A CATERED AFFAIR Reviews- Page 7

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 8:38am

so because the critics hated it they are idiots

But if they had loved it they would have been great?

LMAO

[jaystarr]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 8:40am

Thank you! songanddanceman....

Wait for next week...Ben Brantley's review on CRY-BABY. I am sure people will say.. oh god! he is such a b*tch!

J*

[mc1227]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 9:01am

I didn't say they had to LOVE it. I'm talking about a very negative review for a show that has some very good qualities about it. My point is that you can say overall the show's not your thing, but you can also write about the things that are good. This way people will still go see it and make their own decisions. Word of mouth still wins out over critic's reviews. Brantley and I have never seen eye to eye about most shows so this is par for the course anyway. I

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 9:18am

Its a critics opinion, as your opinion is your opinion

Obviously a lot of the critics are not seeing what you are seeing for example, but that doesn't make them right and you wrong

what they give is there opinion, a paid opinion

I just hate when people call the critics idiots etc because they did not like a show someone else had liked

There is not right and wrong on an opinion

[MarkK]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 10:00am

JV92 - Elysa Gardner of USA Today loved "Grease" and she was favorable to ACA. I really think it's what resonates with a reviewer. The majority of reviewers seemed to not care for A Catered Affair -there not all idiots.

As for me, I liked ACA, but didn't really care for Grease.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 10:12am

A mixed review from Peter Filichia.
A Catered Affair

[Maurice]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 10:36am

Another negative in the NY Sun.
NY Sun

[jaystarr]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 10:45am

So what's the general concession? MIXED to NEGATIVE?

J*

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 11:33am

i would say apart fro a couple its Negative

[jeffrey1dog]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 11:43am

Well with 4 stars from Clive Barnes & 3 stars in USA Today I would consider the general concession to be mixed.

[MarkK]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 11:45am

Bloomberg is Mixed-to-Negative

John Doyle, the trendy director, has neither harmed nor helped, and there are some affecting moments, notably from Prince. But the musical cannot make us care whether Tom will forfeit his share in the cab, or whether the wedding will allow the newlyweds their California honeymoon.

Even a pumped-up death in the family fails to yield much impact. ``A Catered Affair,' though not exactly boring, cannot escape the feel of a rehashed, thrice-told tale.


Bloomberg Updated On: 4/18/08 at 11:45 AM

[BustopherPhantom]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 11:45am

Wow, Clive Barnes loved it!

That man knows what he's talking about! (sarcasm)Why isn't HE writing for the Times?!(/sarcasm)

Updated On: 4/18/08 at 11:45 AM

[buddharich]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 11:49am

I know many of you will get mad at me but here I go anyway:

A Catered Affair had no business being turned into a musical. Ken Mandelbaum's excellent "Not Since Carrie" has a whole chapter on broadway musicals that ought not ever been musicalized; this is one of them.

This show will be a short run flop and deservedly so. It will do o.k., at least 5, tony nominations, but that isn't saying much this season. The score is uninteresting and John Doyle's minimalist stagings are getting a bit tiresome.

These are just my opinions - there's no need to attack each other for having different opinions!!

[buddharich]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 11:50am

I know many of you will get mad at me but here I go anyway:

A Catered Affair had no business being turned into a musical. Ken Mandelbaum's excellent "Not Since Carrie" has a whole chapter on broadway musicals that ought not ever been musicalized; this is one of them.

This show will be a short run flop and deservedly so. It will do o.k., at least 5, tony nominations, but that isn't saying much this season. The score is uninteresting and John Doyle's minimalist stagings are getting a bit tiresome.

These are just my opinions - there's no need to attack each other for having different opinions!!

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:41pm

I have always disagreed with Mandelbaum's view there. I believe anything can be musicalized--it's all in the execution.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:45pm

buddharich, I'm betting on nominations for Best Musical, Leslie, Tom and Faith. That's 4.
Updated On: 4/18/08 at 12:45 PM

[AntonEgo]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:54pm

I'm sorry to say this, but I think Brantley's review was pretty accurate. I didn't find it to be a completely negative review either. He seemed to want to be nice about the show, but overall, he was pointing out what didn't work. I really wanted to like this show, but even with strong performances, it was pretty boring and did not succeed as a musical. Also, the critics shouldn't be blamed for whether or not a show does well.

[jv92]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:55pm

I'm betting six- Musical, Prince, Wopat, Kritzer, Book and Score. They need to fill out the Book and Score categories. These reviews are attrocious, by the way.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:57pm

The best piece ever done on Clive Barnes is in the old William Goldman book, The Season. At the time, Barnes was chief reviewer for the Times (shudder) and Goldman views him as the most destructive force in the critical pantheon of the day, citing his jingoism, sexism, low standards and just about every other sin in the critical notebook. All I can say is, THANK GOD he's lost the power of the Times.

As a sidenote, the reason that the Times finally fired him was that he reviewed a dance performance that didn't take place -- the bill had been changed at the last moment. The Times FINALLY had to cry uncle and got rid of him. We'll be seeing a lot of him shortly -- ACA will make whatever hay is to be gotten from his pathetic review. Fortunately, that a'int hay.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:57pm

jv, I think they *don't* need to fill those categories, if they don't want to.

Also, of course Brantley's right. There's a reason he's the Times reviewer and we're all posters on BWW. :)

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 12:57pm

I will get nominations for Musical, Actor, Actress and Featured Actress and most likely Orchestration, considering most reviewers who weren't completely negative pointed them out.

I think it will also get one for score, depending on now Glory Days does. Or that spot could possibly be stolen by Young Frankenstein, you never know.

Updated On: 4/18/08 at 12:57 PM

[Are_you_kidding?]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 1:20pm

Regardless of the perceived merits of Clive Barnes, his review articulated the way I felt about this show. As with any artisan handcraft, the flaws authenticate the earnest heart with which it was created.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 1:21pm

"I have always disagreed with Mandelbaum's view there. I believe anything can be musicalized--it's all in the execution."

hahahahahaha erm ok X

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 1:22pm

Dinosaurs The Musical.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/18/08 at 1:25pm

Hey--both of you can stay in the box. But some of the most brilliant shows came from thinking outside of it.