Dirty Dancing the Musical Chicago Reviews

Posted: 10/20/08 at 4:20am

"Baby, you fans of the movie "Dirty Dancing" might recall, has a rich summer of ’63 in the Catskills. She learns to dance. She has a fight with her daddy. She loses her virginity.

In fact, she learns to do just about everything except sing. Which would be fine, except she’s now starring in a Broadway show...In Baby’s famous postcoital moment, just when you think she’s going to open up her lips to describe her whole new world, a waitress—or is it a maid?—at the back of the stage starts to sing instead. Talk about sticking Baby in a corner. This truly bizarre new live version of "Dirty Dancing," which I saw Sunday night at the Cadillac Palace Theatre, beggars description."


Chicago Tribune

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 8:04am

Oh my...

I was hoping for more from this

Posted: 10/20/08 at 8:11am

I never expected this to be any good. Just never did.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 8:40am

This show is horrid and i dont understand how its doing so well here in the UK

[MamasDoin'Fine]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 8:51am

LOL
I've just received the flyer from the Boston run in January and it states 'Pre-Broadway Run' -poor Broadway.
I saw the original original in Sydney and it was horrendous.
The fact that is such a hit in London just tells the state of the Wesrt End at the moment. It is sold out until next April nd is taking bookings until June 2010!!!!
Please put baby in a corner and leave her there!

[bwayfan9]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:00am

"Please put baby in a corner and leave her there!"

along with coolkid

[alterego]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:06am

The show was never described as "a musical". The creators prefer to talk of it as "the movie on stage".

[MamasDoin'Fine]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:10am

My dogs could do better ..... on stage!

[JeaniusIsMe]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:13am

I was over in London when it opened and all I heard from theatre types was rent the movie- it's cheaper. When I heard it was opening here, I told everyone I know the same thing. A waste of time and money to simply copy the film.

[MamasDoin'Fine]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:14am

Most of it is taped music and the band dont play everything you hear.

[MelissaF]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:35am

I've seen the Toronto production, and was extremely disappointed. Having grown up on the movie, and loving it, this is nothing more than a cheesey, poor version of it. Save your ticket fees. Rent the movie.

Posted: 10/20/08 at 12:14pm

"You know powerful nostalgia is at work when the audience explodes in tumultuous applause for ... a log. Amanda Leigh Cobb is a dead ringer for the movie's Jennifer Grey (who cannot make the same claim since she had a nose job)."

Ouch


Chicago Sun-Times

[coolboi952]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 3:38pm

I saw this show in london over the summer and actually enjoyed it. I have seen the movie a few times and enjoyed it. But I don't hold it near and dear to my heart. So maybe I was more open to it on stage. However after I saw it I did think that it would proboly never play well over here.

I think some of the reason of it success overseas is because they do not hold the movie versions to such high regard as we do over here. Because the audience overseas loves this show and they are yelling at the stage and just getting lost in it. Especially at the final scene of the show. I know that its weird that the actors never sing and almost all the singing is done by the same two actors.

But honestly I really think its works and makes it even less corny. I do not see this show doing well over here and although I enjoyed it. I really do not see the American audience going for it. but I could be wrong

[Tag]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 5:06pm

Well the Toronto audiences "go for it" and generally have the same sentiments for the film as Americans.

[coolboi952]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 5:32pm

That might be true but I still think that people over here will still hold it up higher. I feel that the audiences up there are still closer to the what the West End Audiences are. because they love bringing west end shows over there for example Dirty Dancing,WE WILL ROCK YOU, as well as priscilla queen of the desert which will be coming over there after its West End run. I believe that they bring them over there first to sorta see how they work with those audiences and if they are hits then the consider bringing them over here. I just think the big thing about this show is it is more of a dancing show and people want to see a more traditional musical. Not just the same two chorus people singing the songs. I really do not think that this show will ever see broadway and if it does it will not last very long.

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 5:50pm

Why did "Hot Feet" just cross my mind?

[chinkie azn jai]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 5:54pm

I went to the official opening night last night, and I felt the same way Chris Jones of the Chicago Tribune felt. I have never seen the movie (sad, I know), but I felt that a lot of the scenes were unnecessary. It seemed that they were put in just to please the fans of the movie and not to progress the plot or add character development. The direction seemed to go everywhere, and I wish they decided to either do the music all live or all canned (preferable live). The cast was great, especially Britta Lazenga. Overall, an ok show that is definitely an audience pleaser. I wonder how this will do on Broadway...

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 5:54pm

I don't know why they just don't call it a play.

[Tag]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 6:05pm

Well because it isn't a play. There still is singing and dancing.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 7:58pm

Yeah, but it's essentially people singing the soundtrack, so? It's just a play with music since the music isn't working to further the plot.

[Tag]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 8:33pm

I don't know why I'm defending this but...

Any actual singing is done with the live band. The prerecorded songs are used as underscoring, for some dance sequences or for transitions.

And the music furthers the plot in this show (maybe even more so than some other musicals). The show is about the music/dancing.

And lets say you take out the singing element from this show. It still would be a dance show, not a play. Look at Fosse, Movin' Out, etc. that were all considered musicals.

[broadwayfan7]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 9:22pm

I'm seeing this show next weekend!

[AllyA]

Posted: 10/20/08 at 11:45pm

I totally disagree with the review in the tribune. I saw the show recently and the review is written by someone who did not like the film (he quotes lines from the stage play that aren't in the film as film quotes) and only likes traditional musicals and does not get that dirty dancing is a play with music and dance - get it - dirty dancing. He doesn't once mention the dancing which is unbelievable and deserves praise. He was probably the same type of critic who said Contact was not a musical but it won best musical and did not even have an orchestra. Or that Movin Out should have had more singing. Dirty Dancing was brilliant, and I liked that Johnny and Baby did not sing to each other, if Baby had broken into song after the love scene I would have hated it, it would be like the one scene i hate in Jersey boys, oh what a night when he loses his virginity, it was so cheesy. I think Dirty Dancing is going to be a huge hit and audiences all over america will embrace it.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 10/21/08 at 5:07am

I watched this a week after it opened in the UK (after they had to change all the advertising which was advertising it as a musical when it clearly wasn't) and was horrified.

I have nothing against putting movies on to the stage as a straight adaptation, but something new needs to be brought to the table to put an original stamp on it.
Nothing in this show is new, creative, original, exciting, its just a poor version of the film transplanted on to the stage.
It gets annoying because you feel like at times you are watching a musical because there is so much music, but you are praying for a lead cast member to sing instead of the background singers.

The odd thing about this whole sorry mess is that Dirty Dancing could have actually made a good musical and still of attracted the same audience.Keeping many of the old songs and writing new songs it could have been a great show which had something new to offer.
Sadly because of this wreck of a version we will probably never see an actual musical of the show.The only reason i can guess they did it this way was because writing a musical for it would have been to much work for them.

Flashdance has just started touring the UK and is getting great reviews, a genuinely exciting new musical with a few of the old songs (What A Feeling, Maniac, Gloria etc) as well as a very catchy new score...that should have been Dirty Dancing

[alterego]

Posted: 10/21/08 at 8:01am

It isn't a "real" musical because the woman who wrote the movie - and the stage adaption (that's what they should call it - A Stage Adaption) wouldn't let them change one single thing. So what you see onstage is her idea of just how her movie should be seen - onstage.