FINDING NEVERLAND Reviews- Page 8

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 4/18/15 at 6:24pm

^^Not to push you to one or the other but I think King and I will be extended and be around for a while as well. South Pacific was extended way past it's initial planned run as I think the King and I will be also.

The King and I is not new material but certainly you can't go wrong with a classic and I enjoyed every second of it..but there is nothing wrong with choosing something that is brand new either.

I think you and your partner probably should just pick one and go for it. Of course, ticket availability may affect your choice as well...so I would decide sooner rather than later.

[sctrojan65]

Posted: 4/18/15 at 6:27pm

"The reviews wouldn't have been half as bad if Harvey Weinstein wasn't producing it. Not all but some of the reviews reeked of bitter anger for him."

Did you see the show, Bilbo?  If so, what did you think of it?

Your observation ties into some things I've been curious about.  

Is this about a show that is just bad, or was it already doomed because of those who are involved in it and choices made in casting that people didn't agree with (Morrison over Jordan)?  Had some already decided they weren't going to like it because of…fill in the blank.

Personally, I saw the show and thought it was good.  I was in no way disappointed by what I saw.   I really liked it and even thought it had some "wow" moments that impressed me.

It may not have the most hummable score I've experienced, but in the moment, throughout its telling of the story I found it quite nice. And the staging was beautiful.

 

[MorningGlow2]

Posted: 4/18/15 at 6:35pm

"Screw the reviewers, and screw the folks on this board. If it sounded like something you would have wanted to see before, make up your own mind and go anyway."

I for one didn't enjoy this show, but am in total agreement with you here :)

The BWW message board could use some "favorite shows" tagging system that could show up beneath the person's "joined" date. Right now it's hidden inside profiles.

Even better, have an ability to follow someone. The best critics (amateurs included) are the ones you can relate to the majority of the time and would be nice if that could be more visible rather than people taking in whatever post at face value.

 

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/18/15 at 11:16pm

David Cote of Time Out on NY 1 ripped Finding Neverland a big one .

Might this show be a new Legs Diamond - ripped by almost all the critics and closing after a big advance dried up?

Does anyone expect any nominations for it? By the way, before the reviews tried to get the concept album on Amazon but no record of it there.

Updated On: 4/18/15 at 11:16 PM

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 4/18/15 at 11:38pm

"Might this show be a new Legs Diamond - ripped by almost all the critics and closing after a big advance dried up?"

No....just....no.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 7:52pm

Ouch-- that LEGS DIAMOND line cuts me to the quick-- and I worked on that turkey for 6 months back in 1988 so I should know.

This show is nothing like that one-- FINDING NEVERLAND has an unerring capacity to bring utter delight to its audiences (including myself) despite missing with so many of the critics. Those audiences are huge (102% attendance last week) and roar their approval back at the stage. We on LEGS only wished we would have gotten the crowd reactions back at the Mark Hellinger Theater that are coming across the footlights these days at the Lunt-Fontanne.

[sctrojan65]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 8:03pm

^^^Like.  I thought Neverland was a really enjoyable show too.  I don't pay much mind to the critics anymore.  If the theme or story of the show….or the music or dance element…is in sync with my interests, I'll go for it anyway.  If I'm torn between two shows (which I was….Gigi vs. American in Paris…prior to my recent trip to NY), I'll look to the people.  Which was my reason for coming here. 

Chose Paris and glad I did.  

It just so happens my thoughts about that show DO match the critics this time.

[rcwr]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 8:24pm

What does 102% attendance mean?

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 8:50pm

^ Not altogether sure but FISH IN THE DARK was at 101.6%, BOOK OF MORMON was at 102.6%, and THE AUDIENCE was at 100.8%.

I assume something to do with standing room sales.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 8:58pm

Exactly.

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 9:08pm

"I thought Neverland was a really enjoyable show too.  I don't pay much mind to the critics anymore.

My daughters loved it and I hope it is still around when my wife and I visit NYC this summer, we would give it a chance along with "American In Paris".  Maybe word of mouth from audiences who seem to like it will help it stay around for a decent run. As for critics, they have been wrong before on shows and "Honeymoon in Vegas" is the latest example.

 

[sctrojan65]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 9:25pm

I hope so too, yankeefan.  I really had not one problem with it and think you'd enjoy it.  

In fact, the performances, the music and the staging were really good, IMO.  As I mentioned, there were even a couple of "wow" moments for me that I thought were really cool.  

With regard to the critics, it can be nice when a critic does give a show you liked the thumbs up.  But not because they're necessarily the "be all" and "end all" of opinions.  But I've seen shows close that I thought were good.  And I think it probably had to do with the fact that there are people who do listen to the critics so never even give it a chance.

I hope Neverland overcomes that hurdle, because based on what people are saying on here (largely), there seems to be a small chasm between what the critics said, and how the audiences are receiving it.  That certainly was the case in the performance I saw too.  The audience loved it.

Hopefully that continues.

 

[steven22]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 10:47pm

Saw the show tonight. Not a fan. Not at all. 

 

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 4/19/15 at 11:39pm

"Saw the show tonight. Not a fan. Not at all. 
 "

Well, bully for you. 

[littlebro2]

Posted: 4/20/15 at 10:21pm

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/audiences-flying-to-neverland-and-paris/?ref=theater&_r=0

It seems that Harvey's announced tour plans as a way to drum up Tony support.

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/21/15 at 7:27am

"With regard to the critics, it can be nice when a critic does give a show you liked the thumbs up.  But not because they're necessarily the "be all" and "end all" of opinions.  But I've seen shows close that I thought were good.  And I think it probably had to do with the fact that there are people who do listen to the critics so never even give it a chance."

I agree and my gut feeling is "Finding Neverland" is going to get shut out during the award season which can hurt a show. IMO - this show will hang in there kind of like "If/Then" did with Idina Menzel. Once Matthew Morrison and Kelsey Grammer leave, it might be tougher for the show to survive without nominations/awards to use in advertisements. My cousin will be seeing it in early May and I will be interested in her opinion because she can be very picky - lol.

[valeposh]

Posted: 4/21/15 at 7:52am

I was disappointed in the critics reaction, which I was expecting to be more mixed than negative. I wonder if Morrison and Kelsey will still snag a nomination. Most of the negative reviews were about the score and book, not their performances. I was surprised Peter Gallagher even got an Outer Critics nom, didn't think he was particularly good.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 4/21/15 at 7:59am

The industry grudge against this show is childish and in 10 years when we look back on this show and the "controversy" surrounding it, the industry is going to look petty and immature.

If the critics didn't like it that's fine, but you can tell there really is a political grudge against this show in the industry. Some of the reviews relished in taking jabs at Harvey.

I don't even like the show that much and still think Jeremy Jordan should have taken it to Broadway ( he clearly dodged a bullet) but come on, this is a bit much.

The problem is the Broadway industry is actually a very small industry. Everyone talks to everyone about everything.  So if the means are there to really trash a show, it's not hard to do it. The show is good. Not great, but it didn't deserve the reviews it got. If Harvey wasn't producing it we wouldn't have seen the childish slaughtering of this show.

 

Updated On: 4/21/15 at 07:59 AM

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/21/15 at 1:55pm

"If the critics didn't like it that's fine, but you can tell there really is a political grudge against this show in the industry. Some of the reviews relished in taking jabs at Harvey."

I don't know anything about the industry but that is a shame if they really did that to "Finding Neverland" for the reason you mentioned.  Numerous people are making a living from working on the show and to possibly lose that not on the merit of the show but a political grudge seems very mean spirited.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 4/21/15 at 2:11pm

The show didn't get negative reviews because the critics don't like Harvey.

Finding Neverland got negative reviews because the critics didn't like the show. They didn't like the book, they didn't like the score, they didn't like the choreography. That's your answer.

[sctrojan65]

Posted: 4/21/15 at 9:05pm

Which is in contrast to what the public seems to think about it.

At the end of the day, the critics can say whatever they want, but if a show is of interest to me I will see it anyway.  And sometimes I even like it.  Seems to be much the same for others.

It's still interesting to see what they say though, even if I don't agree.

A good number of the shows I saw were in previews so all I had to go on was what people were saying here. I still saw the shows I felt I needed to see, and so far FN is the only one that has shown a difference between my opinion and those of the critics. 

I liked it though, so I'm glad I saw it.

 

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/22/15 at 7:16am

"At the end of the day, the critics can say whatever they want, but if a show is of interest to me I will see it anyway.  And sometimes I even like it.  Seems to be much the same for others."

I agree. I wanted to see "Finding Neverland" because I really liked the movie and I have always wanted to see Matthew Morrison and Kelsey Grammer. My daughters saw it (previews) and loved it and they said the crowd really liked it that evening. Maybe it is not one of the top musicals this year but I really think if I get to see it I will have an enjoyable evening of theatre.

[Insider3]

Posted: 4/22/15 at 10:23pm

some of the divisive reactions seem targeted viscerally against weinstein, which imho is a shame given that this musical while perhaps not daring/edgy like Fun Home (which deserves all the accolades its gotten) has a charm and energy that made it a worthwhile evening. Matt Morrison's laid back approach i did not see as a negative and despite what some critics said, i thought he and the leading lady had an easy, convincing chemistry. I can see why its becoming a popular hit

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 4/23/15 at 3:11am

Some shows are critics' darlings. And some shows are crowd-pleasers. Based on its booming box office, 'Finding Neverland' is the latter. It's the only new Broadway musical that's been grossing over $1 million each week since it began previews. Family audiences are flocking to this show. On the awards front, it did get snubbed by the Outer Critics Circle, but it won 8 IRNE Awards (including Best Musical) for its A.R.T. production, and the Drama League nominated it for Best Musical and included Matthew Morrison and Kelsey Grammer for its list of Distinguished Performances. Most notably, with a $10 million advance, 'Neverland' isn't going anywhere soon. Harvey might get the last laugh.

Updated On: 4/23/15 at 03:11 AM

[skylight2]

Posted: 4/23/15 at 5:55am

yeah Harvey might not lose money over this but isn't he awards hungry too? he's probably not gonna get those.