Dracula 8/20/04

[TheGirlinTheFrock]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:11pm

Now, there has been alot of talk over this show. Is it good? Is it bad? Critics haven't been to kind to it, and I have a feeiling this is just tbe beginning. I saw the show last night, it was a last minute decision and got last row balcony. Not to bad off seats - i was worried at first.

I usually agree with alot of the posters on the board on certain shows, and anticpated the same for Dracula and was surprised to see that i disagreed with mostly everything that was said.

I truely like the show. I am no expert on what makes a show good or bad, all I know is what I like. I came out of the show entertained and happy. Not once was a bored, like so many others on this message board have reported their experience to be. I am not sure whether the flying/levitating was toned down, but again i disagreed with the majority on the board and did not find it excessive. I thought it was well done, and appropriate. I enjoyed the fact that before something "big" (for lack of a better word) happened in the plot Dracula (Tom Hewitt) was see flying across the stage.

I enjoyed the music, and IMHO I think it was a nice return to the more classic/traditional Broadway. My favorite would have to be "If I Could Fly" sung by Mina (Melissa Errico) and a close second would be Life After Life. I also have the impression that the score is more enjoyable if you know the lyrics and are familiar with it going in.

I also felt the actors/actresses were wonderful in their roles. I did not find them boring, and very much felt a conncetion with all of them. My only complaint would have to be Van Helsing. He was a good actor, but he kept slipping into an American accent and with that occuring so often, he wasn't a believable Van Helsing.

My only complaint on the show would be that i wasnt sure if I was supposed to like Dracula or not. I know in the novel, you aren't and he is supposed to be a character of "pure evil" as a friend put it. It may be that it is up to the indivivual to decide if he is likeable yet I sat there confused at the end whether or not I am supposed to be happy.

At the end of the show, I stayed at the stage door and meet almost all of the cast. They were all so personable and seemed to be enjoying themselves.

[Derek2]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:23pm

Im glad you liked it. I agree. Many reporters care so much about every little aspect of a show. I know that's their job. i just care if I come out entertained, still seeing parts of the show in my mind and humming a few songs. I mean that's what really matters. Critics didn't really like Wicked when it opened...Les Miz too. I thought they were both very good. Every lyric to every song doesnt have to be perfect or work exactly...who cares. Theatre is a magical experience, no matter what show (ok some are just reallllllllllllllllllllllllly bad) but i doubt Dracula is one of them. It cant be with that cast. Even if the music isnt great the cast would still entertain me. Anyway, Im happy for u

[magruder]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:30pm

A lot of emphasis is placed on the reviews, but a couple of shows in the past few years have fought the battle and won. Beauty and the Beast was universally panned...not a single good review, and it's in its 11th year. Aida, apart from praise for Heather Headley and the design was also panned, but ran four years and turned a profit. Wicked, though the reviews weren't necessarily "pans," opened to a lot of negative notices, but is clearly an audience favorite. Jekyll & Hyde, though it ultimately didn't pay back on Broadway, still managed a three and a half year run and a partial pay back, despite reviews that were just as bad as Dracula's. The audience will be the ultimate arbiter...

[TheGirlinTheFrock]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:30pm

I do think the show has its flaws, but I have never seen a show that I wouldn't like to change atleast one thing about it. I was very pleased at how closely they stayed to the book.

[Testing1232]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:40pm

Magruder,

Respectfully disagree a bit about the "Wicked" reviews... though not great, they were FAR better than the "Dracula" reviews, and dont forget that Idina and KC both, for the most part, received good reviews. (In some cases, very good reviews).

[magruder]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:53pm

Yes, Wicked's reviews were of course, much better than Dracula's, and largely enthusiastic for Idina and Kristin's performances...but most of the reviews were negative for the material. I think USA Today and the Star Ledger were both pretty positive, but Wicked did receive a lot of downbeat notices.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 10:05pm

Sorry if this has already been said. But I think that a lot of people will now be curious to see it since the critics had blasted it, to see for themselves. I think it just might be a hit a the box office.

[TheGirlinTheFrock]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 11:54pm

I wouldnt be surprised! I always say - go see for yourself, hopefully others feel the same way. Its also a very familiar story, so it might get alot of tourists coming to see it. Only time will tell.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 8/22/04 at 10:20am

Great post, TGITF. Everything was very well said, and I'm really glad you had a nice time!

[Testing1232]

Posted: 8/22/04 at 4:06pm

Here is a link to Roma Torre's review from NY1. I think she hit it right on the head. The leads should hold their heads high....
but otherwise.....

http://www.ny1.com/Living/on_stage.html

[Peter]

Posted: 8/22/04 at 8:24pm

Nope..I disagree with her. The revised version of SP was actually good..in fact, it's Frank's best show to date.

And Hewitt was pretty good as Dracula, but Errico was stiff, vocally inconsistent and easily turned in the worst performance of the cast. I thought the best performances in the show were from Kelli O'Hara and Don Stephenson, who were able to bring some dimension to their roles.

I also disagree with those critics who blamed the "material" for performances from actors they believe are talented (ie their "stars"), but weren't able to do much with their parts here. That kind of argument goes only so far with me. Critics berated the "material" for both J&H and Scarlet Pimp, but there were performers who were able to rise above the material, deliver memorable performances and make us care about the characters. In fact, many of these same critics blaiming the poor "material" for the disappointing acting in Dracula, knocked some performers not on their "star" lists in Wildhorn's other shows, while they deemed the "material" just as bad.