Will Chase on HiFi's Closing

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 10:21pm

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=43581893&blogID=205881410


He's not wrong.

[SNLMedia]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 10:29pm

Well said, Mr. Chase. I hope to see HiFi tomorrow night!

[TomMonster]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 10:58pm

I agree that the internet has changed the preview period. This is why I wait to see a show until it is frozen to comment on it.

Will is so charming (clearly moreso from his blog--thanks Yankee for pointing us there), and I wish him the best of career.

Even last night, the audience gave great feedback to the show. Yet the same people who were "hooting" around me did not like the show. I think the response is due to the fun the performers were having.

They gave it their all and believed in the material. As a performer, that is your job. It's hard to separate.

I understand his "catty" comment. It's true. Some critics go in with the review semi-written. Most BLOGGERS on this site or any other LOVE to bash a show during or before it's frozen.

However, when the majority of national critics and others agree on the fundamental problems on a show, it should be no surprise that it doesn't sell.

Word of mouth is the key to Broadway. Even greatly reviewed shows won't run if the audience doesn't connect. (Sondheim, anyone?)

HIGH FIDELITY connects temporarily, but the audiences are not telling their friends about it.

Will Chase and his cast members have nothing to be ashamed about.

The work is solid.

The show itself just does not connect...

[Neverandy]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:44pm

He said the reviews were "caddy" As in Cadillacs!
That's funny.

[thevolleyballer]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:47pm

"These days it seems it is more fun for the "critic" to be as witty and nasty as possible...

The absolute truest line in there. These days, reviews are all about cleverly using a show's negative aspects in witty little puns. I'm not just speaking of this show, though. That's the entire critical approach to everything, it appears.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:50pm

I have been saying this for many years>For a critic, it is no fun to like a show

Clowns like John Simon get a vicarious pleasure out of knocking a show & the people in it - even their physical attributes or what he feels to be their shortcomings

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 12/15/06 at 11:55pm

Will definitely has a point, I think. The focus in theatrical criticism seems to be on the critic's stylistic flair rather than the material at hand. It's difficult to even tell what Ben Brantley thinks of a show some of the time (though not, obviously, in the case of High Fidelity) because his writing is so meandering. Of course it's fun to read an amusing review, but not at the expense of valid criticism or praise of the material.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 12:24am

I just got back from tonight's performance. The cast is filled with talent. My personal favorite was Christian Anderson. His subtle character attributes totally made the show for me. I have always been a fan of Will Chase, and his talent never disappoints. I wish him and the rest of the cast the best of luck in future projects. I have such respect for theater actors that commit themselves to the theater, when they could just as easily be doing bit parts on TV shows out in Hollywood for a lot more money. I agree with Will that the critics need to get over themselves and focus simply on constructive criticism of the show at hand, so that the reader/prospective ticket buyer can then decide on their own if the show is right for them to see. Again, best of luck to the cast. I hope to see them all back on stage again soon.

[DRSisLove]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 12:30am

Such true words.

Man, I loved this show... I was planning on seeing it like 4 more times in January and Febuary.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 12:37am

You guys are all jumping up and down on the critics, but alot of you are so quick to write a review after the first preview.

The New York times did not close this show or any other printed review, it's fate ( and that of alot of shows ) are all ready decided by the end of the second preview.

[ashley0139]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 12:39am

But people on here are not professional writers that are influencing thousands of people on whether or not to see a show.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:00am

Even though people on here are not professional critics (I say critics because there may be some professional writers on here!), I have often seen posts from people who say they may or may not see a show based on posts in these threads. Since this site has a lot of members all across the country, in some way our thoughts and "reviews" of shows may influence whether some people see a show or not. And word of mouth was mentioned. Who is to say that someone who has read one of our "reviews" didn't say to someone else that they should or should not see a show based on what they read here. I am sure it happens. JMO

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:03am

Rubbish..

Look at any of the flops over the last 12 months and most of the damage was done way before a critic even had put pen to paper...While most of the shows will have closed in due course, they have no hope of ever getting bums on seats, cause within hours of the first preview finishing, the show is being ripped apart on the internet.

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:06am

I imagine that the internet's impact on ticket sales is somewhere between the two extremes.

And as I said in the other thread, I'm glad to have seen the show one final time and best of luck to the cast. Will said tonight that he wasn't sure of any immediate future plans, but I wish him the best. He's a bundle of talent.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:07am

There can be nothing wrong with too much information. If this forces people to raise the level of what gets produced on B'way, then I am all for it. (I doubt it will)
According to the Boston Critics-High Fidelity was in trouble there.
The audience never picked up here in NYC-that is what doomed it. Jekyll didn't get anywhere near rave reviews, but an audience who loved the show kept it alive. Sometimes things just don't work out. It very rarely has to do with how hard you work on something. It's the hardest lesson in showbusiness to learn. Will has been around long enough to know that.

[mabel]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:11am

He said the reviews were "caddy" As in Cadillacs!

Maybe he was subtly trying to imply that critics are really "cads"??

[McFrenzied]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:37am

It was great to read Will's personal thoughts on it, thanks Yankee. I saw the show tonight as well and I really really wanted to just sit back and have a good time, but the more it went on, the more annoyed I got...I'm not going to be negative and so I'm not even going to bother posting an analytical critique--that's like kicking someone when they're down--but I found myself agreeing with most of the critics. You guys are coming down on the critics, but they were just stating their educated opinions. The only critic I thought was overly nasty was Brantley (sorry, but "Top Five Most Forgettable Musicals" was just uncalled for).

[SirLiir]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:47am

Brantley's review was such garbage and I think Will is specifically targeting him on his comments (and rightfully so). God bless him.

[thevolleyballer]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:50am

"Look at any of the flops over the last 12 months and most of the damage was done way before a critic even had put pen to paper..."

Hmm, yes. I completely agree with all the proof you cite. Too much proof, if you ask me.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:52am

Please don't bring GOD into this.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 1:58am

The thing is that advanced sales have a ton to do with how long the production can stay open, and the advance sales for High Fidelity were not good. Before any professional reviews were posted, High Fidelity was already in bad shape. A nasty review from a newspaper on opening night would not have hurt the show at all. It's just that a good review could *theoretically* have helped the show to stay open a little longer. But this show definitely did not deserve good reviews. I know it doesn't necessarily deserve catty reviews either, but we cannot blame the critics for a show's closing when we all know that the show on it's own is just not good. I always say "Give credit where credit is due, and point the finger only when someone is truely at fault." We cannot point the finger at the critics here, but rather at the musical itself.

[lite2shine]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 2:26am

Internet changed theatre world, good or bad. I mean actors only had their official page or fan web sites several years ago, and now they are writing on myspace, having their own blog etc. to communicate with their fans directly/indirectly.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 6:12am

So after the first one or two previews of "Any of the flops in the past 12 months", how long did it take for the first post asking "How long before this closes".

And yes why that staement above may have been broad,I do believe people will read what others think before spending money on a show in previews.

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 7:10am

Oh, puh-lease, In My Life was a turkey the minute Joe Brooks conceived the idea.

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 12/16/06 at 7:27am

The real problem with the internet is not people reviewing previews, but people bashing shows based on what others said. More than half the people that bash shows on here have never even seen them. This is so immature and rude and it's causing failure to shows that could have been possibly entertaining to someone.

I too have fallen victim to this at times because whenever I plan on seeing something new, I read the board reviews also. Therefore, don't review or bash a show if you haven't seen it.