LEMPICKA Reviews — Page 6

Responding to bwyobsessed

Most people buying show tickets for hundreds of dollars want to know if they are making a good investment or not.

The critics need to give an honest accounting to their readers,  otherwise they lose their credibility. 

I love flashy shows probably more than anyone. But once you get past the "exciting" most people expect there to be more there.

Flashy, exciting shows like Moulin Rouge or Wicked work - despite their many flaws - because they keep the stories very simple.  When the story doesn't go anywhere, no amount of style & flash can cover that. People leave disappointed & dissatisfied.  If you're just seeing a movie on a cheap Tuesday- like the recent Argylle - you're out $10 so you can be forgiving.  But when people are spending $150+ for tickets they are less forgiving. 

After thinking on the Lempicka reviews it made me remember that there was this thread giving the creative team some advice. I’m curious if there is anything that would stop a show from implementing the changes described in that thread and has a show ever done it? Where they read the advice of a comment or post about the show and then implemented changes according to the post?

inception said: "Responding to bwyobsessed

Most people buying show tickets for hundreds of dollars want to know if they are making a good investment or not.

The critics need to give an honest accounting to their readers, otherwise they lose their credibility.

I love flashy shows probably more than anyone. But once you get past the "exciting" most people expect there to be more there.

Flashy, exciting shows like Moulin Rouge or Wicked work- despite their many flaws - because they keep the stories very simple. When the story doesn't go anywhere, no amount of style & flash can cover that. People leave disappointed & dissatisfied. If you're just seeing a movie on a cheap Tuesday- like the recent Argylle - you're out $10 so you can be forgiving. But when people are spending $150+ for tickets they are less forgiving."

I wasn't saying exciting to mean flashy. I thought the story and characters were fascinating and really enjoyed the performances. I don't think everything about the way they told the story is done effectively. 

 

Agreed about the score needing melody. “Woman Is” changes gears so much that he makes Sondheim seem as hummable as Jerry Herman. I couldn’t tell what came first, the terrible lyrics or the terrible music. 

lopside said: "Sara Bareilles is sharing exactly the same perspective about critics that most other artists share and have shared till time immemorial. Getting mad over it is pointless.

MJR also makes a point that I tend to agree with, is about many critics refusing to engage with the why beimhind choices. He shouldn't have gone after Holdren though."

I don't think it's a refusal to engage with "why." Frankly, I'm not sure an exploration of "why" will make something that doesn't work suddenly work. It may make one appreciate the piece and the effort that went into it- and I can't think of any major critic working today who isn't at least appreciative of the things they review- but ultimately it has to work on its own without the creators whispering into your ear about why they did things. And in this case, the "why" is obvious because Holdren is specifically referencing an extremely well-worn trope of biographical works- we know why it's used.

Sometimes a choice is simply unsuccessful regardless of why it came to be.

Updated On: 4/15/24 at 09:50 PM

Owen22 said: "gibsons2 said: "God, I feel so terribly bad for Matt Gould. He is so talented and seems to be a very sensitive person... there was a lot of hype about this musical based on his score, particularly Woman Is song, there are couple of amazing covers on YouTube. I think that maybe Matt assumed that his truly amazing original score will finally get the acknowledgement and recognition it deserves, and the reality of a notvery goodbook and overall strange directorial choices will sink this show. I feel for him."

His mid score is as much to blame for the show's failure as the lackluster book. One or two good numbers, nothing great, the rest boring with no real melody to grab onto. I felt the same about Invisible Thread. He's not untalented, just a very mediocre talent."

Damn... Ok. I don't remember people being so cruel and vicious towards a single show on this board. Every season a show picked as a favorite punching bag, last year it was How To Dance In Ohio I think. Posters here bashed the quality of the show but not necessarily overall talent or abilities of the creatives or actors. When it comes to Lempicka,  I recall someone was  fatshaming the leading actress and even bashing her voice quality, and now declaring the composer mediocre. It's insane. Especially given how many awful, mediocre shows have opened post pandemic and some even managed to thrive.

Jordan Catalano said: "OMG if you think the boards reactions to THIS show are mean, you haven’t been on here long enough lol

"

Exactly. I remember The Little Mermaid, Godspell revival, Good Vibrations,etc  now that was a massacre.

Heck, compared to Espinosa's BKLYN these are rave reviews.

Right? 

 

When a show works, it is lauded. When it doesn't, we dissect to figure out why. 

 

Eden hits notes poorly on a regular basis. The book is a mess, and few are loving the score. The critics are largely in agreement - I don't see what the problem is. 

The age old problem of the theatre:

"Why is nobody talking about my show?"

"Wait, no, don't talk about it THAT way!"

The reviews for this show were bad but damn, we’ve all read SO MUCH WORSE over the years. We aren’t giving out any participation trophy’s for shows just to make them feel better and that seriously is what the freaking out over this feels like - some people now feel every show deserves to be coddled and loved on even if it’s bad and sorry but that’s not how it works. We haven’t entered into this new age where criticism is only acceptable if it’s good, whether you think we should or not.

I highly recommend to anyone feeling angry over the big mean critics being big mean to the show, to just google “bad Broadway reviews” or something like that and read what a TRUE scathing review sounds like. They ain’t hard to find. 

Diana got much worse reviews, and I think it was significantly more entertaining than Lempicka.