BRONX BOMBERS Reviews

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 2/6/14 at 2:01pm

Post 'em here!

[NewYorkTheater]

Posted: 2/6/14 at 10:40pm

You almost have to admire the chutzpah of the producers of “Bronx Bombers,” a dramatically inert play about the Yankees that was poorly received when it ran briefly Off-Broadway but nevertheless now has opened in Broadway’s much larger Circle in the Square Theater. They apparently aim to make their show not just critic-proof, but immune to the opinion even of regular Broadway theatergoers.
Bronx Bombers Review: The Yankees Foul

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/6/14 at 11:20pm

It bombed.

[AntV]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 12:08am

So what could take the Circle in the Square before this season is up?

[RippedMan]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 12:27am

Those pictures are horrible. I was thinking about seeing this but, oof.

[AndrewAndrew]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 1:42am

Is the new play about the New York Yankees a home run or a no hitter? Watch our video review and find out!
Click Here For Full Review of Bronx Bombers

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 2:46am

Andrew2, both a homerun and a no-hitter are good things. What you should have said is a home run or a strikeout. It is however always entertaining watching people who know nothing about sports talk about it.

[AndrewAndrew]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 2:50am

We meant a no hitter as in "not a hit show". and yes we know nothing about sports.

~AA

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 3:37am

I knew why you used the term but was just saying calling something a no-hitter is a positive thing in baseball terms, not a negative thing. A no-hitter is to pitching as a home run is to hitting. So basically what you were saying is was it great or was it great. If you are going to use sports analogies, you should try to have them make sense in the sports sense, not just the theater or literal sense. Just a little helpful feedback

[tazber]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 4:43am

So no one linked any, you know, legitimate reviews in the review thread?

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 6:26am

No, because this isn't a musical and it doesn't star Patti, Bernadette, Audra, Donna, Marin, Sutton, Idina or Kirstin so like, no one cares.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 6:31am

Here's The New York Times Review

[jayinchelsea]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 7:39am

Every once in a while we get one of these "reportage" reviews from Ben or Charles, where they really don't want to tell you whether they liked it or not, just that its here, and it might be good or bad. It doesn't much matter; plays like this have little to do with theatre. As Charles does say, it is in the same vein of this playwrights' earlier pieces, and if you liked them, you'll probably like this. Many of us won't find out.

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 8:30am

I'm a little bit muddled as to how Isherwood rated this play. I get the sense that he didn't think it was "wow", but rather "o.k.".

[NewYorkTheater]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 9:59am

It does seem a political decision of the Times (or Isherwood alone) not to slam the play -- which the Times did do in its review of the show when it was Off-Broadway. The review was by Daniel M. Gold: "the Yankees — the players, the organization, even the club’s fans — deserve better than this mawkish and sappy effort, which brings new meaning to the phrase “high cheese.”

[RippedMan]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 2:43pm

Did it do good business off-Broadway? I remember the off-Broadway reviews being less-than-stellar.

[Kad]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 2:44pm

Not really. And it's doing terrible business now.

[mamaleh]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 2:51pm

Aw, let the rabid Yankees fans have their "field of dreams" on stage. I saw it Off-Broadway and didn't hate it; I could understand where all the love and passion were coming from and directed to. Of course, if it hadn't been a comp, maybe I'd be a little more harsh. I thought the cast at least was pretty admirable, even if Richard Topol, the guy who took over at the last minute for Joe Pantoliano, reminded me more of Larry David than Yogi Berra. However, I don't see its having much longer a run on Broadway than it did off.

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 2/7/14 at 3:34pm

I read an article in the Daily News not too long ago that made it sound very much like the producers don't actually care whether this does terrible business and closes in two weeks. The goal for them it appears was to get this play to have run on Broadway to help increase the licensing fees from regional theaters they'll get down the road. It sounded like whatever money they lost on the Broadway run of Lombardi as an example, was more than made up for by the fees they made later on.

It's kind of a sad way to do business. As a lifelong Yankee fan (even though I don't live in the New York area anymore), there are so many great, compelling stories about the Yankees that could have been told and yet they put forward this mishmash of ideas and characters. I actually liked Lombardi a lot, didn't see Magic/Bird and wouldn't waste my money on this. The only positive thing I can think of to say about it is that my favorite Yankee, Roy White attended the premier and it was nice to see a current photo of him.


Updated On: 2/7/14 at 03:34 PM