Profile for dickg2

This is a woefully broken revival. Some parts look and sound good but Sher should know better.Before today's technology a Broadway show involved a lot of belting to get the music out with the story subservient. The original cast had three of the best voices: Richard Burton, Robert Goulet and Julie Andrews who were also accomplished actors. Then came the 1967 film in which there was chemistry at work.Richard Harris' King Arthur was a self-admitted bit of a klutz who accidentally ascended to th...

Parts of the show I really liked but there's some work to do.First, the sound is off. Vocals should not be "lost in the mix" -- not with today's technology. This is something the sound people should have been on top of in rehearsals.At times I felt that this was a mx of Mean Girls and The Prom with an Elton John score. The show has some loose ends but they can certainly be tied up. Music is fine and performances, too, although I am just so tempted to compare it to another Broadway show launch...

ChiDoc said: "I saw both Sharon and Joaquina (albeit only in Chicago for the latter, so I didn’t get to see her take on the new Act 1 finale or the rewritten book scenes in Act 2). I liked both performances immensely. It’s been said here before, but it comes down to: vote for a great performance in a great role, or for a performance that’s holding a flawed show together and elevating it? Personally, I was rooting for Joaquina but I am gobsmacked that neither Caroline won the Tony. (But neithe...

JBroadway said: "dickg2 said: "There was no reasonable doubt Joaquina Kalukango deserved the Tony."Obviously this is all purely subjective, and there's no way to measure this. But still, I'm curious if you saw Sharon D. Clarke as Caroline? I'd argue that performance alone constitutes more than reasonable doubt.I did see Caroline and Sharon Clarke did a very good job. The production was more dramatic, I thought, and less complex. I certainly felt it was better than any performance in Company. ...

Full disclosure: Saw this three times in Chicago and twice in New York including the closing.This closing was tough to take because the show really didn't have a fighting chance. The internal issues made it less competitive in a very competitive time. The cast and crew were simply superb. What went wrong?The general consensus in Chicago was reflected in mixed reviews. The parts of this show that were good were very good, those that were excellent were quite excellent and then there were those...

There was no reasonable doubt Joaquina Kalukango deserved the Tony. The power she unleashed was almost unprecedented.I also have had the pleasure of meeting Chilina who is a fine actress and a good person. She was not awful but her role lost some definition between Chicago and New York. The awesome power of Kalukango needed the balance of toughness/softness that Chilina gave it (kind of playing herself, too). Kalukango was a clear no-brainer. Supporting actress was not a clear choice. And her...

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "This piece from Lee Seymour might be the bleakest assessment I've read of the current Broadway landscape. As expected, it's really bad for all but the biggest hits. Here are some highlights from the piece:THE GOOD:– At Six, the average ticket price is around $200, with premium seats topping out at $499.– General consensus among industry veterans is thatWicked, Hamilton, The Lion King, Hadestown,andCompanyare all in strong financial health.–The upcoming Thanksgiv...

I think Amy's synopsis is spot on: promising but needs more clarity and it's a show that most of us who have seen it, I think, want to see succeed which perhaps make the critiques more compelling.

I think shows like South Pacific, Hamilton, My Fair Lady, West Side Story, etc., are timeless classics.Shows like The Prom and Mean Girls are nice, OK, but not necessarily timeless classics that people see again and again and again. I would rate Paradise Square as a pleasant show but one that is unlikely to become a timeless piece or one that people endeavor to see multiple times.

This is a difficult show. I really want it to be successful but it needs some work.First, the producer's history isn't terribly relevant to the audience. He discharged his sentence and so be it. If there are issues with misbehavior or maltreatment associated with this show, go for it but otherwise it's history.Second, this is no Hamilton. Not even close. But that's not a fatal flaw, either. What it means is that there are some shows that are compelling and some that are classics and these mer...