Anyone else think War Horse was over hyped?

Much better plays or much better shows? Nothing is a "much better show" than War Horse.

---

I've seen it twice. I'd never say it is a "great play" but I'll maintain that it's one of the "finest theatrical experiences" I've ever had. There is a difference. And if one isn't able to let himself go into the theatrics of the piece then certainly it would not be a major event. I have one friend, for example, who just couldn't get beyond seeing the "puppeteers". Of course, he didn't think the whole thing was great.

This is the one thing playing I haven't yet seen but a common thing I'm hearing from people is that while it really is visually stunning, the script itself is incredibly weak. I'm very much looking forward to seeing it myself next month, though!

I might be the only person who actively disliked War Horse. It was one of my least favorite things on stage this season. I don't care how awesome the puppets are (and they are), I found it silly and boring. In a season with GREAT plays (Jerusalem and Good People are my favorites), I'm disappointed that this is the show snagging all the attention. But again, I know almost everyone else loves it!

It sounds like the play version of THE LION KING. Awesome puppet work but a long and boring evening otherwise.

WAR HORSE is pretty much over-everything. Over-hyped, over-staged, over-wrought, over-acted, over-praised, over-gimmicky -- all in the thinnest story in recent memory. It makes MEMPHIS look deep.

As if sensing the thinness of the story, the show’s creators have gone to great lengths to keep the action lively at all times, and they just plain go too far. WAR HORSE is, ultimately, just a big honking barrage of THEATAH!!!! Sets! Lights! Music! Puppets! Sound Effects!! Projections! Annoying Folk Songs From Some Broad With A Violin! Guys with Bird Puppets on Sticks To Wave Over The Audience! Big Serious Message!

It’s like some insane collection of all the Biggest Moments from 80s British exports like LES MIZ and NICHOLAS NICKLEBY and CATS. For example, Joey has a battlefield encounter with a tank that will bring back fond memories of MISS SAIGON. And so on. For all the energy and flash, the show is best when it settles down for a bit and lets us just watch those wonderful puppet horses. There’s a marvelous couple of minutes where Joey and another horse named Topthorn run around the stage together and engage in some Equine Bonding. But it is back to sound-and-fury business before long.

But what really makes the show unforgivable, for me at least, is the High Solemnity that the show cloaks itself in. Everybody’s working very very hard indeed, and the expectation seems to be that you will be a better person when it is over. This is Serious Theatre, even Medicinal Theatre -- Art That Is Good For You. It can’t be a surprise that Steven Spielberg has already bought the screen rights. His film will doubtless be a masterpiece of taste and restraint compared to this bloated self-important all-out assault of gimmicks that have all been done better elsewhere.

---

If you loved it, you'll understand the hype. If you hated it, you won't understand the hype. I didn't hate it, but I didn't -- and still don't -- understand the hype or the (what I perceive to be) critical whitewashing of the writing. The comments range from "Well, it's not the greatest script" to "The writing is the weak." The writing is flat-out bad.

When I say "bad," I don't mean "abomination." It's not "My aunt's friend wrote a musical!" bad. But in the annals of (handsomely) produced professional theater, it's pretty bad. There was no pleasure for me whatsoever in the thin melodrama of the characters, the insulting, emotionally reductive glibness of the dialogue, or the overall shrillness of the acting. The themes are tried-and-true and the piece's structure is Kaufmann-solid, but without detail or honesty in the writing, those aren't going to do much, dramatically. (The lighting, music, and non-puppet design elements are sporadically charming, particularly the versatile lightning-bolt projection screen.)

But when those horses weren't onstage, my brain and eyes were all over the audience, trying to find anyone else as disengaged as me. (My mom -- who's a pretty easy mark in the "sappy" department -- looked bored throughout.) When the horses were onstage, I marveled at them. But without investment in the story or characters surrounding them, it never went beyond visual stimulation or purely objective awe at the technical wizardry. It's the theatrical equivalent of the movie "Independence Day"... with worse writing.

---

Mister Matt - A play can win Best Original Score. Last year 2 plays were nominated. But I don't think one will ever win. I do think there should be Best Book of a Play but the Tony's don't think plays are profitable. Thats false just look at War Horse.

Back to the subject. I do think War Horse is brilliantly staged. I think its script is weaker than the design. But I wouldn't cal the script weak it's just traditional.

And that ^ right there is why I won't discourage anyone from seeing it. Would I recommend it? No. But having such a hard time wrapping my head around who might or might not enjoy the play makes it difficult not be constantly reminded how squarely in the minority I am. Would I discourage someone from seeing HOUSE OF BLUE LEAVES? Yes, and with verve. WAR HORSE? No.

---

felt it was overrated. the season as a whole on broadway was lackluster and in many ways boring

I think the question was overhyped by reviewers.

I don't see many plays, I've only seen two of the new ones this season on Broadway. That being said, I think War Horse is the BEST production I've ever seen on stage. It's not the best script, obviously, but no one is going in there and thinking it's Shakespeare (at least I hope not). But, the show is more than the sum of its parts and I left loving it. It may actually change the way plays are seen on Broadway. Usually, they're the forgotten child, but look at War Horses grosses. It's been doing incredibly well and obviously must be popular with tourists.

---

True but Jersuleam would be more valid to win the tony .