I left SWEET CHARITY at intermission- Page 3

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 1:25am

Well if you're seeing shows only to say you saw it, then I'd say you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

[LouieLovesTheater]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 1:34am

Yeah, there are some shows you sit through so years from now you can say..."Yes, I saw ALL of Dance of the Vampires." I'll freely admit it.

More often I simply don't want to tell people I spent $80 for a show I didn't have the willpower to sit through. But then again you liked Stones in His Pockets so we'll just have to agree to disagree on some points...right? =)

[shira467]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 1:59am

MEF, I completely understand!

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 1:59am

"I fled the Al Hirschfeld like it was Annatevka"

OK, that made me spit my beverage all over my screen. THANKS A LOT, MEF.

Updated On: 4/14/05 at 01:59 AM

[shira467]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 2:08am

Margo,

I look forward to your review of Charity - you have excellent taste, and provide excellent reviews of the shows you see. You give credit where credit is due.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 6:41am

Margo-You are quite welcome.

Bennett and others-It was the production that was "hell on Earth". The show is only mildly unenjoyable.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 7:09am

I've said it a hundred times on this site and I'll say it again:

If you leave a show at intermission you lose all ability to have your judgement of it count. I'm sorry, I think it's rude to leave at intermission. Trust me there are plenty of things Id have liked to leave but if you leave and don't see the second half then you can't say whether its good or not because you didn't even bother to see the whole thing.

[Glebb]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 7:46am

Nothing rude about leaving at intermission.
When one leaves at intermission they are not stepping across viewers. Stepping across viewers while the show is going on is rude. When the first act of a show is as bad as this production of Sweet Charity, the 2nd act cannot save it.
I'll say it again. I think it is rude to charge the price I paid for a show that is bad as this production of Sweet Charity.

[ken8631]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 7:56am

Wife and I have seen LOTS of shows, have never left at intermission. I did have the woman next to me (in the second row center orch) asleep and snoring during the second act of "An Almosyt Holy Picture", but we've never left. It too expensive to go and at least not see it through to the end before forming an opinion. Or maybe I just hope to be entertained more in the second act if I hate the first (hated the second act of "Return to Moscow" - sooooooooooo boring).

Anyway, I have 4th row center orch tickets to Sweet Charity on the 18th, and am still looking forward to it (maybe a LITTLE less now though). Methinks that Christinas chances at a Tony nomination may be dwindling now - go Sutton! :)

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 8:19am

The funny thing about Anatevka - they didn't want to leave.

I enjoyed Sweet Charity. It was the first production of the show I ever saw that I liked. I'm sorry other people didn't like it, but I really don't think there was anything in the production that was so revolting or dull that would cause such vehement protestations or to cause anyone to leave at intermission unless they simply don't like the show (not this particular revival). But then, I do think there are many here going in with the mindset that they won't like it simply because it was not produced the way they wanted and then all the drama. Oh well.

I found this Sweet Charity far more entertaining than the bewildering All Shook Up.

[evic]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 8:59am

I second acted it so I can fill you in...this show is cute, sweet but it is a star vehicle and while Charlotte is a triple threat, she is just not star material. It's just a characteristic that some actors have- a special something that sets them apart. Orchestra sounded great,sets seemed sparse on the stage- ferris wheel was nice..costumes- bluch.. Rhythm of Life is staged better than original, Oscar's new song should be cut- and are there cleaning people in Central park on a Saturday night?..Baby Dream- sounded fine...Brass Band-yuch....hideous costumes, sloppy, where are Charity's boots?...Cry and scene- lacked a lot-had no sentiment.........finale- yu got to be kidding!- the original while not the best had Fosse's whacky humor- and they cut one of the funniest bits- the subway scene where Charity asks Oscar where they are meeting 3 times and the crowd yells- "At the Y"! There is no point in reviving this and some things just need to remain in your memory......If I get a freebie, I will review the first act

[Justice]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 9:08am

The only reason I sat through all of DRACULA was because my family was there, plus it would have been disrespectful to my brother who got me the ticket. But, I did fall asleep.

Movin' Out was also a show that I could've walked out on, because I wouldn't have missed anything special. I stayed for the same reason I stayed in Dracula.

Jeckyl and Hyde, I waited for Linda Eder to die, then left.

[Demitri2]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 10:14am

I've always felt you should "cut your losses" when it comes to bad theater. Why not leave if the show is a total bore? Why put yourself through the misery of sitting through a show with a first act you've truly disliked? Are you staying JUST to be able to give your friends a full review? When I have stayed, I've never found a second act that has been able to redeem a show with a dreadful first act. I don't understand the mentality of those who feel "I've spent the money so I'm staying even though this show sucks". If you go to an expensive restaurant and realize you made a wrong choice in ordering, do you force feed yourself? And no...I don't tell the server "I'm not happy with this dish" since I take responsibility for my choices. The last time I left a show at intermission was "Triumph of Love". It bored the hell out of me and I had much more fun shopping at Virgin records. At least my whole day wasn't ruined.

[robbiej]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 10:30am

Some of these comments are ASININE!

He fled the Hirschfeld like it was Anatevka (I personally would have used the Poland, 1938 analogy, but it still works!)

WHAT MORE OF A REVIEW DO YOU NEED???

Honestly, the only reason to sit through bad theatre is when it's so bad it's entertaining.

[WISHIHADATONY]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 10:49am

Melissa Ericco Fan, I am so verrry sorry. YOU KNOW I have been trying to warn folks here what a dreadful show this is. I am very dismayed that you had to sit through the first half even! and had a miserable time. I am very sorry I was RIGHT. I will ask for the dozenth time on this Board; why on earth would the producers think they could make money with this dreadful piece of theater that has always failed in the past? Tis simply bizarre. Anyway Melissa, thanks for your post and I am sorry they didn't do something to improve this clunker, at least for you. :)

[WISHIHADATONY]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 10:54am

Mattio98, it is clearly preposterous to put the masterpiece, THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA in the same category of the dreadful SWEET CHARITY or the hardly ever seen dreadful BRING BACK BIRDIE. It is certainly ok if you don't like PHANTOM, but the vast majority of the world who has seen it seems to be enthralled by it. Again, putting PHANTOM in the category of SWEET CHARITY and BRING BACK BIRDIE is ludicrous.

[WISHIHADATONY]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 10:56am

frontrowcentre2, where did you get the information that SWEET CHARITY is a classic? It was a bomb and failed when it opened with Gwen Verdon and it was a bomb in its last Broadway revival. This show is not a classic, not even a very respectable failure. But classic? When have you heard that word applied to this awful show SWEET CHARITY?

[robbiej]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 11:00am

'but the vast majority of the world who has seen it seems to be enthralled by it.'

Just because the lemmings followed each other off the cliff doesn't make your assertion so.

And one of the reason nearly EVERYONE has tuned you out is because you seem to be the only here that thinks the show is 'awful'. Perfect? Certainly not. But I and many others here were certainly entertained by the piece when we had seen it earlier.

At least MEF got through one act before he made some proclamation about the show.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 11:30am

Bythesword--it is NOT rude to walk out at intermission, but it is very rude to make bad theatre.

My mother, who used to go to the theatre with her friends every Tuesday evening, would say after a bad show, "All those talented people...couldn't they tell it stinks?"

[NBC]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 11:39am

Right, just putting in my two cents...while I don't think this is the best production of Sweet Charity that it could be, and I do think the show is structured so that the second act is a bit of a letdown after all the wonderful numbers in the first, I had a far, far, better time at the theatre the two times I saw this Sweet Charity revival than I did the two times I sat through Phantom of the Opera! (Though granted I didn't see the latter until about 14 years into its run, perhaps it was more enchanting early on.)

[DAME]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 11:49am

WISHIHADATONY,
I hate to take this tone with you; but are you stupid? Or just a idiot? For the 100th time; Sweet Charity HAS NOT FAILED IN THE PAST! The Debbie Allen revival was a moderate hit and the original was a very big hit. GOT IT??
The show has a very special place in many peoples heart and I am sure the Weisslers see it as a show that can also prosper with name replacements. Now that I have answered AGAIN why a producer would want to do it.. do you think you can go one day without posting your same crap again. Honestly. You are putting out such bad karma for yourself ( are you sure you are not that past poster Teacheroftheater? )

Updated On: 4/14/05 at 11:49 AM

[GirlfriendFromCanada]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 12:46pm

I thought it was cute. And for whatever reason, that satisfied me. I enjoyed it.

[justme2]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 12:47pm

Why is anyone even reading a post about show by someone who walked out at intermission? I am, because the audacity is amusing.

And, just for WISH here, Phantom of the Opera was a smoke and mirrors piece of crap that gave me and my companions a headache. You don't see me posting on every single Phantom thread with the same comment over and over, do you? Wait...that's because it's only my opinion and I have no pathetic need to continually voice my negative opinion to others who may enjoy the show.

Yet.....I stayed for the duration of Phantom, MEF, as it is NOT OK to start throwing opinions around about a show you saw 45-50 minutes of!

Wait, don't tell me....you went into the show expecting a horrible rendition of live theater and weren't dissapointed. So why leave then, if you got what you expected out of the experience?

[DAME]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 12:48pm

Justme2. I love you. You are one adorable hussy.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 4/14/05 at 12:51pm

WISHIHADATONY - For the dozenth time, Chicago bombed originally as well and the Weisslers turned it into a megahit in revival. They want to try and make lightning strike twice. Sweet Charity has been made a "classic" by regional and stock productions, several popular and memorable songs in the score, and Fosse's choreography (which they took a huge risk on abandoning), and Gwen Verdon's original performance all of which are included in countless books regarding American musical theatre so the idea was not as far-fetched as you would like to make it seem.