Kinky Boots previews — Page 5

This is a tough one for me to wrap my head around. It reminded me of SISTER ACT (which in my opinion is a better show, for the record) in that it takes the majority of the first act to really take off, but the remainder of the show, while not well-structured, is fun...and sorta moving. I wasn't crazy about the book, although Harvey has squeezed a bunch of fun lines and sincere moments in it. He's always had a little trouble with the actual exposition of the show, and that is why the beginning of the first act didn't do it for me. Too much telling and not enough showing; there was way too much explanation. The score is extremely catchy (I've been humming the tunes all day) but that doesn't make it necessarily good. All of the songs have a very clear signature "Lauper" stamp on them and do sound very Top 40-ish. But they are fun and well-suited to the nature of the show. Jerry Mitchell has done his usual over-the-top directorial/choreography job, but again, it works well enough for this show.

Now on to the cast. I love Stark Sands, but he is very much out of his element here, vocally. He acts the part very well, and he's charming enough, but the songs are WAY out of his range. His first big number was basically 2 and a half minutes of him screeching to hit the notes. And his second act solo was better, but still didn't seem to fit him comfortably. He's giving the role his all, but he seemed a bit out of his comfort zone when it came to singing. Billy Porter obviously has the most flashy role in the show and he pulls it off well (even though, vocally, he never really soars either). He's very entertaining, and his chemistry with Sands is very good, and I imagine he'll be a Tony contender, as the Norbert Leo Butz comparison is apt (although CATCH ME was far less entertaining than this). Annaleigh is doing her usual shtick and it's pretty funny, but she doesn't really have all that much to do. The rest of the cast is strong and they're clearly having a lot of fun up there.

Technically speaking, everything looks good even if most of the sets are smaller pieces, but the sound was a bit off (at least in the mezzanine). The audience is having a BLAST, but I'm sure 75% of them were comped.

I will admit that this show ultimately won me over. At intermission, I was on the fence, but by the finale, I had finally given in. It's fun, it's performed with a lot of energy, and certainly leaves you beaming from ear-to-ear. Even if it's not Chekov or any masterful piece of theater, I still had a good time. It's not particularly well-written or constructed, but it's got a big, glittery heart at its core, while not giving into that faaaaabulous drag world too much, like PRISCILLA did. This is like PRISCILLA-lite, which I appreciated for what it was worth.

I'm anxious to see what the reviews will be like.

"I very much enjoyed the show, I thought Cyndi's work on the score was pretty good (although one song did sound an awful like True Colors in the beginning, and Lola's eleven o'clock number reminded me of something Whitney Houston-esque)."

I hope Tom Kelly and Billy Steinberg know that--since like most of Cyndi's really big radio hits, she didn't write True Colors...

So by your reasoning, if you're not gay - you can't connect with the material on any level? That's kind of a weak excuse if you ask me, especially considering the heterosexual couple next to me was loving it. Remove the drag element for a second, and focus on the two grown men who both struggle with wanting to either make good on their father's pride or earn it. Is that not a universal thing? Struggling to achieve the ideal of being your own person, while living with who your parents want you to be - is that not common among people of both gay and straight orientations?

I get not liking something or finding something boring or subpar, but using the old "I didn't like it because I'm not gay" is just a bad excuse. This is just my opinion, but we're each entitled to our own opinions.

---

Updated On: 3/12/13 at 09:33 PM

Rushing this Wednesday morning! Absolutely excited! Will def. report back.

I'm not gay so that might be part of the reason I didn't like it.

I'm gay and I didn't like it. I also didn't like Priscilla. Have you never liked anything that might have a gay aspect to it? Like musical theatre?

---

In case anyone is interested, KINKY is enjoying amazing audience response complete with daily lineups at the box office.

"The Sex is in the Crowd"

Before the curtain even went up you'd think the audience was expecting Ethel Merman to appear from her grave. The buzz was THAT electric. Though once that curtain went up, this thing trudged along for the first 30 or 40 minutes before picking up any steam.

Lauper has a few good numbers, but for the most part, utterly generic. Both her and writer Harvey Fierstein are doing what they can to fill up two and a half hours with humdrum material. It's a sweet, small story to begin with.

The cast is game and does their best, though I too feel that Stark Sands is totally miscast in the role. Giving him those super long ballads doesn’t help his case either.

Billy Porter (and an underused Annaleigh Ashford) tries to save this slowly sinking ship, but how many times do we have to have this same formula on Broadway? Nothing is nuanced or different. No definitive wrap up at the end, let's all just parade around in boots and sing an uplifting song.

If the audience continues behaving like they did, and spread the word, I believe it will run for a while. I imagine the reviews will be mixed, though I would hardly say it was critic-proof.

It's not a bad show; I just wish it had been better.

I'm honestly not sure how anyone can love this so much. It was a pretty boring 2.5 hours that could have been trimmed down to no more than 2 hours. One of my biggest complaints is that it seemed as though the one requirement for being in the show is having a terrible British accent.

Let me also say that this is a drag queen show made for tourists and I hate that. Shows like Priscilla and La Cage are based on cult movies that are about drag queens. These movies are written with a gay audience in mind so there is some edge to the jokes and it's not safe and boring. Kinky Boots is more of a (somewhat) mainstream movie made for straight people about drag queens. There is hardly any fun in this show and it's a slog to sit through.

Annaleigh is completely wasted in this role as she is given nothing to do and her comedic talent is wasted on one solo number that sounds like a bad Cyndi impression. Stark Sands is hardly a leading man and this very much shows that. Billy Porter is suitable in the role but I didn't care much by the time he was introduced. The Cagelles (I'll call them nothing else) were fine and if I were a woman I would feel pretty bad that those men looked that damn good as women.

After seeing this and HARDBODY, I would definitely recommend that over KINKY any day of the week. HARDBODY has memorable music rather than this beyond generic dreck that doesn't even all sound like it's from the same musical.

---

I saw the show tonight, pretty impressed, especially with Billy Porter's performance.

---

Saw the show last night and had so much fun! Billy Porter was really wonderful. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he won the Tony. Analeigh was great as well, and will probably be nominated.

I just want to say I saw this tonight, and a friend in the show told me they'd made some big changes earlier in the week, including cutting a number, but I thought it was fabulous. It doesn't try to be more than what it is, but at the same time there was an arc and emotional depth that was lacking in Priscilla. To me, the Tony is Billy Porter's to lose. He was stunning, his voice was beautiful. He played Lola's fabulousness and camp as much as he played her heartbreak and anger. I couldn't have asked for more. Stark was wonderful as well, as were the angels, as was everyone. I smiled the entire time and I left humming at least 3 of the songs. Cyndi's music was the perfect blend of Cyndi and Broadway, and Harvey's book had me laughing myself silly.

I went in expecting to be rolling my eyes the entire time, but I'm a convert! For anyone curious, got to rush at 9:30 this morning and got A1 and 2 in the right box. Great seats. You miss a few entrances but nothing else. Everybody say yeah!

---

I haven't seen it before, all I know is my friend said it was something with the angels and a box? I have no idea.

---

"After seeing this and HARDBODY, I would definitely recommend that over KINKY any day of the week. HARDBODY has memorable music rather than this beyond generic dreck that doesn't even all sound like it's from the same musical."

Everyone to their own taste but if I followed your advice and missed Kinky Boots for Hard Body I would never follow your recommendation again. I will take exciting over earnest anytime. Hardbody was the most boring, simpleminded, predictable piece of theatre I have seen in years. The reviews were just as boring as the show. The audience I saw it with was 50% full and 80% comped and they could barely bring themselves to get excited about it.

Kinky Boots is involving and entertaining. I loved Priscilla but it was a camp fest and in no way real. I am not a tourist and I am gay and I found Boots sensitive and loving and the first show in years I can't wait to go back to see. I couldn't bare the thought of sitting thru Hardbody again.

The Producers of Hardbody are in a terrible predicament. They lost hundreds of thousands of dollaris if not a million plus in previews because audiences wouldn't pay to see the show. If the New York Times had not given them the tepidly positive review they did they would have closed in a week. Now they have to find money to try and stay alive long enough to see if the reviews will create business.

Kinky Boots already has the audience and great Word of Mouth. The audiences are not tourists who are enjoying the heck out of the show. If they get as good reviews as they got in Chicago they will have a very respectable run.

---