rOcKS' Best & Worst of 2009- Page 2

[MusicSnob1]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:36pm

"someone critiquing a show doesn't leave them open for personal attacks."

That's so wrong to think or say. You open yourself up for personal attacks the minute you choose to post opinions on the internet - for the general public to see.


"(Because what rocks says is pretty much always right)."

hey bwayfan, you've got something brown on your nose... don't even pull sh!t like right vs. wrong when we're strictly discussing OPINIONS.

Although I have to say that I agree with most of your thoughts on this specific thread, RoCks. My only suggestion is that you broaden your horizons and give the older musical classics a better chance - revisit Finians Rainbow. Please!

That is all. Thank you.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:39pm

Yeah but your attacking someone for not settling for mediocrity. It's not like he called Gone with the Wind a piece of ****.

[snarkywannabedreamer]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:41pm

That is not what Rocks is being challenged on!!! The point we are making is the level of sensitivity to criticism Rocks demonstrates in the face of criticizing others!! Take a break from your knee jerk snobbery and read the full post.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:46pm

For the billionth time, it's not the criticism I have a problem with. It's the nastiness.

My only suggestion is that you broaden your horizons and give the older musical classics a better chance - revisit Finians Rainbow. Please!
You're being a hypocrite. You're all saying that everyone can have different opinions. But then you're suggesting I go broaden my horizons and revisit shows because I didn't like them and you did.

Maybe I genuinely didn't love FINIAN'S. That is my opinion. Doesn't mean I need to "broaden my horizons" or go see it again. I just didn't enjoy it. I loved GYPSY, I loved SOUTH PACIFIC, I've loved plenty of old-school musicals. I see/review shows on a case-by-case basis and enjoy them or don't. Period.
Updated On: 12/20/09 at 09:46 PM

[snarkywannabedreamer]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:51pm

And for the billionth time, I am simply pointing out that you are just as nasty in your critique of the hard work of others in your reviews as other posters are toward the hard work you put into your posted internet opinions! there is no difference. don't dish out what you can't take is all we are saying. I have no opinion about your opinions just the hypocrisy you show in the face of posting them.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:53pm

I really don't think I've been nasty in any way. This thread was meant to encapsulate my feelings on the shows. In my full reviews, I go into more depth about these shows and I feel like I've been nothing but honest and fair.
Updated On: 12/20/09 at 09:53 PM

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 9:56pm

Personally, I enjoy reading reviews that rOcKS posts (in addition to Yankeefan)

I usually share the same opinions, and not living close to the city, it's great to hear what they have to say about the numerous productions.

MusicSnob is just a hater, in addition to a snob.

[BwayTday]

Posted: 12/20/09 at 10:15pm

i enjoy ALL reviews made by posters on this board....if I agree with them or not.

"...while you seem to have no problem cutting down the hard and passionate work of others."
You can put your heart in soul in something and guess what, some people won't like it...it happens.

[MusicSnob1]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 12:33am

"MusicSnob is just a hater"

Idina, Do you even KNOW what you're talking about? Or did you decide to just spew something out of your @ss? Look, it's not my fault that I don't like your idol and goddess and master...Eyedeenuh Minzael.

I have nothing against RoCks and, as I had ALREADY mentioned, I usually do enjoy his (?) posts/threads/etc. I actually agree with most of the opinions that RoCks posted. I was simply adding on and playing Devil's Advocate.

You need to take the stick that's shoved up there and pull it out. How 'bout you read the dialogue that has been taking place in this thread instead of ASSUMING what the situation is? Basic reading comprehensive skills, please. Jesus.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 12:45am

My Top 10 (since everyone's doing it)

Best
1. The Norman Conquests
2. Circle Mirror Transformation
3. Hair
4. Streetcar Named Desire
5. Next to Normal
6. Next Fall
7. Noel Coward's Brief Encounters
8. Mary Stuart
9. reasons to be pretty
10. Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson

Worst
1. Speed-the-Plow
2. Desire Under the Elms
3. The Starry Messenger
4. Our House
5. The Singing Forest
Updated On: 12/21/09 at 12:45 AM

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 1:15am

As the old saying goes, an opinion is like an @$$hole- everyone has one.
As someone who likes pretty much everything (I don't think I've ever not enjoyed any show), I see nothing wrong with criticizing a show when it's due. The only thing that irks me is when people dismiss a show by denying the amount of heart, soul, passion, effort, work, time, money, etc that goes into it. And noone here is doing that (I think)! It is not enough to simply say "___ sucked" or "I hated ___.". That's just disrespectful. But, if you follow that with well thought-out constructive criticism, I see nothing wrong with it- if anything it makes reading the boards more interesting and inspires stimulating conversation.

[saveusmike]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 1:21am

Nice critique rOcKs

and to the rest of BWW,

Must we have our period, every day??

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 2:55am

Made my account in '06. So please don't assume I'm some retarded Idina fan.

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 2:55am

Made my account in '06. So please don't assume I'm some retarded Idina fan.

[CSonBroadway]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 6:56am

Mildred- Shut the eff up. Just because they like Rock of Ages doesn't make them uneducated and not knowing of any show pre-rent. Stop sticking your nose up at people and go live in the 1940's alone.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 9:29am

This is the kind of off-off-off Broadway fare you'd see at midnight drunk. To call it good or artistic is uneducated, in my opinion. And do you seriously think that the majority of Rock of Ages supporters have a broad knowledge of the history of the American musical?

Updated On: 12/21/09 at 09:29 AM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 11:16am

The cast is fun, I guess, but I just couldn't get over how unfunny and absolutely horrendous the book was, how amateur the direction was, and just how low everyone involved with this show had set the bar.

I can understand if it's not the type of show you enjoy, but I'm not sure how they set the bar so low for musical theatre in any significant way. Take away the in-seat drink service and I think it would have been just as successful. Most tourists probably have no idea it even exists before buying tickets to the show. And in terms of Broadway history, it's hardly a major detriment to tarnish the image of Broadway or musical theatre. If the bar had not already been lowered enough for this show to garner favorable reviews, Tony nominations and find an audience, it wouldn't have lasted as long as it has.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 11:38am

I think Rock of Ages is a pretty legit show. I've seen plenty of theater, and I'm not saying it deserves the Pulitzer, but it accomplishes what it sets out to do. It has some funny moments. It's theatrical and comments on itself. I love the way the director used the space and the theater. I like when a show looks like it was built into the theater and not just a show thrown into a theater (a la 9 to 5 or something). Could the show have been better? Probably. I would have liked to see it with Will Swenson, but I think it's a great show, and it's just trashy low-brow entertainment at its finest. If it's not your thing, that's cool too, but don't make fun of the people who enjoy it. It's not like it's "In My Life" or "Impressionism."

[snarkywannabedreamer]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 12:07pm

I have a very broad knowledge of musical theater history in America and yes, I admit it, I loved ROA. (not sure why this thread became about this one show but oh well... ) In fact, I think it is YOU, Mildred, who is showing your ignorance of Musical Theater history with your posts.

FACT, Musical theater and Broadway started as entertainment for the immigrants... the unwashed masses... the "drunk, off, off broadway crowd." And pre-Showboat, consisted almost entirely of what are now known as Jukebox Musicals- stories put together using popular music of the day. (yes, another FACT)

And as far as the story of ROA, if you really look at the story it is an homage to the structure and storytelling of classic broadway- pre-Rent. It lovingly pokes fun at the cliches of Broadway (and rock)- and it can only do that with a deep knowledge of what it is poking fun at.

Yes, ROA is not going to win a Pulitzer but it has no desire to. It simply wants to be fun and silly... LIKE MANY MUSICALS OFTEN DID WAAAAY BACK IN THE EARLY DAYS OF BROADWAY. It is classic comedic escapism. Nothing more. Mildred, Broadway was born on lowbrow entertainment. Christ, the very first Broadway star was not a beautiful singer or a classic Shakespearean actor. it was Eugene Sandow. Do you know him, Mildred? He was a bodybuilder who did nothing more than stand and pose half naked and people flocked to see that s**t.

So before you start accusing people of being ignorant of the history of musical theater simply for liking a show, you should brush up on your own knowledge, Mildred. Your snobbery is boring.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 1:47pm

Did you not like this particular production of GODOT?

Or do you not understand the show in general?

[hmpeterson]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 2:50pm

rOcKS: how could you forget GUYS AND DOLLS??? That was the worst thing on Broadway this year!! My opinion of course!

Hey Mildred, why don't you remove the gigantic pole from your butt and lighten up. How dare you say people who enjoy a musical like ROA don't know anything about musical theater history. How about, maybe they aren't too stuck up to appreciate that while it is not the most stirring piece of musical theater ever and it certainly won't be in the top 10 of most people's list of greatest musicals ever, there maybe people out there who appreciate it for what it is...a fun night out and nothing more. And if a show like ROA introduces new people to musical theater, then Broadway is better for it because Broadway needs more people to go see it's shows. And ALL kinds of musical theater tastes should be welcomed. It is people like you who don't understand the true nature of what theater is all about. If people like it, fine. If people hate it, fine. But don't knock the intelligence of the audience simply because you are too close minded.

[Musical Director 109]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 3:58pm

Nice job!! Love reading your critiques. I'm so happy that I got to see "reasons to be pretty". It was a fantastic show with an equally fantastic cast. I also totally agree with "Hair". By far the best revival on Broadway last season.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 4:23pm

I didn't despise GUYS & DOLLS. I disliked it to be sure and thought it was pretty much totally joyless. But the show itself is so good it's hard to completely screw up. I would probably put it at the trail end of my worst of list I guess.

[esparza 333]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 4:34pm

I think we all need to chill. I always look forward to rOcKS' reviews because of how well written and insightful and honest criticism they are. This is no different. So what if rOcKS doesn't enjoy some shows you enjoy. It's his opinion and not yours. I consider rOcKS one of the least rude people on the board who respects other's opinions. He never wishes a show badly and when a show he didn't like does well he just says congrats to the cast just wasn't my cup of tea. So let's calm down an appreciate each other's opinions.

[hmpeterson]

Posted: 12/21/09 at 4:51pm

Good point. G&D is one of the all time greats. It was just such a disappointment to see McAnuff destroy that show. I didn't think anyone could ruin that show, but this revival managed to suck the life out of it.