CHESS Previews — Page 9

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. 
 

 

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

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 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. 

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.

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

"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?    

 

"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

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.

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  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: 10/30/25 at 08:43 PM

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

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.

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!!