I know a lot of people have complained about the set looking cheap, but from a lot of what I’ve seen it looks pretty good? Does it just picture better than it looks in real life?
Mickey Jo Theatre's thoughts are in. Definitely a mixed review.
The idea is to work and to experiment. Some things will be creatively successful, some things will succeed at the box office, and some things will only - which is the biggest only - teach you things that see the future. And they're probably as valuable as any of your successes. -Harold Prince
It's not high art and I don't think it has a deep message or anything, but what it was for me was simple: it was fun. The show was fun, the actors seemed to be having a great time (especially Grace and Carolee!), and the score is pretty memorable ("Man's Man", "Beauty Has a Price", and the title song have been stuck in my head since I went). Ultimately, that's the biggest reason I go to a musical (outside of something like Parade): I want to lose myself in something for a couple hours, feel like I had a good time, and have something to whistle while desperately trying to get a cab.
I do agree the book is kind of a mess, but for the price of admission, I was just glad to have a couple hours of campy, pretty-to-look-at fun. If you don't think too hard about it and let yourself simply enjoy being at the theatre, it's well worth it.
I will say that in terms of the performances, both Grace and Carolee absolutely stole the show for me. The chemistry between those two during their number together is just off the charts.
gibsons2 said: "Bad Cinderella's gorgeous, luscious stage sets and costumes can be compared to Moulin Rouge and Phantom. Nothing cheap about them."
I sincerely hope you're kidding. The sets look like they're made of cardboard and literally shook as they moved, as if they were about to collapse. The costumes looked like they were bought off of the clearance rack at the Party City that's closing on 34th Street.
smallworld said: "gibsons2 said: "Bad Cinderella's gorgeous, luscious stage sets and costumes can be compared to Moulin Rouge and Phantom. Nothing cheap about them."
I sincerely hope you're kidding. The sets look like they're made of cardboard and literally shook as they moved, as if they were about to collapse. The costumes looked like they were bought off of the clearance rack at the Party City that's closing on 34th Street."
OMG!!!!! YESSS!!!! THIS SAYS IT ALL!
The idea is to work and to experiment. Some things will be creatively successful, some things will succeed at the box office, and some things will only - which is the biggest only - teach you things that see the future. And they're probably as valuable as any of your successes. -Harold Prince
Also: "It amazes me, frankly, that after decades in the business, Lloyd Webber still has no ability—or desire, perhaps—to write a bona fide musical-theater number okay I'm gonna stop you right there
As someone who knows how kitschy Lloyd Webber's work can be, and as a connoisseur and expert on Sh***y Lyrics in Andrew Lloyd Webber Musicals COME ON MAN IT'S NOT THE EIGHTIES ANYMORE YOU CAN'T KEEP GATEKEEPING LLOYD WEBBER AWAY FROM THE GENRE YOU HAVE TO GIVE UP THIS FIGHT EVENTUALLY
The idea is to work and to experiment. Some things will be creatively successful, some things will succeed at the box office, and some things will only - which is the biggest only - teach you things that see the future. And they're probably as valuable as any of your successes. -Harold Prince
According to David Cote: “The fact that Genao is a poor actor with a grating, nasal voice, and negative comic timing makes Cinderella less appealing than the gyrating cartoons around her.”
BorisTomashevsky said: "According to David Cote: “The fact that Genao is a poor actor with a grating, nasal voice, and negative comic timing makes Cinderellalessappealing than the gyrating cartoons around her.”
There’s no coming back from that."
DAMN!
The idea is to work and to experiment. Some things will be creatively successful, some things will succeed at the box office, and some things will only - which is the biggest only - teach you things that see the future. And they're probably as valuable as any of your successes. -Harold Prince
In Bad Cinderella's defense, The Observer typically has very strict reviews. They HATED & Juliet, which is similar to BC in the sense that it's campy and pure entertainment, as opposed to something of more substance.
Edit: They also review more operas than Broadway shows, so this makes a lot of sense...
BossBroadway said: "In Bad Cinderella's defense, The Observer typically has very strict reviews. They HATED & Juliet, which is similar to BC in the sense that it's campy and pure entertainment, as opposed to something of more substance.
Edit: They also review more operas than Broadway shows, so this makes a lot of sense..."
Or he just hated the show.
Namo i love u but we get it already....you don't like Madonna
"To clear up the obvious question, 'Bad Cinderella,' which opened at the Imperial Theater Thursday night, isn’t good. Composed by Webber and with lyrics by David Zippel, it is a muddled and momentum-less retooling of the familiar fairy tale in search of a coherent point of view as if it were a glass-slippered foot."
I'm not saying it should be getting great reviews, but based on the history of this reviewer I can see why this was an awful review. They hated & Juliet and review much more operas than Broadway shows, so it makes sense that they WOULDN'T like the show, regardless if it was campy perfection or the worst show alive.
The idea is to work and to experiment. Some things will be creatively successful, some things will succeed at the box office, and some things will only - which is the biggest only - teach you things that see the future. And they're probably as valuable as any of your successes. -Harold Prince