CINDERELLA Reviews- Page 3

[Emma White]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 1:27am

Does the show include "Falling in Love with Love," just out of curiosity? I'm assuming it doesn't.

[Copperfield2]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 1:28am

The book is a problem but it doesn't ruin the show. Several of the musical numbers are enchanting and Osnes, Fontana and Clark are all wonderful.

As far as this not really being Cinderella, it basically is: Cinderella gets her Prince and that's why people will watch this show.

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 1:30am

Emma White, sadly the show does not include that number.

[SamIAm2]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 1:39am

Hollywood Reporter is positive, despite problems with the revised book.
Hollywood Reporter review

[SamIAm2]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 1:49am

Vulture.com (never heard of them!) is positive.
vulture.com blog

[SamIAm2]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 2:08am

Very positive.


Showbiz 411 blog cinderella review

[SamIAm2]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 2:15am

Financial Times (London) loves it.


FT London

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 2:45am

Lots of great reviews here! Brantley's review is not going to help or hurt this one way or the other considering he never states his opinion or writes in detail about the show itself. SOOOO thrilled to see some great reviews for this one though! They definitely won't have a hard time finding pull quotes.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 2:52am

The idea that Brantley "never states his opinion" seems strange to me. His take on Cinderella ("a glittery patchwork"of "sincere and snark") is in line with a majority of the reviews. It's just that he adopts a tone that he feels fits with the glib nature of the book. Reading it gave me a sense of the production's affect that let me know the show wasn't for me.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 4:07am

I think I got more out of the New York Times review than any of the others, how does one hum a frock change?

[After Eight]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 5:56am

From the Chicago Tribune:

"a golden title for family audiences and yet something else entirely once their credit cards have been charged."

Therein lies the biggest problem of this whole, misconceived enterprise.

[best12bars]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 6:40am

I thought Brantley's opinion was clear. He thinks this "Cinderella" is a product of its time, which isn't so much a good thing. He doesn't overstate his opinion, but rather backs it up by citing many examples of why he feels this way in the review (the OMG! Red Carpet approach to the "makeover" story and characters, the "designer label" title, the tiaras sold in the lobby, the political and PC renovations, the costume colors and costume changes, etc.)

I haven't seen it, so I can't agree or disagree with him.

But his opinion of this production was clear.

[dtzumbrunnen]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 7:09am

I predict they will use the OMG from Brantley.

Also, since when do journalists print "OMG?"

[bdn223]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 9:53am

The issue with Brantley's book is that it takes way too long to get going. The first Act is mostly a bore/wash with setting up plot lines for the supporting character's whom unfortunately do not have songs to help explain/make their stereotypical stories more entertaining. Since most critics make up their minds at intermission and start planning their review, when his book takes off in Act II the critics don't care.

Honestly the first Act would barely get a C in my book, but the second Act easily gets an A+ averaging to B for the production as a whole.


I also now thing Osnes is the frontrunner for Best Leading Actress, considering the fact that she is Broadway's current Cinderella story (Going from winning a reality show to star in Grease, which everyone hated, to becoming a well respected Broadway leading lady), who is actually playing Cinderella.

[suestorm]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 10:56am

Kelly2, if i listened to a reviewer, i wouldnt have seen WICKED 4 times!

its really hard to find a show with 100% praise and so i am looking forward to seeing this in a couple of weeks

I will admit, that all this PC crap (stepmoms and stepsisters cant be mean in this day and age i read in one review) and reinventing gets on my nerves. just the fact that they call the Prince Topher makes me want to strangle someone.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:00am

"Topher"? You have a problem with "Topher"? It's just a nickname of "Christopher" which was in the original production and is still in "The Prince Is Giving a Ball" presumably.

[suestorm]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:05am

i know,and its admittingly small thing but it just bugs me in a too cool for school way, you know?? but again, i cant wait to see it!

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:13am

My favorite part of the "Times" review:

Such uncertainty may not bother the little girls in tiaras (you can buy your own in the lobby) who are the show’s target audience.

Hmm.

[tazber]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:24am

Ha! I had the same reaction, growl.

I think "little girls" is used euphemistically.

[suestorm]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:25am

GROWL this is even better from NY Magazine (VULTURE):

preadolescent girls - still the worlds top consumers of $15 lobby-sold plastic tiaras, barely edging out middle-aged theater critics...

LMAO

[Wynbish]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:37am

"Little girls, little girls"...

[Pammylicious]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 11:51am

okay Regis Philbin out of nowhere on The View just 10 minutes ago started high praise and loving the show. Does he own a piece of it?

[jacobsnchz14]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 12:50pm

http://www.didhelikeit.com/shows/rodgers-and-hammersteins-cinderella.html

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 12:59pm

suestorm - Unless most of the reviews are like a Wildhorn show (lol), I think a show can survive on word of mouth for awhile. A few years ago, I went back and looked at NY Times reviews of big time hits like "Wicked", "Phantom" and "Rent" and they were not that positive.

[suestorm]

Posted: 3/4/13 at 1:13pm

"I think a show can survive on word of mouth for awhile. A few years ago, I went back and looked at NY Times reviews of big time hits like "Wicked", "Phantom" and "Rent" and they were not that positive."

agree 100% Yankeefan7!!