Bwayfan292 said: "Does the general public read reviews though? Or do they just go cause a show looks cool?"
There isn't a yes-or-no answer, and I think it's very different with a play than with a musical. Smaller shows or shows without stars rely on rave reviews (and, later, Tonys) to stay alive. Look at The Humans, Band's Visit, Oslo, Fun Home, Come From Away, and even Hamilton (though that was also the audience reception). Then there are the shows that didn't recoup, but the reviews helped them in the beginning (Dolls House 2, Hand to God, Groundhog Day, Carousel).
Broadway Star Joined: 1/12/17
HogansHero said: "zainmax said: "Re. Hogan, it's still helpful sometimes to know where the critic ultimately stands on the show. When I'm reading some of Brantley's reviews, all I'm trying to figure out is the answer to one question. Did he like it? (Cue Ken's advertising pitch)."
yes, I did not mean to suggest otherwise. My point is basically that where he stands ultimately is only meaningful if it is set within a general sense of his taste and how it is likely to align with your own. I could say the same thing about (to pick someone with whom I am most often in disagreement) Terry Teachout. The specific question, however, is not about that alignment but about the editorial decision to make something a critic's pick."
I know. Not disagreeing. Just adding onto your point.
Anotha one:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/04/theater/american-son-review.html
raddersons said: "The day that Tuck Everlasting got critic’s pick was the day I knew it meant nothing to me."
Exactly
Featured Actor Joined: 3/18/15
I didn't get a chance to read through all of the posts so I apologize if I repeat this opinion, but the one seal of approval that I found incredibly laughable was when Isherwood raved over DISASTER.
I stopped caring about the seal of approval around the time they put up the paywall.
Chorus Member Joined: 3/30/17
The only person the critic's pick seal should really mean anything to is the critic who decided to apply it to their review, denoting that they quite liked the piece they are reviewing. Criticism and reviews are purely subjective - sure, we can hope that professional critics are more educated and are coming to the theater from a place of higher regard than average audiences, but at the end of the day they are just expressing their own individual opinion.
The critic's pick seal can be helpful as a reader to note which shows that individual critic liked a lot, but as with anything I never use reviews or ratings to tell me what I should or shouldn't see. I see what I want to, and then perhaps read the reviews afterwards. It's not meant to be some definitive stamp of approval or to suggest that everyone will like this show or everyone should see this show, and it shouldn't be taken as such.
It seems that at some point recently, the threshold for Critic's Pick seems to have changed. Rather than it meaning the show is in the top tier, now it's more of a thumbs up/thumbs down situation, which is a much lower bar.
I found it helpful before, but not anymore.
So the esteemed NYT critics extols the stellar ‘critic pick’
So the lavished show buys marketing space in the said publications, pointing out it is the anointed one of having the behemoth ‘critic pick.’
See what I am trying to say?
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/22/14
I think the seal still means something to me. It at least puts me on notice of a show that I should pay some attention to and read about how other people liked it.
If I show I dismissed as skippable gets a Critics Pick, I'll go and read some more reviews and see if my rationale for skippage is unfounded. But it doesn't mean I automatically buy tickets.
Videos