KING KONG Reviews- Page 7

[Squeens14]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 5:16pm

One of my friends saw it and said it was great, so I'm not really sure

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 5:18pm

Lot666 said: "LesliMargherita chimes in on Twitter"

She responds on Twitter regarding criticism of her on this board:

https://twitter.com/queenlesli/status/1060937126181789696?s=21

 

[Sondheimite]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 5:21pm

Miles2Go2 said: "Lot666 said: "LesliMargherita chimes in on Twitter"

She responds on Twitterregardingcriticism of heron this board:

https://twitter.com/queenlesli/status/1060937126181789696?s=21

"

Actors were so much more tolerable before social media.  

 

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 5:56pm

Well, I will say I’ve seen Margherita in Matilda and Brightman in The School of Rock and found nothing mid-level about their great performances. They were also both lovely at stage door. She says she was calling out two bloggers and Brightman seems to be taking issue with the way the review was written.

Personally, I found nothing objectionable about the NYT review. I haven’t seen the show but it sounds like they gave it the review(s) it deserved. Is it Pulitzer-worthy criticism? Of course not. But I suspect the review is more fun the show itself.

I also agree that actors must have rhino tough skin. (It’s just one of the reasons I had to accept that I’m better supporting the arts from my seat in the audience) But I do respect actors who will stand up to critics on the behalf of others when they believe said critics are being unnecessarily nasty. If we can criticize critics, why can’t they? I don’t believe that’s the case here though. I do think Brightman’s motives could be questioned as his current show has links to this one.

I have a slight chance of working in NYC for a week early next year. Sadly, I’ll probably miss some plays that are on my radar (The Lifespan of a Fact, The Waverly Gallery, American Son), but if I make it in time I hope to see Torch Song, The Ferryman, Network, Fiddler on the Roof, and maybe To Kill a Mockingbird (I just recently added it to my list, but I’m undecided). That would leave one for two possible spots: revisiting The Band’s Visit and/or Dear Evan Hansen, seeing The Cher Show, or seeing King Kong just for the puppet. I’m hoping the 2019-2020 musical season brings with it some great new musicals. In the meantime, the scarcity of new musicals that appeal to me has led me to turn to more plays which I’ve come to rediscover my love for.

Updated On: 11/10/18 at 05:56 PM

[jakebloke]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 6:01pm

Reviews of reviews.  This seems to have gone to another level than the typical broadway review.  

[BroadwayPrincess3]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 7:41pm

I think it’a a snarky review, sure, but it’s not like they were wrong. Had it been written in a more typical style, people would have no problem with it. What’s the difference, really? A one person, paragraph-by-paragraph review is the same as a dual, back-and-forth one. Some people (mostly on Twitter) are making it out to be a huge thing, which is just giving it more exposure.

[Glittergrrl]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 8:41pm

I didn’t see this link in the thread.  From Slate: 

https://slate.com/culture/2018/11/king-kong-broadway-musical-review-not-racist.html

I still want to see it. As said in the Vulture review, I want to see the monkey.  I love a spectacle.

[robskynyc]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 8:48pm

Sondheimite said: "And this is the last thing I'll say right now.
Story Time:

I saw my first Broadway show about three hours after being rejected by Julliard.
It was Billy Elliot with the OBC before the show won the Tonys.
Jan 2009.

After the show, about five people were at the stage door and I was one of them.
I chatted with the cast as they came out, in my 18 year old wonder, and it was a perfect first Broadway experience.

Then, Greg Jabara came out. Greg asked me how I liked the show and I said something to likes of, "I'm so happy this was the first show I saw on Broadway." He asked me what brought me to NYC and I told him I was auditioning for Julliard but I didn't get in.

Greg, a Juilliard graduate, put his hands on my shoulders and looked me square in the eye.
He said, "you've got to have rhino skin if you're going to do this."

And that moment has stuck with me for ten years now.

You've GOT TO have rhino skin.

I find it... like... tacky that members of the community (and I'm not talking about this message board, I'm talking about actors) are attacking critics for not liking a show.
YOU'VE. GOT. TO. HAVE. RHINO. SKIN.
If you cannot embark on an artistic project without accepting that you might get critically lampooned, this is not the field for you.
If you cannot stand to see any piece of theatre reviewed badly, this is not the field for you."

LOVE this story!

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 11/10/18 at 11:19pm

Awesome story, Sondheimite.

[Sho-Tunes-R-Us]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 8:29am

Attended Wednesday matinee as part of my six shows/five days visit. Spectacular from mezzanine, row E. Kong WAS the show and earned the final bow absolutely.

Had a celebrity encounter with Donna McKechnie at intermission. Still faaabulous and very gracious.

[massofmen]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 12:13pm

Sondheimite said: "Miles2Go2 said: "Lot666 said: "LesliMargherita chimes in on Twitter"

She responds on Twitterregardingcriticism of heron this board:

https://twitter.com/queenlesli/status/1060937126181789696?s=21

"

Actors were so much more tolerable before social media.

"

Patrons were a lot more tolerable before social media as well. 

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 2:27pm

Squeens14 said: "One of my friends saw it and said it was great, so I'm not really sure"

Well, keep hanging around with them for a little while longer, see if they say anything else a bit crazy. But I wouldn't end a friendship over one comment... people can have differences, or dark times, just be there for them, etc.

[robskynyc]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 3:58pm

haterobics said: "or dark times, just be there for them, etc."

LOL

 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 6:18pm

HogansHero said: "@Kringas I agree the writing is not good, which I attribute to 2 things (these 2 are not funny and I think that rather than an actual edited transcription of a conversation the whole thing was either done by email or sitting around a table making it feel inorganic). But I don't think it is smug either.

I find Green pretty funny. But it felt like they had each written a review (or at least had some zingers ready to go) and then tried to awkwardly fit them into a fake conversation. Their styles clashed and in no way did it feel like an organic discussion of the show. 

That said, I don't think censoring is required. There's a difference between "mean" and offensive. There was nothing racist, homophobic, etc. that would require an apology. Sexist and misogynistic we can table for another time since there have been reviews I've been uncomfortable with but that's not something we particularly care about as a society. 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 6:55pm

From the Vulture review: "Not that the show is willfully shallow. In fact, in a brochure handed to me outside the theater by the show’s press representatives, one of Kong’s lead producers, Carmen Pavlovic, writes about the resonances she found in the story while developing the production over the last ten years. She talks about the global recession, Harvey Weinstein, the environmental crisis, and xenophobia in both Australia and America. Brett Kavanaugh gets a mention. So do the immigrant children forcibly separated from their families. King Kong, it would seem, is about everything."

I get that all shows argue for their relevance in ways that aren't always reflected in the material on stage but this seems particularly over the top.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 6:58pm

well... I don't find Green funny, but as with every other funny thing on earth, ymmv. I completely agree the whole thing felt fake and certainly not organic. My sense (and I have nothing to support this) is that they did not want to do this. Beyond that, I think you'd agree critics are allowed to be "mean." And while the line between acceptably offensive and not is one that (sadly) still has to be discussed, I don't think there is anything here that gets close to that line. 

In looking back at these 7 pages, I think what we have are (a) folks who don't like Brantley, Green, and/or the NYT, (b) folks who think the only way you can nurture is by being nice, and (c) some putative stars who have said some very silly things (proving once again that no one's talent translates into a reason to pay any attention to what they have to say, and yes I know we have an entire industry built on just the opposite).

[ChildofEarth]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 7:04pm

Having finally seen the show this afternoon...the NYT review was far more polite than I am.

Wow.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 11/11/18 at 7:16pm

Miles2Go2 said: "Lot666 said: "LesliMargherita chimes in on Twitter"

She responds on Twitterregardingcriticism of heron this board:

https://twitter.com/queenlesli/status/1060937126181789696?s=21

"

Proving once again how fragile their egos are. 

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 11/12/18 at 11:50am

Ouch. According to Show-Score, Brantley gave King Kong a score of 20.

[chanel]

Posted: 11/12/18 at 3:52pm

Here's a more measured review:

http://www.newnownext.com/king-kong-broadway/11/2018/

[Maceball]

Posted: 11/12/18 at 5:42pm

Did people really think the Times review was THAT mean? Brantley and Green will have to work a lot harder if they're going to rise the level of hilarious bitchery Frank Rich used to hit. Everyone remember Moose Murders? Here's the opening paragraph of Rich's review of that legendary fiasco, from 1983:

"From now on, there will always be two groups of theatergoers in this world: those who have seen ''Moose Murders,'' and those who have not. Those of us who have witnessed the play that opened at the Eugene O'Neill Theater last night will undoubtedly hold periodic reunions, in the noble tradition of survivors of the Titanic. Tears and booze will flow in equal measure, and there will be a prize awarded to the bearer of the most outstanding antlers. As for those theatergoers who miss ''Moose Murders'' - well, they just don't rate. A visit to ''Moose Murders'' is what will separate the connoisseurs of Broadway disaster from mere dilettantes for many moons to come."

Now THAT'S how you do it.

[joanntom]

Posted: 11/12/18 at 9:40pm

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/11/19/shades-of-darkness-in-king-kong-and-american-so

 

A fair assessment I would think.

 

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 11/12/18 at 9:56pm

I haven’t seen either King King or American Son, but would like to see the latter and am on the fence about seeing the former as I don’t know if I’d pay money to just see the puppet. It likely won’t matter because I don’t know when I’ll make it back to NYC. But I have to say that end of the American Son review really pissed me off. It’s like the critic hated American Son so much, the critic decided to pair its review with a much more favorable one of King Kong and then gave away the ending just so people who read it would be less inclined to buy tickets. Really bad form, The New Yorker, really bad form.

[BJR]

Posted: 11/13/18 at 10:23am

I think it's perfectly fair to reflect on this conversational format of a review, but saying it crossed some kind of line by being a pan is ridiculous.

I happen to think the format contributed to a more catty tone, since each likely felt a need to respond quip for quip. And there wasn't the need one person has while writing a review of arranging a series of disparate responses to all the elements into a deeper and/or overarching analysis. So, it did sound like one of the pithy chats you sometimes stumble into when a friend has seen a show and it's a race to the bottom of cattiness. And NYTimes should have a higher standard.

But also, the show is bad. And bad shows get pans.

(I happen to love Peter Mark's WaPo review for this. The headline says it all: "Poor King Kong. First, taken prisoner. Now trapped in a bad musical."

[Lot666]

Posted: 11/13/18 at 10:25am

Markecib said: "As for the NYT review it was like a poor mans Statler and Waldorf routine from the muppets"

Brantley and Green seem to think they're as clever as Statler and Waldorf, but they're not.