CHESS Previews- Page 9

[Jumpin_J]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 11:21am

PIZZAGIRL2 said: "Jumpin_J said: "First, if you must go, I got a pair last night in the orchestra row O for $91 on Telecharge which was better than the 20% discount at TKTS and the view was fine. Second, don't go. Honestly, this was one of the worst shows I've ever seen, not just of Chess which I've seen many versions of, but ever. At least New York New York had Stroman choreography. As my date said, this looks like a show you'd see on a cruise ship. Why a narrator? Why's the band on stage? Why does the choreography look like it was done by David Byrne? Why is there zero chemistry between anyone on stage? And why does Michael Mayer think this is a comedy and think the audience is so stupid that we can't figure out what's going on? And if you think it's supposed to be funny, why cut the "Embassy Lament"? "One Night In Bangkok" had glimmers of what the show could be before it self destructs. And look, it's got a decent shot of recouping, but that's mostly from Lea Michelle's reputation. Her Florence has no teeth, no love, and no risk. It could be sung by any other belt soprano and no one would notice a difference. It's that bad. They would've better off simply doing the original concept album straight through. Just heartbreaking to me. They could've done so many other versions that would justify this revival including the Royal Albert Hall one with Idina, Josh, and Anthony. It's so much better than this one, it's not even close. This version takes out nearly everything that made Chess good and amplifies the awfulness."



i feel like you just took a good ****

I don't know how you find that constructive but, um, okay. 
 

 

[Jumpin_J]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 11:24am

Auggie27 said: ""The constant commenting not on the actual story but on the nature of Chess The Musical and the songs that are performed kept taking me out of the story and halting the momentum of the show - what should be a rollercoaster was a series of fits and starts at times.."

Still can't wrap my brain around this as a "fix" on a book - commenting on the earnest work of other librettists as a solution to storytelling challenges in the piece's DNA. We expect a modicum of meta commentary in an Encores! concert prism - the format is a calculated revisit of material with the audience sharing theappraisal that results - yeton Broadway anticipate a revitalized show to work as a standalone construct.Maybe this winking annotationworks for many -- who just want these characters to belt out thattreasure of a score - but insulting prior iterations to make a case for your own feels like creative sloth."

And herein lies the biggest problem with this version of Chess. It doesn't know if it should be taken seriously or not. The moment it's not taken seriously, the stakes for all the characters vanish. Campy melodrama isn't a sufficient reason to get the audience to care. 

 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 1:11pm

And herein lies the biggest problem with this version of Chess. It doesn't know if it should be taken seriously or not. The moment it's not taken seriously, the stakes for all the characters vanish. Campy melodrama isn't a sufficient reason to get the audience to care. 

Ah, this nails the new book's Faustian compromise, making the wrong deal with the audience: "I'll wink at you so that we both know that I know it still doesn't quite work." But if you cannot make the show about real (enough) people and the (real enough) emotion their relationships engender, you just become another critic of the piece's DNA, albeit one who comments in real time as annotation.

Maybe this level of distancing works for a target audience who want soaring vocals set off by limited explanation of why these characters express themselves thus. Yet storytelling is still a beautiful part of musical theater - earnest, disbelief-suspending, unabashedly emotional - and when you sacrifice it, you risk losing in the end.

Updated On: 10/27/25 at 01:11 PM

[GirlFromOz68]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 5:15pm

Auggie27 said: "And herein lies the biggest problem with this version of Chess. It doesn't know if it should be taken seriously or not. The moment it's not taken seriously, the stakes for all the characters vanish. Campy melodrama isn't a sufficient reason to get the audience to care.

Ah, this nails the new book's Faustian compromise, making the wrong deal with the audience: "I'll wink at you so that we both know that I know it still doesn't quite work." But if you cannot make the show about real (enough) people and the (real enough) emotion their relationships engender, you just become another critic of the piece's DNA, albeit one who comments in real time as annotation.

Maybe this level of distancing works for a target audience who want soaring vocals set off by limited explanationof why these characters express themselves thus. Yet storytelling is still a beautiful part of musical theater - earnest, disbelief-suspending,unabashedly emotional - and when you sacrifice it, you risk losingin the end."

I'm just curious if you have seen this version ( i haven't) or you are just determined to not like it without seeing it? Latching on to any negativity to make your point.

From what I have seen from reading comments from quite a few people who've been ,  the modern jokes need to be cut, but other than that most people are liking most of what the new book is doing and that it makes the show easier to navigate.

Some of these people have seen various versions of the show, some have never seen the show but have listened to various cast albums and others have no experience of chess before. 

Now it sounds to me from taking in all this feedback that Danny needs to bite the bullet and kill the modern jokes and maybe a few judicious cuts of dialogue here and there to make the show run more smoothly but other than that,  the feedback from most people who have actually seen the show is that for the most part its working. 

or maybe you think its better for people to be confused about what is happening?

Also,  one quibble I've always had with the show seems to have been fixed,  Florence's seemingly quick switch from Freddie to Anatoly. ive chatted with people who say it works a lot better now with Danny's book.


Sometimes we can be so attached to something we can't accept change.

im probably going to regret posting this later when the response in condescension comes.

Updated On: 10/27/25 at 05:15 PM

[Mary_Poppins]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 5:47pm

As a general observation, most negative reviews appear to come from people who have been familiar with Chess for decades. And most of these seem to have a special affection for the first version they ever heard or saw. Or sometimes for a version featuring a favorite actress/actor.

(On Reddit there's also large group hell bent on criticizing everything involving Lea. Here on BWW it's at least not as obvious)

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 7:54pm

The narrator role was also played by Bryce Pinkham for the Actors Fund "concert" performance, and it was just as cringy and distancing as many are reporting. We left thinking, well maybe it was part of the shorthand they needed for the concert version. Something tells me we saw this version of the book at the benefit, and it wasn't abridged for the "concert."  The one consistent element of the word of mouth so far is that they are singing their arses off and that effort alone is worth the price of admission.  So, a concert with a stand-up comic narrator it is the concept? 

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 7:56pm

Up In One said: "The narrator rolewas also played by Bryce Pinkham for the Actors Fund "concert" performance, and it was just as cringy and distancing as many are reporting. We left thinking, well maybe it was part of the shorthand they needed for the concert version. Something tells me we saw this version of the book at the benefit, and it wasn't abridged for the "concert." Theone consistent element of the word of mouth so faris that they are singing their arses off and that effort alone is worth the price of admission.So, a concert with a stand-up comic narrator it is the concept?"

I thought the whole thing was great and Bryce was hysterical. 

[Mary_Poppins]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 8:33pm

Yup, Bryce gets near-universal praise. It's just that he's doing a little bit too much and a few of the 'topical' jokes are not for everybody. None of that is his fault. More like Danny wanting to be extra sure that absolutely everybody gets the story and the whole show isn't too depressing.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 8:50pm

Chiming in (not that anyone cares) but based on the last version of this book that was presented, I know two theatre friends, one who knows Chess extremely well, one who had never seen it before and only knew some of the songs, who felt it was one of the worst written books they had encountered (I think specifically they meant the dialogue, though.)  Of course this was before any changes made for the current Broadway.

[Ensemble1728379893]

Posted: 10/27/25 at 10:55pm

Just saw it. And I am seeing it tomorrow again. Big fan of the original Chess. I saw it three times in London. I still listen to the original recording often. Never saw the original Broadway production but I have seen most of the NYC concerts and the Kennedy Center production. The first act is good and the second one is a mess and long. Dramatically inept. 

Very mixed bag. I did not like Lea Michele at all. There are perfect notes but no character. Her "Someone Else's Story" comes too late and she does not do anything with it. The scene with the father is borderline ridiculous (would they recognize each other at all after all that time?).  

I think the night belongs to Christopher. His Anthem and his Endgame were extraordinary. 

The  narrator's role (Pinkam is excellent) tells you that the creatives do not believe in the story that they are presenting. Too many jokes like "you will not believe this but..."   

Oh well. Tomorrow again. 

[Ensemble1728379893]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 9:57am

BTW, Is the Imperial the most chaotic theatre on Broadway?  

[darquegk]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 1:00pm

The show is always going to have a valley between its mind and its heart, because it's the most Tim Rice of all Tim Rice projects: characters in a deeply human and emotional story who are all mostly dealing with it through a cold, detached, witty and analytical perspective. Even the classic Mountain Duet ends with the two characters stepping back and realizing the absurdity of their situation. It's like Brecht but with detached irony instead of revolutionary intent. 

Having a narrator comment on the piece like Lemony Snicket is only drawing attention to what audience members will likely pick up anyway. And while I haven't heard the new jokes, I'm not certain that's a bad thing. 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 1:24pm

"The  narrator's role (Pinkham is excellent) tells you that the creatives do not believe in the story that they are presenting. Too many jokes like "you will not believe this but..."   

 

I noted the same thing in my post(s) and I raise these decades-old libretto issues not as a cynical poster but as a die-hard fan of the score, dating to the concept album in the 80s. I was among the first to purchase the vinyl. If memory serves, I made my own cassette of highlights to play (ad nauseum) on a long car trip. A friend said, "If I hear 'Nobody's Side' one more time--'I" fell hard for it. Then saw the Broadway/Nelson iteration twice and both times rooted for it til the end (first, a preview; they second time, near closing, they'd cut the Arbiter's Song, which tells you how lost the creatives were about what was failing the storytelling, and what songs landed with audiences/the built-in fan base)  The division in this thread - and I've enjoyed the level of discourse in this smart debate - seems to be about whether any book can - or needs to - serve. An open question. But if this company is delivering the score as solidly as most report, the show becomes an event, book once again a mere footnote*. Irony duly noted. 

*question: if Strong were not a known screenwriter, would the focus on the book be quite as pronounced?    

 

[Mary_Poppins]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 2:11pm

Auggie27 said: "

*question: if Strong were not a known screenwriter, would the focus on the book be quite as pronounced?"

Yes. Because the fantastic score and the cursed book are are everything commenters, professional or not, can think of. I feel like everyone has been talking about the book forever now, long before Danny came into focus. My great-grandmother could have written the book and people would still have talked about it - just not about her. I guess The Score Versus The Book makes for some good drama or something.

What I'm wondering about: Danny has such a long list of credits. Why did the show's promotion mostly just focus on Dopesick? They could have mentioned e. g. Empire or his acting roles which actually ring a bell for wider audiences.

[Art Isn’t Easy]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 2:23pm

"The show is always going to have a valley between its mind and its heart, because it's the most Tim Rice of all Tim Rice projects:"

This is a really excellent point - As an overall fan of Rice I at times actually laughed at the (lovingly) absurdity of some of the lyrics, one that stands out was the Arbiter's "It's not just black and white/ If I may coin a phrase," the word salad that comes out of these character's mouth's is part of the charm! The issue for me was that in bringing in the outside world, and poking fun at it in such a lowbrow, obvious way, it hurt the immersion and tension of the piece. I do think there are moments when the Arbiter commenting directly on the story works rather well and provides nice bits of humor, but at other times it made my eyes roll to the back of my head, especially when he addressed how he was capable of making jokes critiquing the right and the left. As other people are saying I'm bringing in my own baggage in as a huge fan of the material, the general audience around us was eating it up (in a way that felt very self-congratulatory but I digress). 

The added stakes brought in by the Cold War elements make it harder to square the tone more than in prior versions, when someone could just get lost in the 80's cheese and broad emotionality that the score provides. I wouldn't say there was ever whiplash, Mayer for the most part has a handle on this, but it doesn't quite gel together in the way that it possibly could. Or maybe it can't! Who knows. 

Updated On: 10/28/25 at 02:23 PM

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 3:44pm

Does anyone remember the national tour of the Broadway version of Chess?

We went down to Delaware, which I think was the first stop of the tour, to see it. We remember it being superior to the Broadway version. Having seen the mishmash of the London version we were rooting for a fix way back then too. It was rewritten again for the tour, but I don't remember who did the book work. It was directed by Des McAnuff with choreography by Peter Anastos and Wayne Cilento. Carolee Carmello was Florence, Stephen Bogardus - Freddie, John Herrera - Anatoly, Barbara Walsh -Svetlana and Ken Ard the Arbiter.

They cut Florence's father and that storyline and came up with another politically motivated ending. Freddie came around to really care for Florence and Anatoly was painted as a womanizer. 

Chess 1990 American Tour

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 7:15pm

The book was futzed with for that production by Robert Coe, who briefly followed the tour, doing brush-ups to keep post-Soviet references topical.

[cglaid]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 7:32pm

What does rush look like lately? Specifically if I want to try for tomorrow's matinee? Thank you!

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 8:43pm

Saw it last night. Sat far side house right. Last two seats 10 rows up. Only missed about three things that we didn't actually need up to see up on the platform but could hear and at times moved down to center stage anyway.  As reported earlier in the thread, 98% of the show takes place pretty much center stage. 

I enjoyed it overall. It ran 2 hours and 45 minutes. It really didn't feel that long. 

Where to start?

The set/lighting/Choreography: Was not crazy about how the set corralled the ensemble into the center of the stage. We didn't feel it worked well for the choreography. Some of the choreography was inventive but overall I wasn't crazy about it. But the cast executed it quite well. Especially the bit in the middle of "...Bangkok" with Aaron. (His "costume" for that number was a nice surprise!) Felt like it was purposely choreographed for a small space, if that makes sense. During one number 2 ensemble members just stood off to the side. Otherwise, the set was fine. I liked their use of live streaming video and pictures. A few set pieces rise from the floor. The lighting was fine.

Orchestra/Orchestrations: Most of the songs have had that original "edge" taken out of them. The synths peek through but are not as prominent as they are on the concept album. Was a bit disappointed with "Nobody's Side". I do not like the the replacement of "He would, but he didn't know you. He'd loath your behavior and so do I". I cringe. Just me. At times the band is overpowering. They still need to do some sound adjusting. They try to bump up "One Night in Bangkok" but it too lost something without that pumping bass and original vocal arrangement. The audience ate both songs up. I will say the sound level/volume was good. They just need to get the balance with the vocals better. My friend said after "Did the sound board not like Michele?" 

Performances: Lea Michele, for me and my friend was the weakest performance in the cast. Don't know what was up with her. She sang ahead of the orchestra during "Nobody's Side" (Which drove me and the people I chatted with at intermission crazy). She nailed "Heaven Help My Heart" and "Someone Else's Story" but her voice just didn't seem right for the rest of the score. And her acting was quite flat. A few people were wondering if she was just under the weather. A friend who saw it last Friday had the same thing to say about her performance. I honestly hope she is just under the weather. If not and this is the performance critics see, I don't think she will get the positive notices she got for Funny Girl. The rest of the cast is performing rings around her. It seems that she is the person they are featuring the most in the cast as she gets the final bow and not as much applause as other cast members do.

Aaron Tveit: I felt his performance, the night I saw it, in Moulin Rouge was one of the stiffest performances I had ever seen but he sang his face off. Well, he lets loose in this AND sings his face off. I love his voice. I think they should have done that voice thing they did on the concept album with him for "...Bangkok". Would have spiced it up a bit. His performance last night was excellent and I think deserving of a Tony Nomination.

Nicholas: Yup, he just runs away with the show. He is so good with the Russian accent he does and the way he plays the role. He just owns it through and through. And yes, he tears down the house at the end of Act one. Just. thrilling. And doubles down near the end of Act two. He gets the most applause at curtain call.

Hannah Cruz: Loved her. Loved her "entrance". She played and sang the role quite well. Some of her higher notes were in the shrill territory but it was fine. A much stronger vocal and acting performance than Michele.

Pinkham: I thought he was close to perfection. He balanced the role of Narrator/Arbiter quite well and seamlessly. He was so much fun to watch and even brought a slight bit of sexiness to the role, in my opinion. 

Dean and Krill were fine in their roles.  I really like Krill. And the Ensemble was good and sang their butts off.

The Book/Story:  I have not followed all of the changes since the concept album so I went in with only that as a reference. I like what they did with it. The narration keeps things pretty clear and makes the story easier to follow. I had no problem with the Arbiter/narrator's jokes. They lightened things up and the political jokes worked since it is presented as a story about the past being told to us in the present. They kind of tied/compared the past to the present. He made one great comment that got under the skin of a lot of audience members and he delivered it brilliantly. He said it, paused to let it sink in and then walked off the stage. 

The storyline about Florence's father was kind of a throwaway and felt very anti climactic at the end. And last night, was poorly acted. It felt like they aren't quite sure how to do it. Also the Chess piece being passed around was...interesting.

Overall, I did enjoy it. I overlooked the things I expected and didn't get. It's a new production and took it for how they did it. It has a few thrilling moments and I hope through the preview period they tighten it a bit. I would like to go back after they open but that probably won't happen. Wasn't crazy about the merch but bought the magnet. I don't remember ever having to pay tax on merch at a show but I did last night.

Just my thoughts and opinion. Anything I forgot, I will share as I think of them.

Updated On: 10/28/25 at 08:43 PM

[melfi39]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 10:12pm

I have tickets to see this on a Saturday matinee and then have 5pm tickets for Oh Mary. Google Maps says it’s about a 5 minute walk. Can anyone who has seen a matinee performance let me know what time the matinee has ended? I’m hoping it’s in the 4:45 range so I can still make Oh Mary. Any help on this would be appreciated. Thank you! 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 10:14pm

Last week, “Chess” clocked in at EXACTLY 3 hours for me. 

[melfi39]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 10:18pm

Jordan Catalano said: "Last week, “Chess” clocked in at EXACTLY 3 hours for me."

I was afraid of this. Thank you though for your comment, I appreciate it!! 

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 10:27pm

They have trimmed it to 2 hours and 45 minutes and I was told it is possible they may try to take off a bit more time.

[Ensemble1728379893]

Posted: 10/28/25 at 10:51pm

Yesterday and today, the show ran almost 2:45. You will have enough  time. 

Just seen it again.  A few things.

Yesterday performance was much better vocally from Christopher. Today he seemed cautious. It is too bad that there is no stop/button after Endgame. He deserves a big ovation and he does not get it.

The creatives will burn in Hell by cutting up "You and I." It is divided into two parts. The first part during the "No Deal" sequence and then at the end. However, it lacks the grandiosity of the original Cast album. The end just fizzles.

Something that I thought worked well was the introduction of the Able Archer exercises during Endgame.

I noticed that when "I Know Him So Well" starts, Svetlana disappears and it becomes Lea M.'s song until Svetlana appears again. Strange. 

I have a feeling critics might go mixed to negative. 

[melfi39]

Posted: 10/29/25 at 8:52am

uncageg said: "They have trimmed it to 2 hours and 45 minutes and I was told it is possible they may try to take off a bit more time."

Thank you!!