How about Miss Saigon ?
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/5/04
OK- smash hit might have ben a stretch regarding Titanic, but it did do well, run for years, and won all five Tonys it had been nominated for....and was uniformly trashed.
Sum... Ther Producers got bad reviews? I never saw them...
Without the Tony for Best Musical, Titanic would have closed much sooner.
Then you don't know how to read because The Producers was critically reviled.
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
For Cats, Rich was mixed-to-positive:
"One wishes that ''Cats'' always had so much feeling to go with its most inventive stagecraft. One wishes, too, that we weren't sporadically jolted from Eliot's otherworldly catland to the vulgar precincts of the videogame arcade by the overdone lightning flashes and by the mezzanine-level television monitors that broadcast the image of the offstage orchestra conductor (the excellent Stanley Lebowsky). But maybe it's asking too much that this ambitious show lift the audience - or, for that matter, the modern musical - up to the sublime heaviside layer. What ''Cats'' does do is take us into a theater overflowing with wondrous spectacle - and that's an enchanting place to be."
Rich was also mixed-to-positive for Phantom:
"IT may be possible to have a terrible time at ''The Phantom of the Opera,'' but you'll have to work at it. Only a terminal prig would let the avalanche of pre-opening publicity poison his enjoyment of this show, which usually wants nothing more than to shower the audience with fantasy and fun, and which often succeeds, at any price.
It would be equally ludicrous, however - and an invitation to severe disappointment - to let the hype kindle the hope that ''Phantom'' is a credible heir to the Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals that haunt both Andrew Lloyd Webber's creative aspirations and the Majestic Theater as persistently as the evening's title character does. What one finds instead is a characteristic Lloyd Webber project - long on pop professionalism and melody, impoverished of artistic personality and passion - that the director Harold Prince, the designer Maria Bjornson and the mesmerizing actor Michael Crawford have elevated quite literally to the roof. ''The Phantom of the Opera'' is as much a victory of dynamic stagecraft over musical kitsch as it is a triumph of merchandising uber alles.
*************************************************
The melodies don't find shape as theater songs that might touch us by giving voice to the feelings or actions of specific characters. Instead, we get numbing, interchangeable pseudo-Hammersteinisms like ''Say you'll love me every waking moment'' or ''Think of me, think of me fondly, when we say goodbye.'' With the exception of ''Music of the Night'' - which seems to express from its author's gut a desperate longing for acceptance - Mr. Lloyd Webber has again written a score so generic that most of the songs could be reordered and redistributed among the characters (indeed, among other Lloyd Webber musicals) without altering the show's story or meaning. The one attempt at highbrow composing, a noisy and gratuitous septet called ''Prima Donna,'' is unlikely to take a place beside the similar Broadway operatics of Bernstein, Sondheim or Loesser.
Yet for now, if not forever, Mr. Lloyd Webber is a genuine phenomenon - not an invention of the press or ticket scalpers - and ''Phantom'' is worth seeing not only for its punch as high-gloss entertainment but also as a fascinating key to what the phenomenon is about. Mr. Lloyd Webber's esthetic has never been more baldly stated than in this show, which favors the decorative trappings of art over the troublesome substance of culture and finds more eroticism in rococo opulence and conspicuous consumption than in love or sex. Mr. Lloyd Webber is a creature, perhaps even a prisoner, of his time; with ''The Phantom of the Opera,'' he remakes La Belle Epoque in the image of our own Gilded Age. If by any chance this musical doesn't prove Mr. Lloyd Webber's most popular, it won't be his fault, but another sign that times are changing and that our boom era, like the opera house's chandelier, is poised to go bust."
did TITANIC really get bad reviews? I mean, I remember a lot of negative comments being made prior to opening but that on opening night the reviews were relatively good ... weren't they?
I can't believe that Rich would be that kind to "Cats".
The Producers got bad reviews ? I didn't know that, I thought it was critically applauded ! But if sum says so, I do believe him, after all, I don't live in NYC (unfortunately)
And Margo, WOW ! You are truly a Broadway Legend. Your knowledge and archives never stop to amaze me ! Thank you so much for sharing !
But I am impressed by how much the critics' opinion makes or breaks the show. Here in Greece, the only thing that can close a theater is bad word of mouth !
Take care
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
So much for Rich's Butcher of Broadway reputation.
And in case, people don't get that Sum is joking, The Producers received possibly the most enthusiastic set of rave reviews of any show of the last decade.
Titanic got very mixed, lukewarm reviews.
Don't put words in my mouth CHANNING! IF THAT IS YOUR REAL USERNAME!
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
Now, now Sum, don't make me have to have Nursie increase the dosage on your medication
WHERE AM I? WHAT AM I DOING ON A BROADWAY MESSAGE BOARD?! I'M NOT GAY...YET!
Well, Frank's love letter to "Caroline, or Change" more than makes up for his take on "Cats".
Oh Sum, shame on you, I fell for that completely ! :)
( GMF shrinks in embarassment) :)
It's never too late sum :)
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
Sum,
Gay or straight, we love you
Indeed, we do ! :)
I remember reading about EVITA getting some pretty bad reviews (Even getting an outright pan from a major newspaper), yet it ran over 1,500 performances and won the Best Musical Tony.
Nearly everyone was kind to CATS, believe it or not. I think the critics were feeling guilty for giving EVITA such terrible reviews a couple of years prior, and wary of having egg on their faces again.
I like Rich. For Les Miz, Cats,Saigon and Phantom, all of them were given a positive review. He hated Webber but did give great credit for his Cats and Phantom. Though I think he praised too much of Phantom.
He shred Chess into pieces. I love Chess, but I understood the broadway production was not good. Maybe he could be a little nicer, but I don't blame him as long as he's fair.
He bashed Starlight Express, song and dance and Sunset Blvd. I am not sure. Did those shows do well in Broadway?
It is a pity that he did not like the Secret Garden. I love the Secret Garden very much.
Broadway Star Joined: 5/19/03
Kismet. It opened during a newspaper strike and by the time the strike was over and was reviewed (lot of pans) the audience didn't care the show was already a mega-hit.
I have a hard time considering Rich's 'Phantom' review positive. It's very dismissive, other than to praise Prince, Bjornson and Crawford, basically everyone BUT the composer and his contributors.
Margo,
Do you carry HOT SEAT around with you at all times????
robbie, whose copy is sitting right next to le toilet.
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
Robbie,
Hot Seat is right here on the coffee table, always within reach
(though the longer passages came direct from the Times website -- I'll cut and paste, but I don't type out paragraphs .....)
Didn't Wicked and Boy from Oz get similar reviews? Terrible reviews for the show, but amazing reviews for the leads? I think that counts as pretty poor reviews for the show as a whole.
Videos