CARRIE Reviews- Page 5

[newintown]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 3:37pm

It would be a saving grace for the piece if they did allow anyone to fiddle with it. They certainly haven't found an effective way to adapt it themselves. Perhaps someone else could.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 4:08pm

"And yes, you may have the critics on your side, but who gives a damn about critics anymore!? Movie critics, book critics, theater critics? No one cares what they have to say anymore and people go to see what they want to see."

Umm...yeah people still do care what critics think. Theater is expensive. I often look at reviews to see if a show is something that I want to take the risk and spend money on. And I can usually tell by a review if I'm going to like the show or not...even if the review is negative.

I've been interested in seeing Carrie because of the notoriety of the original production and I'm a big Stephen King fan. I've been waiting for the reviews to see if it's something worth spending money on. And judging from these reviews the answer is no. I have no interest in going to see a Carrie that plays it safe. What's the point?

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 4:35pm

Critics will be around way after we are all gone. You cannot leave the reviews and critiques of a work of art to the general public, with all different kinds of background and education.

Otherwise the best would be the most popular - imagine, Britney Spears would be the best singer who ever lived. A professional, educated reviewer will never be obsolete.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 4:56pm

I'll save everyone some time.

Critics are irrelevant
Brantley is the only relevant critic
Brantley is not as relevant as he used to be
I liked Carrie
Carrie will never be good
My opinion is the only valid opinion

The end.

[best12bars]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 5:07pm

And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen.

[MSmith2]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 5:20pm

Bravo Jemstar! I'm with you on both counts: the negative vitriol on this board that is hypocritically presented or defended as an "exchange of ideas"; and that Carrie, despite some things that don't really work so well, works rather well overall. I found it inventively staged, entertaining and moving both times I saw it as well. And it got standing ovations both times I attended it too.

[bk]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 5:21pm

Five positive reviews? I don't think so. One - maybe. That's it. One simply cannot include a positive "review" from some website or blogger or whatever. That's not how it's done, I'm afraid. Otherwise, why don't you just lump in your aunts and uncles who liked the show.

[sandiego332]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 5:32pm

Good grief. Does anyone here let the critics decide if you are going to like a show or not ? Come on, honestly ? It's all a matter of opinion, and everyone has a different one. I personally enjoyed Carrie over Phantom of the Opera. So, there you go.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 6:54pm

In case no one saw it, Entertainment Weekly gave the show a "C".


Stage Review: Carrie

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 8:09pm

Loved this bit from the AP review--spot on:

What doesn't fit is the attempt from a group of men on the other side of 40 to sound like teenagers. The action is updated to present day, but the dialogue and lyrics smack of "Porky's."

"Oh, c'mon, church-girl — dance with me. I'll make you see God," the head bully teases Carrie at one point, although he looks more like he's in grad school than high school. In one song, three boys sing: "We better get laid! It's the least we deserve, after everything we've paid."

Two secondary characters — Tommy, the cliched big-hearted star football player and secret novelist (a solid Derek Klena) and his girlfriend, the all-around Miss Perfect who tries to show compassion to Carrie (an underused Christy Altomare) — look lifted from Archie Comics. One thing that might get cut immediately: the closeted gay bully who has a fondness for his male friends.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 8:26pm

BK - Im not sure Newsday, Theatremania etc can be classed as 'internet bloggers', if so their reviews should not be posted and counted on every other review thread that has been started on here for the last 5 years,

NY1 - Mixed
http://www.ny1.com/content/ny1_living/theater_reviews/156974/ny1-theater-review---carrie-

[Kad]

Posted: 3/2/12 at 11:10pm

Stagegrade's aggregated grade is a C, based on all the reviews.
Stagegrade

[blaxx]

Posted: 3/3/12 at 7:00pm

Carrie musical revival met with mean reviews

Several critics faulted Arima for being too cautious in exploiting Carrie’s gothic elements and also for playing down the bloody effects, including the pig-slaughtering scene, of the first production.

“Desperately trying to avoid any suggestion of camp, Arima goes for the opposite extreme and steers clear from anything that could suggest flamboyance. There are blood-red projections rather than gore, and we don’t see enough of Carrie’s psychic powers,” Elisabeth Vincentelli wrote in the New York Post.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/story/2012/03/02/carrie-musical-review.html

[goldenboy]

Posted: 3/4/12 at 4:08pm

There really is no fault here.

Carrie just isn't a very good musical.

You can't have a musical when the music isn't very good. You can't have a musical about a menstrual period without it seeming tacky. And you can't have a musical when one of the main characters---- (the mother) is not totally written, underdeveloped and makes no sense.

She loves her child so much that she doesn't want her to go to the prom because she may get hurt. She goes to the prom and she gets hurt and then the mother kills her. WTF. This makes no sense. No matter who plays her. I dont care if it's Marin Mazie, Betty Buckly, Ethel Merman, Harvey Fierstein or Mary Martin.

Wait. Harvey or Ethel may have worked but
the whole musical 1988 and present wreaks of tawdriness. Which is why Harvey or Ethel May have worked.

I went to see it because I missed it in 1988, I was curious. I wanted to see what all the talk was about. Apparently the "talk" was about the overblown, over the top, over produced aspects production of Carrie in 1988.

Stripped of all the overblown and over produced aspects....what is left is a tawdry tale that possibly should never have been musicalized and just isn't very good.

And instead of being overproduced, this production looks cheap. Let's call it a noble effort and let's move on.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/6/12 at 12:40pm

Jerry and Mark g-chat a (sort-of) review:

===

Jerry: it's very serious: about school bullying!

Mark: It's a little like remaking Mommie Dearest as a straight drama
What's Missing in the Latest Version of 'Carrie'

[newintown]

Posted: 3/6/12 at 1:16pm

Those boys are telling it like it is, except when they identify the clueless geezer-writers as "middle-aged;" what, are they going to live to 120?

But I think they've got it exactly right that the writing deserves nothing but derision.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 3/6/12 at 6:21pm

Michael Feingold is the only critic I needed to read on this show. Even if he borrowed the headline from Michael Musto's column from back when Carrie opened on Broadway.
Yes, you remember what kind of show it is

[newintown]

Posted: 3/7/12 at 9:44am

Feingold, as the one real critic writing in NYC, says it best and most succinctly.

[newintown]

Posted: 3/8/12 at 4:22pm

I don't know who Henry Stewart is, buy I like what he says about this misbegotten show:

By sanctioning theater like the reworked Carrie, or Philip William McKinley's Spider-Man—by saying they're better than the "messes" they replaced—we encourage theater artists to stay blandly within the confines of what's considered commercially viable. That's not to say good art is inherently unprofitable, but that tame work that restricts itself for the sake of popular acceptance will never be great. I understand producers encouraging such an attitude, because of the money they have at stake ... But as audiences, we should be demanding more, championing those artists who are willing to take risks, even if those risks don't always pay off. Let's encourage artists to try, even if they fail; eventually, some of them will produce great works of art, and not merely pleasant ones. In the meantime, I'll always take an ambitious failure over a cautious success.

The irony here is that MCC is honoring Gore, Pitchford and Cohen at their gala this year "for their daring, risk-taking spirit."

Who's fooling whom?
Another Carrie review

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 3/14/12 at 4:18pm

Patty and Emily posted their review of Carrie if anyone is interested. It's pretty funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bqpD9CWC-E

[newintown]

Posted: 3/14/12 at 4:46pm

"Funny" certainly is a relative term.

But 10 minutes is pretty much way too long, even if you think they are funny.