"Mikers, why don't you post your review of the show ? Surely you must have seen it since you have such strong opinion about it."
I have not expressed any sort of opinion about the show. I did object to the troll review by a troll who registered at BWW just to post a negative review.
But, Mikers, since you haven't seen the show, how do you know that what you call a "bad" review is not warranted ? Do you always have an opinion on things before they happen ?
So why is it, Mikers, that you only seem to appear to gush over/defend Clay and nothing more?
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
It baffles me that you think my review was entirely negative when what I said was that the falsetto stuff was weird (which is more an issue of direction than of Clay himself) and the emotional connection was lacking. It doesn't mean I think he performed badly. I just think the whole thing was an odd fit, and it's not something I'd care to see again. That's all. I'm not going to apologize for having an opinion.
And, actually, Keala Settle's performance was far more of a problem for me than Clay's was. Again, it wasn't that she performed badly- she was just far too demanding of the audience's attention, and that's not appropriate for that role.
Updated On: 8/4/13 at 09:27 PM
I asked in the other thread, but got no response...
What was the story of this being a co-production with another company and it not happening?
Was it because Ogunquit cast Clay?
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
If you think that is a negative Clay Aiken review you haven't been following Clay much:
"He seemed to be fighting a cold or allergies. He went downright screechy on some high notes, and — dare I say it? — pitchy on others, particularly on what should have been the showstopper, “Unchained Melody.”....Didn’t really matter, though — the “Claymates,” as his fans have dubbed themselves, loved every minute of the two-hour show"."
or
"The audience seemed to appreciate Aiken's between-song banter, but unfortunately the songs would have fit all too comfortably in a cruise-ship lounge. "Moon River," "Suspicious Minds," and Aiken's several awkward attempts at mid-song humor were stale - for example, Aiken's messy pop medley of Britney Spears' "Baby One More Time," the New Kids on the Block's "The Right Stuff," the Footloose theme, and his own "Invisible.""
THOSE are negative- just so you can spot the difference. And the thing to do with negative reviews of an artist you enjoy is to laugh and move on. Defending him so vigorously just underlines every negative thing anyone ever said about him.
^Yes. That, exactly. I've enjoyed Clay's music for years. It just so happens that I did not enjoy this production as much as I've enjoyed other things he's done. But I guess Clay fan code dictates that that's wrong.