I happen to really dislike Alec Baldwin and think his little rant on the Huffington Post is pathetic and childish. That said, he is spot on about Brantley in comparing him to the brilliance of Frank Rich. Fortunately, for those who weren't around or don't remember, one can find some of Rich's reviews online and through archives in most public libraries.
His analogy about people reading Brantley like doctors reading an x-ray is actually quite apt. Brantley rarely says anything an actual critic is supposed to say, you know like critically evaluate a work beyond just say who sounds pretty and if you walked on air or started to fall asleep or can't stop smiling, which is all Brantley ever says. Those are reviews we should be reading from people on Broadwayworld, and I'm not insulting everyone here but rather saying we don't expect a level of critical analysis and depth and are instead looking for what others like us thought.
Read Brantley when he raves, like Matilda. He says little about the actual work and doesn't attempt to actually analyze or critique anything he sees. He spoils some plot, tells you who looks pretty, and gives a few quotes that'll look good in lights on a marquee. Read his pans, like Pippin. The most intelligent thing in the piece is when he was quoting the Times critic from the original Pippin. He never says anything of actual value other than that he doesn't like the book and that Patina wasn't good.
Baldwin is wrong in saying that Isherwood is much better, but his point about Brantley is well taken.
Scratch and claw for every day you're worth!
Make them drag you screaming from life, keep dreaming
You'll live forever here on earth.
