Is Avenue Q Over rated?? — Page 2

The material resonates strongly with a generation for whom SESAME STREET and other knowing, progressive childrens' entertainment was a daily connection to the world, ideas, identity. I think the creators tapped into the lexicon of SS and its ilk, and found a way to serve up nostalgia and gentle satire on the earnest tropes of childhood and children's TV, and the universal themes re the pain/thrill of growing up. Its success for any given audience member perhaps relates to that.

---

I saw Ave. Q and Wicked on my last trip to NYC, I thought that both of them were outstanding. My partner and I still talk about Wicked today, and we are actually seeing the touring production when it comes to Houston. But is Ave. Q overrated? No I don't believe so. Should it have won the Tony? Yes. It is a completly different show. We had certain expectations of Wicked and they were all met, but when we went to go see Ave. Q those expectations were met and exceeded then what we expected. Both productions are unique and I feel as though they are better than most productions out now. This is my opinion, not living in NYC and only getting there a few times a year.

I found it to be very overrated, and with Caroline, or Change in the running, Q did not deserve the Tony.

It's unfair to state that Avenue Q can't be the Best Musical because it's choreography isn't difficult. If that were the case MANY Best Musical Nominees/Winners would be ineligible. That's why there is a Best Choreography award, which Avenue Q wasn't nominated for. Also, if you follow that train of thought, then perhaps Stephanie D'Abruzzo should have won over Idina simply because she played more characters than Idina did.

I thought Avenue Q was a very creative and enjoyable. I'm not completely convinced that it deserved to win Best Musical, but not because of choreography or sets. It was a season where (I thought) there was no clear-cut winner. All shows had their pluses and minuses. Avenue Q was (IMHO) one of the best new musicals of the season.

---

I think the score is fantastic.

Umm, not to ask a stupid question, but what the Hell is Sesame Street and why does everyone compare Q to it? I am certainly under 40, and my enjoyment of Q certainly doesn't have anything to do with some other type of show.

You must know what Sesame Street - are you asking a rhetorical question? If not, its a children's "muppet/puppet" show on public TV. There must be some similarities between the two if the Golden Theater has to hang a sign in the Theater that says "Ave Q has nothing to do with Jim Hensen and the Muppets", which is the creative talent of Sesame Street.

I love Avenue Q.
I love Wicked too. And If I had to choose one for the Tony, I would pick Avenue Q. Wicked does not need the publicity anyways. That would only increase the number of annoying teeny boppers. That doesnt mean that I think Avenue Q needs the publicity, because its a great show and stands for itself.


And I thought Shoshana Bean was quite good, IMO.

---

"'Q' is still prefered by many over 'Wicked'"

I highly disagree. Wicked's fanbase is much larger than Q's, and all I hear from anyone I talk to is that Wicked deserved the Tony over Q and that they enjoyed Wicked more and thought it was better. To each his own I supposed.

When I first saw it, I thought it was enjoyable (it was running in the 40% range percentage wise) and I knew the end would most likely be soon and inevitable, but I was totally wrong. I applaud it for coming back and being such a sleeper hit, but I can't fully applaud it since it's Tony was won by lies and deciept, basically. The whole idea of the show is this cute, somewhat bold but mainly adorable musical while Wicked is huge and intense, and you'd think Wicked's producers (etc) would be more set on winning the Tony...guess not. When you have to stoop that low as to LIE to win an award, you lose all respect from me. When I first saw the show, I would say I'd give it a B- or so. And this was before Wicked was even heard about by me. I thought the songs were good, the book kinda blah, but the performances all uniformly stellar. While Wicked's score is a bit blah on a first listen but better the more you hear it and grow accustomed to it, it's book (IMO) is splendid and deals with the heavy plot pretty damn well, and the performances were all for the most part INCREDIBLE.

Sorry for that rant, but before the Tony's I would have said no to this question, but now, my answer is 150% yes, this show is overrated. That doesn't mean it's bad, though. It's just overrated IMO.

I'm not saying Q did or didn't deserve the Tony, but is it overrated? yes, slightly.

Is it enjoyable? Very much so. But that's just it -- it's the "enjoyment factor" I use as the barometer when determining if a show is "good" or not. Bottom line, it's the show's ability to entertain me that matters. Q delivers.

While a new concept for musical thatre, I wouldn't say Q is completely original, however. The puppets are indeed Sesame Street-esque, if not clones. Didn't a fair portion of the original cast and creators work with Sesame Street during some point in their careers?

But, maybe that's why it works so well. I grew up watching Sesame Street - and Q is like grown up Sesame Street. Very entertaining!

Updated On: 10/18/05 at 04:34 PM

Well, since this seems to be steering toward the "clash of the titans" comparison...

Wicked's appeal to a broader fan base over Q's is undeniable. The numbers don't lie. Both shows resonated with people, but Wicked's "empire" is far-reaching now. For a show that people tried to write off as shallow, it's sure digging down deep and "speaking" to more than just a few people, of many ages and backgrounds.

Still, that aside... does "Popular" = Tony?

Just ask Ms. Chenoweth.

For me personally, I'm not a "freaky fan" over Wicked, and it has its faults... but I couldn't stop thinking about the storyline and Idina's performance for days (even weeks) after seeing it. Something resonated and stayed there. It felt universal to anyone who's been doubted, misperceived or seen as an outcast. Avenue Q was a completely enjoyable experience, and hugely entertaining... but the pleasures and “messages” seemed very specific, and faded quickly.

EDIT: P.S. --- I grew up on Sesame Street. I get it. I remember the muppets BEFORE Sesame Street, when they too were controversial. That was over 30 years ago, though.

---

Updated On: 10/18/05 at 04:39 PM

I can only speak for myself. In an age of adaptions and jukebox musicals, Avenue Q was, to me, a breath of fresh air. The story is truly much more existential than people give it credit for. It’s about a kid who comes to the city trying to find out what to do with his life. Sure, the kid is a puppet, and his love interest is a monster, and yes they all basically live in the frame of this “R-rated Sesame Street” world.
If this was just a show that was puppets cussing, I would have thought “Haha, that was amusing” and would have left it at that. But honestly, I just really connected with the characters. I saw them in myself and my friends, and some of the scenes in the show I could swear were identical conversations my friends and I have had about racism, suicide and especially the loss of childhood innoscence.
Avenue Q is really just a story about growing up today and how, the older you get, the less you’re reminded of how special you truly are and how much you can do with your live if someone believes in you. Even if that someone is yourself.

“FROM what i have seen in perviews avenue Q has virtually no choreography. The sets in the pics look dull as anything, gratned i have only seen the one.”

This comment is truly surprising to me. Puppetry is, in its simplest essence, dancing. It is technically a style of dancing that is specific to hand coordination. Just because the actors aren’t doing grand jetes does not mean there is "virtually no choreography". In fact I’d argue that Avenue Q has some of the most intricate choreography on Broadway because of the considerations towards the puppets.
As for the sets, it has more surprises to it when you see it.

“I can't fully applaud it since it's Tony was won by lies and deciept”

This one is not so surprising to me. I love Wicked as much as the next Shizkid, but the way some people still argue about the Wicked/Q upset you’d think it was West Side Story versus The Music Man. This issue has been beaten to death, but I'll kick one last time:
There was nothing deceptive about Avenue Q winning the Tony award for best musical. The producers were offered the choice between a touring production, one that would have been difficult to market that people were concerned about even before the Tony Awards OR have a theatre custom built for their show in a place they knew they could make a profit from. It’s not deceptive, it’s good business, and honestly if the voters only voted for Avenue Q to win because they wanted it to tour rather than because they thought it was a good show, who is truly in the wrong? And even more importantly, who has suffered? Wicked is now charging $110 for tickets to meet their demand, their cast recording has won the Grammy and is one of the highest selling cast recordings in history, the show has a very highly acclaimed 3rd sit-down production in Chicago as well as a lucrative tour, and Q is running strong at the Golden and doing just fine in Vegas as well. No one has suffered. No one has died. And BOTH shows are still in the money. No one has lost anything except a metal statuette on a base of plastic.

Updated On: 10/18/05 at 05:02 PM

:applauds broadwaystar2b:

Ex-freakin-actly!

---