in the theater twice, I am prepared for it to be. I also won the BOM lottery where my $50 lottery seat was the most terrible seat I've ever sat in. It was "only $50" I guess, and if you don't try you never know. I won front-row seats to Amelie which is perfect in the WK theater, and my obstructed view of Sunset Boulevard was one of the most wonderful theater experiences I've ever had.

Point being, sometimes you have a not-so-stellar seating experience (especially on last-minute discount tickets). Luckily these shows run 7-8 nights a week, and lots of them have discount/lottery/rush. Do your research, take what you learned, and give it another shot if there is availability and if you are financially able to do so.

 

Updated On: 6/11/17 at 10:15 AM

[denali.fire]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 10:36am

I had a great seat in the pop-up theatre around 2013 (?).  

Three words to describe it:

Tedious 

Tedious

Tedious

I started to  read the novel but wound up reading the spark notes. 

So get yourself the spark notes and it will only be 1 tedious. 

 

 

 

[rjm516]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 10:47am

I saw that understudy list on twitter yesterday, with Josh, Denee, Lucas, and Amber all out -- I would have been pissed. All of them? Tony weekend? Wtf was going on?

[VED]

Posted: 6/11/17 at 11:04am

Thank you n2nbaby and others with thoughtful replies. I wanted to respond to some points and elaborate.

I agree with you n2nbaby. That was the point I wanted to make. A huge chunk of the shows I've seen on Broadway have been under rush or lottery tickets, so I've seen my fair share of "obstructed" views. I know what it means, or what it should mean. But never have they ever been THIS obstructed. The Imperial may as well place a chair facing the wall in a corner in the back of the room and sell it as an obstructed seat, given Table C exists. This to me is just wrong. And this "pack 'em in" mentality adds to the "cheap," touristy feel I got from the show.

Also if, as many say, we can agree that The Great Comet has varying seating that could make or break your experience, that in of itself is reason to be wary of this show, and is why I dislike it! The alternative seating is one of the main selling points of this "innovative" production. To produce a show in which some seating are "gotcha!" seats and others are supposedly amazing is just bad production, in my opinion! I would think the contrasting dynamics of my experience and the older couple directly in front of me would be avoided by a Broadway production. 

Also, if we were to ignore the fact that I bought obstructed seating, there's still the issue of storytelling. The story is slapped on top of the concept, rather than the other way around. Perhaps if I had better seats, I'd be just as distracted by the spectacle as the older couple in front of me, but as I said, that makes the show feel cheesy. The story, rather the telling of it, was not compelling, neither were the characters, and I'm not sure they would have been just because I could see better. A better view would have just allowed me to distract myself more from the shallow narrative. Given the fact that the wild seating plan completely alters your experience, you would think the producers would at least create a compelling, beautiful story to appease the house.


As for the couple who cut the line. About an hour or so before 10 a.m. the woman appeared and seemed to be chatting away with a man who was originally in front of me, outside the line. A bit later she sat down and it became clear she was now in line. I pointed this out to my friend who said maybe she and the guy she knew were buying together. Then out of nowhere, a few minutes before 10, her friend appears. I thought maybe he was just there for support. But it wasn't until we were at the ticket window that it was clear that they were both buying two tickets each, and had essentially sneaked into the line with the help of the original guy in front of us. Had I caught on to the scheme sooner I would have called them out.