AMELIE Reviews — Page 2

New York Times is in: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/03/theater/amelie-musical-broadway-review-phillipa-soo.html

Brantley leans negative. If I had to sum up his review in one word, it'd be "meh."

Updated On: 4/3/17 at 10:03 PM

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.

People used to care. Now, not so much. Pretty much goes for the rest of BWW as well.

So a love letter from Isherwood to Soo and almost the only negative remark on her performance from Brantley. Typical!

Although to be fair Brantley still says she is an actress of distinctive musical talent and compares her to Audrey Hepburn so I wouldn't be too upset if I were her.

Can't wait to see the clippings tomorrow from Isherwood's review:

"Insert quote here" - Charles Isherwood, Former NYT Critic

And to think some of you were predicting Soo would be nominated over LuPone and/or Ebersole. Of course, we'll have a better idea after War Paint's reviews on Thursday.

ljay889 said: "And to think some of you were predicting Soo would be nominated over LuPone and/or Ebersole. Of course, we'll have a better idea after War Paint's reviews on Thursday."

She got nominated over Audra so nothing is out of the question here. I don't think it will happen but it's not like her performance hasn't been received positively overall.

If The Great Comet does as well in nominations as I expect them to (I'm expecting them to get the most), I think Denee Benton will likely go along for the ride. If Miss Saigon gets the third slot for Best Revival of a Musical (which I'm currently predicting), I imagine Eva Noblezada could also go along for the ride.

As we've seen within the past two years, both lead acting in a musical categories were filled with nominees from productions that were nominated for Best Musical and/or Best Revival.

Nice to see Tony Sheldon getting positive response from the critics.

Now let's see him play opposite Toni Collette in Dolly.

Mister Matt wrote: "People used to care. Now, not so much. Pretty much goes for the rest of BWW as well."

I agree; practically no one cares about theatre reviews anymore, and I say it's a good thing. There's no reason that the opinions of a handful of dilettantes should have any effect on a show's ticket sales. We see now that bad reviews don't always close a show and good reviews definitely don't keep them open. Why the Times would pay anyone a six-figure salary for such an increasingly redundant job is mystifying.

This may lead, unfortunately, to a state of "known commodities only" - hugely popular titles being rigidly adapted, featuring popular TV and film actors; but there is always the Hamilton model to study. That show was almost sold out at the Public long before any reviews appeared, based on a semi-popular biography and with no stars.

I always use show-score to look at review scope. It's very useful in terms of positive/mixed/negative overall.

As has been said, these reviews threads predate review roundup websites and features, but I still tend to check them out.

Also: if we don't click on Isherwood's new reviews, maybe he'll go away again.

Auggie27 said: "Now that the verdicts are in: does Soo put butts in seats? That's still an open question. She's really the only survivor of the yawning indifference to the show proper. I would harbor a guess that Soo's following is small and passionate but mostly people who've already seen "Hamilton." It's also probably true that the film's fans are not the traditional B'way musical audience, though they overlap. Without a money review for the show proper, and word of mouth, will Soo's pedigree matter at the box office?

"

Soo definitely has a following and a lot of her fans have bought tickets already. I only saw the show because of the digital lottery.

a few friends were disappointed at stage door when Soo didn't want to take any selfies with her fans. Of course it's her choice but at the same time doing so would have gotten more free advertising on social media and perhaps word of mouth.

"a few friends were disappointed at stage door when Soo didn't want to take any selfies with her fans. Of course it's her choice but at the same time doing so would have gotten more free advertising on social media and perhaps word of mouth."

Yes, I'm sure if Soo took stage door selfies, this would be running for 50 years or more.

Newintown answered my query very honestly and (to my thinking) pragmatically. It's easy to forget that an admired actor well known in the NYC community who has two roles under her belt doesn't generate actual dollars that might keep a show up and running. How many people would actually buy seats only because she's in it? Rather than because Soo + X factor (composer, film, story, reviews) = sale. That's my issue: she alone won't push sales, whereas Soo in well received material with (cultural wide) curiosity about it might be. A rarefied, whimsical French film + Soo is a potentially harder sell.