LYSISTRATA JONES Reviews- Page 5

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 12:36am

I have never left a show at intermission for exactly the reason ghostlight stated: I always have hope that it could get better/more interesting in Act 2, which sometimes it indeed does. And also I agree that you can find almost always find redeeming elements, even if it's just one single thing, to enjoy about a show you have either paid to see or have been comped into but have already spent time seeing part of. That said, I don't think it's inherently wrong to leave at intermission, but I do take issue with someone leaving at intermission and passing judgment on a whole show. If you saw only Act 1 of a show, you haven't given it a fair shake and don't have a right to judge the whole package, as it were. You can comment on Act 1, but if you say the show as a whole is bad, you haven't given the cast and creative team enough of a chance to prove themselves, I don't think. Sometimes, an odd choice might have a surprising payoff in the second act that you don't see coming, or the book and score might just be stronger in the second act, etc.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 12:50am

"The comparison is just saying if you're not enjoying something, why would you continue to endure it if you don't have to?"

I understand, I just don't think the comparison is apt. I never think of theater - even bad theater - as something to be endured. It's all an experience. And I want the whole experience.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 1:00am

Well some theater is "endured".

I think it's funny (and this is no personal attack) that some people put theater on this pedestal they don't put anything else on and need to find something redeeming in every single piece of it when the truth is - not all theater is good. Some of it is downright awful and there's no reason to stay and "endure" it when it is.

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 1:13am

I agree that some theatre really is awful (which I feel a bit odd saying in a thread about a show that I really liked, but...) and there have been some shows that I really have nothing but absolutely awful things to say about. But shows with absolutely no redeemable qualities are, I think, few and far between. I guess that if I've spent any amount of time with a piece (whether it be a show, a film, an art exhibit, etc), I look for something that made it worth my time, even if I just saw one act of a show. It just isn't my nature to think that I've wasted my time at a show when I could find something about it to enjoy. Sometimes I just enjoy how awful a show is (like I did at Spider-Man). I guess I'm just an eternal optimist.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 1:29am

I guess I just don't see a problem with "wasting your time" with a movie or a play to the point where you need to convince yourself that there was SOMETHING that made it worth your time. The last revival of TOUCH OF THE POET and Stoppard's ROCK 'N ROLL were excruciating and I left as soon as Act One ended. I would have left earlier but I was in the middle of the row each time and I see no problem having left or hating them as much as I did.

I also stormed out of the theater after seeing that remake of NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET because it was so amazingly bad and again I see no need to look for anything redeeming in it. Not everything has good things in it and the time you spend looking for them in bad shows is even more wasted than the time you spent at the theater initially.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 1:35am

"I think it's funny (and this is no personal attack) that some people put theater on this pedestal they don't put anything else on and need to find something redeeming in every single piece of it when the truth is - not all theater is good. Some of it is downright awful and there's no reason to stay and "endure" it when it is."

Listen, I totally agree if you're unhappy and you can't handle it, there's nothing wrong with leaving, but we clearly have different perspectives here. The truth is, I put everything on that pedestal. I try to take away something positive from every experience I have, even the bad ones. That's life.

"shows with absolutely no redeemable qualities are, I think, few and far between"

HIGH and PASSING STRANGE came close for me, but even they had some redeeming qualities.

"I guess that if I've spent any amount of time with a piece (whether it be a show, a film, an art exhibit, etc), I look for something that made it worth my time, even if I just saw one act of a show. It just isn't my nature to think that I've wasted my time at a show when I could find something about it to enjoy."

I could not possibly agree with this more.

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 1:38am

I think a better comparison then comparing staying through a bad show to eating a whole bad meal is comparing it to a sporting event. I attend a lot of sports in this area and some nights my team will be getting killed. Yes some people leave but I always stick it out to see what will happen just cause you never know. I do the same with the theatre, I've had plenty of shows that I didn't really care for but I've always been curious enough to stick around for the 2nd act to see where a show goes.

Also I saw Lysistrata Jones tonight. I really enjoyed it, it was fun and I liked a lot of the music. I was in the mezz, and there were a lot of empty seats so sadly it doesn't seem like this show is going to last very long.

[PopAria]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 2:31am

@broadeayJoe Did you see any standing ovations? I was in the front orch. and looked back to see no one standing. I really wanted to stand and show the cast some support but no one really blew me away. Did you feel the same?

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 2:53am

There were a few people standing around me but not many. I also saw down in the front orch and like you said I didn't see anyone standing. I guess it's not a good sign since almost every show I see gets a standing ovation whether it deserves it or not. I agree none of the cast really blew me away either but my expectations for this show was that it was gonna be a night full of laughs and that's what I got and I ended up liking a good amount of the songs.

It seemed like the crowd was really enjoying themselves though, I heard lots of laughter tonight.

[Tom5]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 8:41am

I haven't (Won't) see it, so I can't vouch for or against its quality. But I do think that, like myself, Theatre Audiences arn't too receptive for a sports/basketball comedy. Perhap golf would have worked better. Plus they could have renamed it Lysistrata Woods.

[After Eight]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 8:47am

Tom,

There recently was a golf musical, called, Golf: the Musical. I wouldn't say it suited me to a tee.

But there have been successful musicals dealing with sports: Good News, Damn Yankees.

[Tom5]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 9:19am

If Gwen Verdon sang "Whatever Lola Wants, Lola Gets" in this musical, I'd be first in line for it.

[Tom5]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 9:19am

Updated On: 12/16/11 at 09:19 AM

[PopAria]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 10:04am

Golf is so boring! You've obviously never been to a basketball game. One day you should go. It's a lot of fun. More fun than golf and baseball.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 10:08am

The amount of time and ink that has been spent on this thread is nauseating. Lysistrata was an innocuous but rather fun bauble. Period. For some of the posters here to go on and on and on about it is indicative of very limited mind-sets. Don't they have anything better to do with their lives?

[PopAria]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 10:17am

Thanks for joining in Ed.

Now tell us how you really felt about it.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 11:05am

If I were a betting man, I'd suspect not much.

Dude, of course it's a bauble. Most Broadway musicals are baubles. Some just shine a bit brighter than others. As for myself, I wasnt too impressed with this off-Broadway, but it looks like they put a lot of work into it and maybe shined it up a bit. Sadly, I think maybe its OB rep followed it here.

Now, if folks want to write another eight or nine pages on the state of Bauble Theatre, I'm totally cool with that. As for folks like Ed, there are other, deeper, more meaningful threads. Go check them out, huh?

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 11:14am

The amount of time and ink that has been spent on this thread is nauseating. Lysistrata was an innocuous but rather fun bauble. Period. For some of the posters here to go on and on and on about it is indicative of very limited mind-sets. Don't they have anything better to do with their lives?

Ink? Are you printing all the pages?

People are discussing what they want to discuss rather than what you want them to discuss. Why do you knock it or even care enough to comment? Don't you have anything better to do with your life?

[wexy]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 11:17am

Well they're advertising all over Broadway world so we are making money from the good reviews...

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 12:05pm

Oh, sorry about my gaffe re: ink. I should have remembered that folks are using bubble gum these days.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 12:49pm

That still makes no sense. Neither does thinking your opinion should shut down anyone else's desire for discussion on the subject.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 12:51pm

I just reported every single post in this thread.

[tazber]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 2:56pm

Awwww.....

I love watching people get all worked up and then slowly melt down when confronted with opposing views. Period.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 3:07pm

You're such a nice guy, Tazbar. Best. Ed Moronhead.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/16/11 at 3:22pm

For those of you with very limited mind-sets, PS3 has the Bonnie & Clyde expansion pack on sale for $4.99. Sale ends Dec. 30th.