"Whether or not Harmony will find harmony in the bright lights of Times Square is anyone’s guess in a precarious theatrical landscape where better shows have come and gone in a New York minute, but if nothing else, amid a precipitous worldwide rise in antisemitism, the time is certainly, and unfortunately, right for it. This is a show that my grandparents would have raved about during the post-services Kiddush luncheon: undeniably moving and extremely powerful, the pros of Harmony generally outweigh the cons. It’s not as profound as everyone involved clearly thinks it is, but it’ll give you the good cathartic cry you’ve been waiting for."
This... does not look good. With tepid reviews, lukewarm interest & sales to date and so many new musicals coming in the spring.. I think this will struggle to make it through the winter.
I'll be so sad if Chip Zien does not get a Tony nom from this (to be fair I haven't seen him in the role, I just feel he's so long overdue for one Tony nom)
Reviews were about what I kind of figured they’d be, if not a little better. This show DOES have an audience but it’s really gonna be on the marketing team to find them and sell them tickets.
I didn’t see Harmony but I have a gripe with Jesse Green again. In his last graf, Green writes of ‘a lot of current theater that hitches a ride on the Holocaust for dramatic propulsion.’ Sounds awfully glib. And what shows is he talking about? Leopoldstadt? I’m not aware of a long list of current shows - and Leopoldstadt isn’t current anyway - in which the Holocaust is part of the story. Am I missing something?
Based on Jesse Green’s other reviews, sometimes I wonder: is that a requirement of having the job as the NY Times theater critic, be as cruel as possible because it sells more newspapers? Or is that just Jesse?
"Based on Jesse Green’s other reviews, sometimes I wonder: is that a requirement of having the job as the NY Times theater critic, be as cruel as possible because it sells more newspapers? Or is that just Jesse?"
Brantley could be cruel on occasion, but I don't think Isherwood was when he was the #2 guy at the NY Times. That being said, being a critic for the NY Times does not require you to be cruel IMO.
I don't find Green's review cruel at all. It's a piece of criticism, about a show that he liked elements of but overall didn't feel it worked. And if he as an audience member finds some of the Holocaust elements manipulative in their deployment (whether they are true or fabricated), he's allowed to feel that way.
The intentions of this show are right; the execution of it is not.
The producers & authors should have seen some of this criticism coming from a mile away and there are things they could have done to sharpen and improve the show and characters for Broadway.
Leisie93 said: "Based on Jesse Green’s other reviews, sometimes I wonder: is that a requirement of having the job as the NY Times theater critic, be as cruel as possible because it sells more newspapers? Or is that just Jesse?"
I disagree. I thought that he was generous in his comments on the score, which he clearly liked more than I did. I read his review as ‘honorable intentions, hindered by pedestrian execution that did not earn any audience emotion towards the end. The reality did, not the work.’
Leisie93 said: "Based on Jesse Green’s other reviews, sometimes I wonder: is that a requirement of having the job as the NY Times theater critic, be as cruel as possible because it sells more newspapers? Or is that just Jesse?"
''The producers & authors should have seen some of this criticism coming from a mile away and there are things they could have done to sharpen and improve the show and characters for Broadway.''
For what it's worth, I've seen ''Harmony'' last year at the National Yiddish Folksbienne Theatre and last month on Broadway. At the Barrymore, I was moved to tears by Act II in a way I hadn't been in 2022. I even saw it many years ago at an early reading. I enjoyed it each time. But taste is subjective. ''Harmony'' has had productions in L.A. and Atlanta, and it's been reviewed before and arguably has been working to make itself better each time.
Even downtown, ''Harmony'' got its share of good reviews, mixed reviews, etc. But notably, it received a very good one from Elisabeth Vincentelli, writing for the New York Times, and she made it a Critic's Pick. Maybe their policy has changed, but didn't the N.Y. Times critic who reviewed an Off-Broadway show that moved to Broadway, also re-review it on the Great White Way? In this case, ''Harmony'' seems to have the misfortune of being reviewed by Jesse Green, who did not share her praise. That's showbiz.
I suspect ''Harmony'' is a show, like any other, that works for some of us, and not for others, and no amount of rewriting would ever please everyone. The fact that it was written by Barry Manilow, never known to be a critic's darling, also made it an easy target for some. All I know is that I'm glad he (and Barry Sussman) wrote it, and at 80, is finally seeing it make it to Broadway. I happily hope to see it again.
Impeach2017 said: "One thing (among many) that is irritating to me today is gaslighting - whether it is done by so-called critics or those who make excuses for them."
What about Jesse or anyone agreeing or defending him gaslighting? I don't particularly like Jesse but personally agree with his review. Even if I didn't, there is nothing gas-lighty about it.
People just throw that word around whenever they don't like something and it's inane.
Wayman_Wong said: "Maybe their policy has changed, but didn't the N.Y. Times critic who reviewed an Off-Broadway show that moved to Broadway, also re-review it on the Great White Way?"
It's my understanding that was always an unofficial "rule" that doesn't seem to be enforced as much in the post-Brantley/Isherwood world.
As a reader, I'm much more interested in a second opinion from a different critic, whether the original NYT review was positive or not. A producer might like two raves from Jesse Green (as with Kimberly Akimbo) or Alexis Soloski (Into the Woods), but the Times should never be catering to producers. It's more interesting to hear different voices...as with Parade (Juan Ramirez at City Center, Green on Bway), Ain't No Mo (Green off-Bway, Vinentelli Bway), and this.
I’m not a fan of Green but I think his review is being really misread here. His main points seem to be: 1) you can’t start the dramatic darkness at a high level because you have nowhere to go and need contrast to underscore what is being lost, and 2) the historical liberties taken use the horrors of the Holocaust as a way to juice the drama when it’s unnecessary given the actual history of the group.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
Others might feel differently, but I think trying to use the trauma of what happened to these real-life people to sell a commercial, historical-fiction product in such a blatant way is pretty gross. It might be more palatable if it was a critic's quote or a press agent's personalized pitch to a journalist, but this line feels right out of the Harvey Weinstein "Honor The Man By Honoring The Film" playbook.
Wonder what the life rights compensation package is like for this show?
I agree, the text is extremely on the nose. I can't imagine Parade using this kind of copy. "They were silenced because they were Jews and their story must be told" - yes, but that's also the story of millions of other people. Why is this one special? It leaves no sense of intrigue.
I don't think there is any reason to be upset, the show was made to share the story of people who didn't have a voice to say it themselves.
"People have their opinions and that doesn't mean that their opinions are wrong or right. I just take it with a grain of salt because opinions are like as*holes, everyone has one".
-Felicia Finley-