Posted: 4/23/15 at 10:16am
Michael Cerveris about to appear on HuffPost Live in the next half hour or so. Maybe he'll talk about the reviews and this link will be on-topic.
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:08am
https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/STAGE-TUBE-Building-a-Home-on-Broadway-with-FUN-HOME-20150424
I love when shows do things like this...
Updated On: 4/24/15 at 11:08 AM
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:23am
So I saw the tag line go up on the FUN HOME website: "The best reviewed new musical of the season!"
Still awaiting a review of THE VISIT from Entertainment Weekly this morning. But unless they give it an A- or better, that seems to be an accurate claim.
FUN HOME was the clear favorite of Matt Windman at amNewYork; Joe Dziemianowicz at the NY Daily News; and the multiple reviewers at Entertainment Weekly.
SOMETHING ROTTEN! was the favorite of Elisabeth Vincentelli at the New York Post.
The reviewers that seemed to love them both equally included those at seven outlets: the Hollywood Reporter; the Huffington Post; NBC New York; Vulture/New York magazine; Time Out New York; TheaterMania; and Variety.
Ben Brantley of the New York Times loved FUN HOME but hated SOMETHING ROTTEN!, FINDING NEVERLAND, and IT SHOULDA BEEN YOU. He was on the fence about THE VISIT. His colleague Charles Isherwood liked AN AMERICAN IN PARIS but hated DOCTOR ZHIVAGO.
Elysa Gardner at USA Today gave the same top grade to IT SHOULDA BEEN YOU; AN AMERICAN IN PARIS; and FUN HOME; and a lower grade to THE VISIT; FINDING NEVERLAND; and SOMETHING ROTTEN!
Matthew Murray of Talkin' Broadway liked SOMETHING ROTTEN! more than FUN HOME, but also liked IT SHOULDA BEEN YOU more than FUN HOME.
And Terry Teachout at the Wall Street Journal seemed to like only THE VISIT and AN AMERICAN IN PARIS.
Updated On: 4/24/15 at 11:23 AM
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:35am
Honest, non-snarky question: why do people focus on any reviews but the Times, the only review that may affect a show's success? (Note well the "may.")
I could see if the other writers were unusually good writers, or seemed particularly insightful about theatre - but (to me) most of them don't appear to be any more qualified to express an aesthetic evaluation than my Aunt Sylvia (who may be unusually articulate, as theatre-loving aunts go, but you get the idea).
I mean, you might as well list that jesse character's reviews from ATC, if one is just interested in collecting every opinion on the web.
If it's the idea that being paid to express an opinion automatically confers value to the opinion... well, that's a good capitalistic point of view, but not much more than that.
Personally, I'm generally more interested to hear what Whizzermarvintrinajasonmendel has to say, than any paid reviewer (with the possible exception of Feingold).
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:42am
I agree with you regarding Whizzer, newintown. I always look forward to his preview-reviews.
In terms of the qualifications of other writers, I think that it's the mere fact that they are published in major publications such as NBC NY, Variety, AMNY, etc. Those publications reach a smaller, sure, but still massive audience when compared to the NYT. But people are still reading them, I'd say.
With that said, you can make the same argument that Brantley and Isherwood's opinions are just as "capitalistic" and "valued" as the others, I guess.
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:49am
Oh, I'd definitely agree with you on that last point, Greased; but the Times sometimes can still occasionally limit a show's success in ways that the industry acknowledges no other publication or medium can. That's the only reason I find to read them. (They don't seem to be able to make a hit any longer.)
Posted: 4/24/15 at 11:55am
You're right. I'd say raves or even positive reviews from the Times have lessened in value, especially this year. But negative reviews from the Times can surely hinder interest, somewhat. As I've said before on these boards, if someone doesn't want to see a show they aren't going to see it these days.
I also agree in the respect that the industry acknowledges them more than others. Most people await at the edge of their seat for the Times review whenever a show opens, as it is usually posted the latest as the "grand finale" of reviews.
Its a crazy thing. It really is.
Updated On: 4/24/15 at 11:55 AM
Posted: 4/28/15 at 12:11am
As I'm overcome tonight with anticipation for Tony nominations in the morning, came across this beautiful interview on HuffPo with Beth Malone.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/helen-eisenbach/beth-malone-a-timeline_b_7133020.html
Adds another layer of insight in to her wonderful portrayal of Alison. I'm really hoping for her nomination nod. And Sydney. And Emily. And Michael. And Judy. And everyone and everything Fun Home.
Posted: 4/28/15 at 11:10am
Congratulations to Fun Home and all of its nominations. <3 :)
Posted: 4/28/15 at 11:32pm
Tonight
Posted: 4/29/15 at 6:01pm
^ Yasssss. <3
Posted: 4/29/15 at 6:06pm
Awesome! I just bought my tickets for 3 weeks from now! So excited.
Posted: 4/29/15 at 9:04pm
Saw the show last night and found it a pretentious and stultifying bore. Judy Kuhn had the same dour expression throughout the whole performance. Cerveris’s dad character is creepy from the moment he enters. Couldn't wait for hime to die. I might have enjoyed this more with the music stripped out. After about 20 minutes I started thinking about how the stage design with all the furniture constantly falling and rising through the floor reminded me of a Whack A Mole game. I do hope that the best musical Tony goes to something more worthy like “American In Paris” or “Something Rotten”.
Posted: 4/29/15 at 11:18pm
Saw the show last night and found it a pretentious and stultifying bore. Judy Kuhn had the same dour expression throughout the whole performance. Cerveris’s dad character is creepy from the moment he enters. Couldn't wait for hime to die. I might have enjoyed this more with the music stripped out. After about 20 minutes I started thinking about how the stage design with all the furniture constantly falling and rising through the floor reminded me of a Whack A Mole game. I do hope that the best musical Tony goes to something more worthy like “American In Paris” or “Something Rotten”.
I have nothing against your opinions (just unfortunate I can't share my excitement for this show with you!), but I do have to wonder I hope you didn't go watch this show thinking it would be along the same lines as AMERICAN IN PARIS or SOMETHING ROTTEN.
Posted: 4/30/15 at 12:00am
Saw it tonight
standing roaring ovation by entire audience the second the lights went done
Stunning
extraordinary
unique
my guesses
best musical
best actor
best supporting actress-young girl
best original score
best book
best director
and one or two more...
I also saw american in Paris today which was very very good.... This was better
And I think fun home will win more Tony's than paris
best
b
Posted: 4/30/15 at 12:34am
A standing ovation? And in a Broadway musical too? This must have been a real theatrical savvy audience tonight. WOW!!!!
Posted: 4/30/15 at 12:41am
Just bought my tickets for June 9th, their first performance after the Tony Awards! Bought seats at Row D seats, 101 and 103! Has anyone sat there? Are they good? Anyways, very excited!
Posted: 4/30/15 at 1:32am
You know, the more I think about it, the more I like it. I listened to the score again, this time actually paying full attention and I liked a decent amount of it. I don't know where my head was on Ring of Keys because it's really good, as is telephone wire. I think that because it was my second show of the day, I was a little fatigued. I still think that the main problem with the show was that they decided to adapt a virtually unadaptable work, but there were many great parts about the show. On reflection, Sydney Lucas was really the best member of the cast, and I hope she wins come Tony time. Part of my initial disappointment came from seeing it just after The Visit, which as I said in the Visit preview thread was incredible. I'd say it's definitely worth seeing, though not a must-see.
Updated On: 4/30/15 at 01:32 AM
Posted: 4/30/15 at 12:00pm
A standing ovation? And in a Broadway musical too? This must have been a real theatrical savvy audience tonight. WOW!!!!
The standing ovation that happened when I saw Fun Home was totally different from the standard version that's come to be regarded as de rigeur. Most people in the theater rose to their feet the second the show was over.
Posted: 4/30/15 at 1:57pm
Wow!! They stood up the second the show was over? That’s fantastic but my audience stood up 20 minutes into Something Rotten and then did it again in the middle of the second act and then did it again at the curtain call. Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah , nyah!
Posted: 4/30/15 at 2:00pm
I hope AfterEight is watching this. He has another anti-Fun Home bully to keep him company!
Posted: 4/30/15 at 2:00pm
A couple people have mentioned doing SRO for this show. Assuming they only offer this if sold out?
Posted: 4/30/15 at 3:04pm
They do, but they're pretty strict about it. I tried on the 28th, and when I went to the box office around 5:30 (for a 7 PM show) they weren't totally sold out yet, so they weren't offering it.
Posted: 4/30/15 at 3:06pm
You know, from my experience going to shows, I think the idea that full standing ovations is common is pretty false. I've been to plenty of shows (some that are "in" with the vocal BWW crowd) where the audience wasn't given a standing ovation or if there was one, it was partial (some with more of the crowd standing than others). Anyway, even if SOs aren't as rare as they used to be, that doesn't negate the fact that someone went to a show and observed the entire audience standing and giving wildly enthusiastic applause. If the audience felt like Tony2600, then there is no way the show would have received any positive response.
Updated On: 4/30/15 at 03:06 PM
