AMELIE Reviews

Post 'em here, gang!

Updated On: 4/3/17 at 12:21 PM

This?

Updated On: 4/3/17 at 12:25 PM

Diane Snyder:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/theatre/what-to-see/amelie-new-musical-walter-kerr-theatre-new-york-review-broadway/

David Cote:
https://www.timeout.com/newyork/theater/amelie

I will never understand the point of providing links to reviews without any commentary. We're all capable of clicking a link from the BWW homepage, and anyone who is interested in reading the full reviews will do so anyway. I've always thought the point of a review thread was to summarize how each critic felt so that the people who aren't interested in reading the reviews in their entirety have a sense of how the show is being received.

bjh2114 said: "I will never understand the point of providing links to reviews without any commentary. We're all capable of clicking a link from the BWW homepage, and anyone who is interested in reading the full reviews will do so anyway. I've always thought the point of a review thread was to summarize how each critic felt so that the people who aren't interested in reading the reviews in their entirety have a sense of how the show is being received.



"



Ahhhh....the good old days.

bjh2114 said: "I will never understand the point of providing links to reviews without any commentary. We're all capable of clicking a link from the BWW homepage, and anyone who is interested in reading the full reviews will do so anyway. I've always thought the point of a review thread was to summarize how each critic felt so that the people who aren't interested in reading the reviews in their entirety have a sense of how the show is being received.

"

I have to agree with this. When I partake in these threads I still give a commentary. Just "Positive, Mixed, Negative" is even helpful. These reviews threads aren't as popular as they were in the heyday of this board though.

Updated On: 4/3/17 at 08:36 PM

bjh2114 said: "I will never understand the point of providing links to reviews without any commentary. We're all capable of clicking a link from the BWW homepage, and anyone who is interested in reading the full reviews will do so anyway. I've always thought the point of a review thread was to summarize how each critic felt so that the people who aren't interested in reading the reviews in their entirety have a sense of how the show is being received."



Yeah, didn't people used to do that? I miss that.

Couldn't help but cringe when reading the BWW reviews roundup for Amelie... they seem to agree that the cast is so talented but the story just doesn't work.

Does anyone know, what kind of effect do bad reviews have on a production's success & longevity? Do audiences stay away from badly reviewed shows? (Personally with movies, I don't care at all about critic reviews, wondering if it's generally different for theater)

Malka2 said: "Couldn't help but cringe when reading the BWW reviews roundup for Amelie... they seem to agree that the cast is so talented but the story just doesn't work.

Does anyone know, what kind of effect do bad reviews have on a production's success & longevity? Do audiences stay away from badly reviewed shows? (Personally with movies, I don't care at all about critic reviews, wondering if it's generally different for theater)"

It depends on the show. Wicked and Cats both originally got mixed reviews if I remember correctly and their now among the longest running shows in history. Also some shows can becomd hits in most markets but flop in one. Chess and Tanz Der Vampire come to mind in terms of West End/European hits that flopped on Broadway.

I like the review thread.

I always come here first -- click on a couple of the reviews that are posted to get a feel. And listen to the board-buzz.

Then I go to the BWW composite site and read their summaries.

Then to "Did He Like It."

And then finally, at 10 PM -- to the Times to see what Brother Brantley has to say.

So thanks for all of it. And yes, I do enjoy reading Board opinions.

dramamama611 said: "bjh2114 said: " I've always thought the point of a review thread was to summarize how each critic felt so that the people who aren't interested in reading the reviews in their entirety have a sense of how the show is being received.



"

Please allow me to do the honors on this one -- all of the reviews are basically the same so far --

1. It was a quirky and successful movie.

2. It isn't a successful Broadway show.

3. Soo is very nice, but is miscast and/or the material is too hopeless to make a difference

4. Go see something else.

To the fellow who earlier said that "the reviews are mixed to negative" -- I'm unable to find "mixed" (except if saying something nice about a performer in a bad role in a bad show qualifies).

These may be the most consistently poor reviews of any show this season (so far).

We'll see what Brantley has to say, but I'll put my nickel on "negative."



Ahhhh....the good old days.



"

Saw it at the Ahmanson -- it left much to be desired. I actually agree with all the reviews so far. It's just basic and unmemorable. I couldn't even tell you about the songs as I don't remember one of them. I feel like anyone could have stepped into lead. I do, however, think this musical works for high school and community theater.

Bro- i know you love doing this, but in all honesty everyone is capable of FINDING the review as well as who wrote it. I don't understand your fetish with this.