** PROMISES, PROMISES OFFICIAL REVIEW THREAD **- Page 5

[ljay889]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 2:15am

Vincentelli is Positive? Wtf?

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/promises_are_fulfilled_NknsdSoPPOk1FuD87dnabM?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 2:19am

Positive although she conveniently ignores Chenoweth (barely referring to her at the beginning and then again when she mentions the two new songs add nothing to the show and are only there because of Chenoweth). Raves for Hayes and Finneran though, I hope they both get nominated.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 2:20am

I predict this is gonna be so like the Oscars. Meryl pretty much had the award in the bag for JULIE & JULIA for several months, what with the sentimentality factor (hasn't won since 1983, but been nominated many times since) and the fact that she got nominated last year and lost. Then THE BLIND SIDE came from nowhere and pitted Sandra Bullock against her. It was a horse race. I believe the same will happen this year. Angela has the sentiment (and had been the frontrunner since NIGHT MUSIC opened), but Katie Finneran has that extra factor of being the only shining aspect of a dull, panned show, which makes her stand out even more. Not to mention her performance is more showy than Angela's. Also, I believe there's a small contingent of voters who may not want her to break Julie Harris' record. This is all conjecture, of course, but in the end I truly believe that Finneran will walk away with the award.

[Marquise]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 2:31am

The biggest letdown is "Turkey Lurkey Time," an ensemble number with a single purpose: to kill. Here, it delivers only a flesh wound.

Had to laugh at that observation, though honestly I am so sick to death of the MAD MEN comparisons. It's clear why the shift in the narrative was made but honestly the music framing the show does not lend itself to the change....it's straight out of 1968 and makes the whole production schizo.

They didn't let the show just BE. They resorted to these gimmicks because of popular television show, they shoe-horned two Bacharach/David tunes that had no business being in the show in the first place to accommodate Kristin Chenoweth, who was miscast but given the role anyway to ensure butts filled the theater seats and in the long run the show suffers anyway. Proving that all of these changes were just so unnecessary.

It should be retitled: PROMISES, PROMISES: The MAD MEN Version or why didn't they just rename it: MAD MEN, MAD MEN: THE MUSICAL and be done with it.




Updated On: 4/26/10 at 02:31 AM

[ljay889]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 2:36am

Robert Feldberg of The Record (NorthJersey.com) is very Negative, but loves Finneran.

http://www.northjersey.com/arts_entertainment/theater/92070704_Trysting_in_a_creaky_and_musty_apartment.html

[Marquise]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 2:49am

I see this show closing very soon, which is sad because people will be out of work. I'd be surprised if it lasts another month.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 3:35am

Now that all the season's musical revivals have opened, let's look at the overall reviews:

1. FINIAN'S RAINBOW - 100% positive
2. RAGTIME - 89% positive
3. LA CAGE AUX FOLLES - 86% positive
4. A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC - 77% positive

5. WHITE CHRISTMAS - 45% positive
6. PROMISES PROMISES - 44% positive
7. BYE BYE BIRDIE - 21% positive

Now, IF the Tony nominations follow the critical consensus, the first four shows show be nominated for Best revival of a Musical.

If the first two titles were still running, and the playing field level, FINIAN's would easily have a lock on the award. But we don't know show many Tony voters saw the show (or RAGTIME) and even if they did they may feel more included to give the award to a show that is still running and would benefit from the boost - so LA CAGE could win it.

Personally I believe the award should go to the best of the 4 nominees whether the show is open now or not. So, based on the reviews alone FINIAN'S RAINBOW should win it. (I saw FINIAN'S. BIRDIE and RAGTIME when I was in New York in November but won't see the others until I am back in June.)

Did the weak performance of BIRDIE set up the critics to be more favourable to FINIAN'S RAINBOW?

[Smaxie]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 5:35am

Not sure where you came up with those percentages. Going by the grading system of Critic-O-Meter, now known as Stage Grade, both Finian's Rainbow and La Cage received an overall grade of A-, with a B+ for Ragtime and a B for A Little Night Music. And the La Cage average is missing the production's newly received raves from NY1, New Yorker and the NY Observer.

Finian's Rainbow
http://criticometer.blogspot.com/2009/10/finians-rainbow.html

La Cage aux Folles
http://stagegrade.com/productions/392

Ragtime
http://criticometer.blogspot.com/2009/11/ragtime.html

A Little Night Music
http://stagegrade.com/productions/12

[LindaTNo1]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 6:55am

Marquise

So anti, so negative! I choose to not take ANY critic seriously at all. They are all people with opinions of their own as individuals. Thankfully, they don't speak for ALL people. Some of them don't have much experience either. So consider the source. These critics already had an opinion up front without giving the production to grow and mature in the run of the show. Some prefer plays to musicals so consider their weak sources.

Promises Promises will do fine during its run and it will have a very nice run.

[LindaTNo1]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 6:57am

After Eight

The only thing wrong was your posting. Try being positive for a change.

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 7:33am

allofmylife presents an interesting supposition that if David Merrick were the producer of PROMISES, PROMISES, things would have turned out differently. I think this is highly likely. Though Merrick was a real SOB as a person and VERY difficult to get along with, he had theatrical acumen at a very high level. I agree that he would not have allowed Chenoweth to stay in the production and would have probably fired director/choreographer Ashford, or at the very least have brought in an accomplished director/choreographer to assist. Little seems to have happened during previews outside of adding two extraneous songs to the score to beef up Chenoweth's part.

I saw the original production of PROMISES, PROMISES and found it well acted but otherwise uninspiring. I don't think it deserved its three year run. And the use of three back-up singers in the pit turned me off; pop music it may have been, but theatrical it was not, notwithstanding the hits "I'll Never Fall In Love Again" and the title song. Even if this production had garnered rave reviews, I would not have gone to see it, even to return to the good old Broadway Theatre where the original production of GYPSY had no trouble filling the stage space, unlike its current tenant.

Updated On: 4/26/10 at 07:33 AM

[Marquise]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 8:18am

Linda your knee jerk reaction to my post just shows me you don't take the time to read anyone's posts carefully. I've backed up everything I've written about this production with the reasons why I feel the way that I do about the production. If you feel my opinion is negative, oh well ~ as the old saying goes: different strokes for different folks, i guess.

For you to call (some of) the reviewers "people with no experience" just goes to show you how completely illogical you are. Then you go on to write that they already formed an option before seeing the show, not giving it a chance to grow. C'mon! The show had a preview window of almost a month...and it's not like it's a new show, it's a revival for christsakes.

If you like the show that's fine, you have a right to your opinion but you also need to realize so does everyone else and you need to respect it without trying to insult them and coming up with these "reasons" as to why their opinions differ from yours.

But in my opinion you need to wake up and smell the proverbial coffee, the show didn't exactly "wow" any of the critics...it's gotten some pretty lousy reviews and that my dear is A FACT.

Updated On: 4/26/10 at 08:18 AM

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 9:27am

Marquise, Hal David did attend the opening night performance.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 10:07am

StageManager, I think your comparison isn't equal for the reason that Katie Finneran already has a Tony Award. Let's be real, Sandra only won because she is so friendly in Hollywood and they'll never have another chance to reward her. Not the case with Finneran (and Streep, for that matter). Angela, however, will not be eligible for Tony Awards forever.

If Promises closes before the Tony Awards, goodbye Finneran's chances.

There are people firmly against giving Angela Lansbury a sixth Tony Award? Haha...

~Steven

[Piper3500]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 10:19am

"I predict this is gonna be so like the Oscars. Meryl pretty much had the award in the bag for JULIE & JULIA for several months, what with the sentimentality factor (hasn't won since 1983, but been nominated many times since) and the fact that she got nominated last year and lost. Then THE BLIND SIDE came from nowhere and pitted Sandra Bullock against her. It was a horse race. I believe the same will happen this year. Angela has the sentiment (and had been the frontrunner since NIGHT MUSIC opened), but Katie Finneran has that extra factor of being the only shining aspect of a dull, panned show, which makes her stand out even more. Not to mention her performance is more showy than Angela's. Also, I believe there's a small contingent of voters who may not want her to break Julie Harris' record. This is all conjecture, of course, but in the end I truly believe that Finneran will walk away with the award."

great analogy and both movies were on Pay before i could blink an eye. I truly think Carey Mulligan should have won the Oscar but had no chance with the other two. A lot came out about Sandra winning due to the nominees and it was "her time" - Seriously...Carey should have won.

The biggest surprise that happened at the Oscars in recent history is when Crash won best picture (which Sandra was in as well)

There are already clear separate camps on this one and although I would not be angry at all if Landsbury won i think it should go to Finneran. It is a taste thing perhaps.

Linda;
we are on the same page. although i do think critics are knowledgable in all aspects of theatre, if i listened to them, there are shows i would not have seen that i thoroughly enjoyed. it is an opinion

Updated On: 4/26/10 at 10:19 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 10:29am

It's interesting, reading thoughts about how Merrick would have handled this revival.

I begin to wonder who, exactly, is in control of today's Broadway productions?

It doesn't seem to be anybody. When was the last time a director, star, composer or choreographer was fired from an incoming show? (I'm thinking "Wicked" with Robert Morse. And I'm not talking just "actors," I'm talking "stars.")

The financial stakes are so high today. Higher than ever. Yet nobody cleans out the problems. The closest we get is a "consultant" like Zaks coming in for "Addams Family" while everyone is careful not to imply any firings took place. Why didn't they fire the whole creative team, including Lippa, and start over?

Why weren't Chenoweth and Ashford fired from Promises, Promises?

Are today's producers scared and thin-skinned enough to lose millions of dollars instead of hurt someone's feelings? If so, they're in the wrong business. And they deserve to lose their millions.

And they deserve these reviews.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 11:42am

The closest we get is a "consultant" like Zaks coming in for "Addams Family" while everyone is careful not to imply any firings took place.

That happened in the Golden Age too. George Abbott, Jerome Robbins and Neil Simon were often brought into doctor shows without credit.

And on the recent Pal Joey revival, the star was indeed fired. Or leg-injuried.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 11:48am

Linda your knee jerk reaction to my post just shows me you don't take the time to read anyone's posts carefully.

LOL. I could have told you that. She's like amoni2; she just comes in to do drive-bys where she goes off on people under the guise of being a better person.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 11:58am

She's Linda Tripp, right?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 12:00pm

She a real trip, that's for sure.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 12:16pm

HeyMrMusic, the comparison I was trying to make is that everyone assumed Meryl had it in the bag for several months until Bullock came from nowhere to take it. I think the same will happen at the Tonys this year regarding Lansbury and Finneran.

[best12bars]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 12:19pm

PJ---I realize it went on in the Golden Age. A lot more than it does now, particularly in Merrick shows. That was my point. It should happen more often.

Jerry Herman got "help" with the Hello, Dolly! score. Why wasn't Lippa at least "helped" or shown the door?

I did forget about the Hoff "injury" and replacement. I guess that would be the last example of a "star" (okay, well at least a "leading man") replacement.

EDIT: My basic point (I think?) is that ruthless decisions used to be made "for the good of the show." I don't believe anyone in charge (be it producers or directors) has the guts to do that anymore. They're too afraid being perceived as "the bad guy." Even if it costs them millions of dollars. I guess they'd rather be known as a producer of mediocre shows that close fast.

Updated On: 4/26/10 at 12:19 PM

[bk]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 12:50pm

"And the use of three back-up singers in the pit turned me off"

Really? Did it turn you off one year later when Tunick used them again in a little show I like to call Company, which not only borrowed the pit singers but the entire feel of the Promises score, orchestration-wise?

[sundayclothes2]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 1:11pm

And on the recent Pal Joey revival, the star was indeed fired. Or leg-injuried.

Which happens to be the same producers as Wicked who replaced a few of the leads out of town as well as "requested" some significant re-writes. And look at how that turned out!

Updated On: 4/26/10 at 01:11 PM

[bk]

Posted: 4/26/10 at 1:24pm

The producers of Wicked were not the ones who "demanded" rewrites. They "demanded" nothing. Stephen Schwartz was the one who wanted to do one more rewrite before New York, not the producers. And I don't believe they replaced "a few" of the leads - I believe they replaced Robert Morse - I can't remember any other lead being replaced but perhaps my memory is faulty, although given the nature of your comment about the producers "demanding" rewrites, I'd trust my memory more than yours.