BRING IT ON: The Musical Reviews- Page 2

[GlindatheGood22]

Posted: 8/1/12 at 11:15pm

I am shocked. Thought for sure the reviewers would lay this one out.

[Rentfan931]

Posted: 8/1/12 at 11:21pm

^ Me too actually

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/1/12 at 11:27pm

I guess critics like shows about cheer leaders. Good for the cast and crew though!

[JeanGudio]

Posted: 8/1/12 at 11:57pm

actually NYT loved it Ben good on him

[chanel]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:07am

Villagevoice.com is so-so

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/dailymusto/2012/08/bring_it_on_the.php

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:10am

actually NYT loved it Ben good on him

Brantley didn't review it.......

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:17am

actually NYT loved it Ben good on him

What does that even mean?

[bjh2114]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:27am

I'm not surprised by these reviews at all. I absolutely loved the show. It's so not even close to high art, but I laughed my ass off when I saw it. Is it cliche? Absolutely. Is it nothing but fluff? Totally. Does it make the perfect type of show for summer on Broadway? Yes. I think the critics recognize that the show realizes that it's cliche, but it uses that to its advantage by not taking itself seriously at all. I had a great time.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:44am

"^Yes, it happens all the time. No reviewer actually goes to opening night anymore. Theatre reviews used to be published in the "late editions" of newspapers but with tremendous pressure to get them in the newspapers early tomorrow morning and publish them online immediately, critics are invited to attend toward the end of previews."

Wasn't Hal Prince one of the first to do this? I've heard stories how, often to make a deadline (even with late edition papers) reviewers would walk out before the show was even over, which understandably infuriated him.

[broadwaydevil]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 1:04am

That sounds right. I remember hearing something along those lines.

[newintown]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 8:30am

To add a different perspective, I would say the Times definitely did not "love it." The one-sentence summary would be "For what it is, it's fine, but what it is is juvenile and insignificant."

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 8:38am

"I am shocked. Thought for sure the reviewers would lay this one out."

Never be shocked at the stupidity of our so-called critics.

[Sauja]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 10:36am

Jeez, AfterEight. You manage to consistently be the most negative person on here. And there's a lot of competition for that.

I found the show thin and familiar...and still very fun. Which seems to be the consensus. You don't have to be stupid to enjoy a trifle. You just have to be willing to accept some things at face value.

[jstarr2]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:45pm

Yeah, glad to see all the positive words! On Curtain Critic it's scoring:
73 Overall
85 Cast
67 Book
74 Music
85 Tech
http://www.curtaincritic.com/Shows/BRING_IT_ON__THE_MUSICAL_REVIEWS-225.html

Only a few really negative reviews on there.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 12:56pm

I sat through this last week -- it was largely painless, I guess. One genuine moment of real hilarity, but pretty forgettable overall. I'm glad I saw it for free, I'd have been very angry if I'd spent any money on it -- there's just not enough there to make it worth a ticket price.

Interesting how BRING IT ON is getting a pass, while a really brilliant production like THE SCOTTSBORO BOYS got roundly jumped on.

[newintown]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 1:23pm

You aim for 5 and hit 5, they tend to cut you slack. Aim higher and some people start gnashing teeth.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 1:37pm

I think Isherwood's review is, surprisingly, mostly favorable. He never says "juvenile and insignificant."

They could also use "...moments of memorable wit and... appealing rhythmic Broadway-pop songs." as a NYT pull quote if they wanted to.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 1:42pm

"You just have to be willing to accept some things at face value."

I did accept it face value. That value being zero.

"No reviewer actually goes to opening night anymore. Theatre reviews used to be published in the "late editions" of newspapers but with tremendous pressure to get them in the newspapers early tomorrow morning and publish them online immediately, critics are invited to attend toward the end of previews."

"Wasn't Hal Prince one of the first to do this?

Probably, though I try to blot out of my memory all the changes he tried to effect upon what was in no need of change. As if critics hadn't been able to attend opening nights and write excellent reviews that same evening for decades upon decades.

Now with all the time in the world to cogitate, today's critics proffer rubbish.

The irony is, with 6:45 openings, they would have more than enough time to compose their words of wisdom.

[newintown]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 1:45pm

No one said Isherwood used the words "juvenile and insignificant." That was (as clearly noted) a summary.

He did use these words, though:
"alternately snarky and sentimental,"
"peppy teen-angst musical aimed squarely at the Glee demographic: adolescents, their chaperones and the nostalgically adolescent,"
"this featherweight concoction,"
"by no means in the same league as those musicals" (others by the creative team),
"has the feel of a daffy lark embarked upon as a summer-vacation goof,"
"relies so blithely on the familiar formulas (and clichés) of fictional depictions of adolescence,"
"trots merrily through several predictable subplots,"
"central roles are more generically written."

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 3:19pm

I am just thrilled that the show got a fairly positive review for the most part and not "trashed" like a lot of musicals the last couple of years. I would love to see a strong season this year on Broadway.

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 8/2/12 at 5:02pm

Very happy for the cast/crew/creatives on all of the positive reviews. I had no plans on seeing the show (I, wrongly, judged it before I saw it), but my sister saw it when it was in Chicago and insisted I see it. I ended up loving the show (saw it both in Chicago and NY) and I'm glad to know that the positive reviews may encourage people who may not otherwise have planned to see the show (like myself) to give it chance. I would have been sad to miss this.

[theminutepast]

Posted: 8/3/12 at 10:34am

Newintown, I think your summary of Isherwood's review was mistaken for something Isherwood actually wrote because you put it in a quotation. I made the same mistake because I was skimming through posts, and usually the quotations stick out, not the lead up to what you're quoting. But I agree with your summation of the review.

[Wishing Only Wounds]

Posted: 8/4/12 at 12:52am

I just saw the show and I have to say, to my surprise, I really loved it. Although I loathed the set (I felt real scenery would've been better), I'm quite happy with the reviews. It's a lot of fun...which is exactly what's being printed.