LENNON Reviews- Page 4

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 2:54pm

I completely understand discussing critical reviews, either negative or positive, to any extent... But my only issue with the "negativity" is just how joyous people appear at ripping this show to shreads! It makes me rather sad, because, in my opinion, this show has a LOT more worth and deserves better than that.

Say you didn't like it. Fine. Say you don't think it'll last very long. Fine. But when it comes to a show that people have worked their ASSES off for, I simply can't understand why people would talk such ****, saying that it's "worthless"... really... that's ridiculous, because it has worth to SOME people (and I'm NOT just talking about Yoko.)

true, I have disliked shows in the past, but hate? I can't seem to bring myself to hate ANY piece of theatre, because as a performer myself, I always try to find SOMETHING decent about a show (acting, music, singing talent, etc.) However, for me, when it comes to "Lennon", I didn't have to dig hard, because I saw a LOT of positive aspects. The music is really really great, the talent is fantastic, the energy of the show is top-notch.

If people disagree, I don't care. Really, talking respectfully about things that YOU thought weren't good about the show I don't, and never did, have a problem with. If you saw the show and agree or disagree with what the critics have to say, then that's great too. But outright bashing the show left and right, when I know for a fact MOST of the people attacking it on the boards haven't even seen it (since they continue saying "I hope I get a chance to see this jukebox before its probable closing in a month!") -- Ouch, what an outlook. See, then judge, but do it fairly.

[bella cantato]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:20pm

I agree, Starbuck...

[justme2]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:25pm

I'm with you Starbuck...waaaaaay too much joy being expressed in this thread. It's sad to read the posts of such "theater fans", isn't it?

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:36pm

Yeah, uh huh, that's what I meant. Definitely.

I'm not doubting anyone here as a true theatre fan, but I suppose it's too much to think that it's better to support a show rather than help fuel its failure.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:44pm

"I'm not doubting anyone here as a true theatre fan, but I suppose it's too much to think that it's better to support a show rather than help fuel its failure."

Giving an honest opinion of a show is not fueling its failure.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:51pm

I'm not talking about peoples' opinions on the show. I already said that I didn't care about that if they were fair and legitimate comments.

What I'm referring to is people who attack the show for either having Yoko involved with it (all that "St. Yoko" stuff) or resembling other "jukebox" musicals, which it doesn't. It's not a jukebox musical. The very definition of that type of show is exactly what this show ISN'T -- Even people who weren't fans of it should be able to see that.

And as for the CD, I think it's crucial this show release an album (if not only to record 2 of John's previously unrecorded songs), but to show people the amazing variations on John's music. Almost all of the songs in the show... I enjoy their versions even better than John's. They did amazing things with them, so I can't wait until this CD is released.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 03:51 PM

[gymman]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:56pm

"Almost all of the songs in the show... I enjoy their versions even better than John's"

Uh, so the synthesizers and the American Idol shouting works for you, huh?
That explains why you like the show that many of us found truly insulting to Lennon's music.

[justme2]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:57pm

agreed southflmarc...honest opinion is not the problem here. I saw the show in SF and enjoyed it, but can completely understand the points people (who saw the show) are making about the problems.

The sheer joy that some are taking in this show's problems and resulting critical reviews is what is discouraging to read through.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 03:57 PM

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 3:58pm

I just don't understand the vitriol and venom that's directed at 'jukebox musicals.' Broadway is the commercial theater, and the shows that run the longest are the ones that appeal to the most people. The audience will decide. I doubt that the shortcomings of a few jukebox musicals (like 'Good Vibrations') will discourage others, any more than the shortcomings of a few original musicals (like 'Brooklyn') will discourage others. Producers will put on shows as long as they believe their shows can entertain and make money.

Some critics say: 'Instead of jukebox musicals, why not stay home and just listen to the CDs?' Hey, there are tons of recordings of Beethoven, Mozart, etc., so why do people go to the symphony? Couldn't they just stay at home and listen to CDs?Ditto for Shakespeare, Moliere, Chekhov, O'Neill. Why not stay at home and read the plays? Because it's NOT the same thing: We crave LIVE entertainment. There's a whole generation or two that doesn't know the music of ABBA, Elvis or Lennon, and these jukebox musicals not only showcase today's performers but they can help introduce younger audiences to their music. Should the songs of ABBA, Elvis, Lennon, etc., die with their original artists? Why shouldn't NEW singers be allowed to give them their own take, the way actors are allowed to reinterpret the Bard?

To me, there can be terrific jukebox musicals, and there can be terrible ones, and the same goes for original musicals. It's a matter of taste and execution. Each show deserves to judged on its own merits or lack of them. To prejudge or dismiss an entire genre out of hand, seems unfair to the many hardworking and creative artists who are busting their butts to do their best.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 4:03pm

I enjoyed the songs because of their energy. I felt part of the show, and having never seen John perform live, I simply have recordings to go off of.

While the songs may be sung differently and I enjoy them in a different way, I in no way mean that I don't adore John's music. It is simply done differently in this show, and I enjoyed that aspect of it. It made it fresh and new.

You may think the show was an insult to John's music, but I in no way do. It honors it. I'd rather see a show that portrays his music as a narrative for his life, sung by a variety of remarkable voices (loud, soft, male, female), then by one simple John impersonator who sounds like John, sings like John, acts like John... on EVERY. single. song. No thank you. I think THAT would be an insult to John's music. He'd be bored out of his bloody mind. I honestly believe he would adore this show, as is.

I agree with Wayman_Wong -- "Lennon" should be allowed to present John's music in a new and interesting way. You're not ALL required to like it, but it doesn't mean that other people should be denied the opportunity to see what they may think is a GREAT production simply because haters of "jukebox musicals" hate that there's one playing on Broadway. They aren't all the same, so don't treat them as such.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 04:03 PM

[justme2]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 4:03pm

Great points waymanwong!

However, I am NO fan of jukebox musicals. I still don't see why Lennon is being catorgorized as one, either. I suppose it makes it easier for naysayers to dismiss the show, though.

I agree with earlier statments made, that the jukebox musical encourages lazy show standards. Get a catalogue of songs together, a headliner, and you are off and running! That's my problem with them.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 4:12pm

"I agree with earlier statments made, that the jukebox musical encourages lazy show standards. Get a catalogue of songs together, a headliner, and you are off and running! That's my problem with them."

I totally, 100% agree with you -- That's why I didn't enjoy "Mamma Mia!" very much, or "Good Vibrations"... And "Lennon" totally shouldn't be in that category, because it's not just a catalogue of songs. The story is John's, so the music tells his story.

"Jukebox" shows don't do that. They take songs and create a story AROUND them. I hate how that works in theatre, and while I suppose it can be done right, it's not something I enjoy. But I enjoyed "Lennon", because it's different. I'm hoping audiences put their doubts aside and just enjoy the show.

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 4:48pm

People are bashing the show itself not the performers. Everyone including most critics have said that the performers are very talented and doing the best that they can. Their work is being recognized. Obviously people have worked very hard to put this production together however, work does not equal a good show. It is indeed a jukebox musical. I loathe the jukebox musical. Hell, I even loathe some revues but I am so tired of seeing these shows that belong in a theme park!

Posted: 8/15/05 at 4:51pm

Ok everyone,lets lay off StarbuckQAF.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:04pm

haha, it's fine, TomasMarx, I don't feel attacked. Everyone has something in their life they feel inclined to defend, and I suppose this show is that for me right now.

And in the end, people have the right to bash what they want, just like I share that right to defend it (which I find more useful.)

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:10pm

Just don't take it personally StarbuckQAF and you'll be fine.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:12pm

I totally don't, which I suppose is good. I think I just enjoy finding the good in shows that a lot of people don't have faith in.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:26pm

finding the good in shows that a lot of people don't have faith in.

And snaps to you for doing so; I know how that goes, as well.

I might *finally* see Lennon tomorrow. I know I've been saying it forever, but I've been waiting on my mother, who apparently actually *wants* to see something with me?

[kooky]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:57pm

Starbuck, I wished you wrote the review for the NY Times, you seem to have
smarts and heart. I can't wait for the C.D. I loved the casts renditions of the
songs, and I happened to LOVE THIS SHOW.

[Sunfish]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 6:45pm

That poor thing!!!! He is so humiliated...cats have their pride, you know! Was this someone's idea of a joke?

I'll admit they are very funny pictures but I feel really bad for that poor kitty!

[leefowler]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 6:49pm

Starbuck,

Tou write that you didn't like Mama Mia. I happen to know for a fact that the people in it are VERY TALENTED, and that they work really hard trying to make it a good show. I think it's terrible that you're knocking it,and I only hope that the people reading your negative opinion will MAKE UP THEIR OWN MINDS, and see it for themselves.

[Pinguin]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 6:49pm

Enjoying a negative review does not necessarily subvert you support for a show or its cast/creators; writing reviews is its own little art, and appreciating/recognizing clever or entertaining writing is not mean.

I mean, the opening of Brantley's review is HILARIOUS, and it should be whether or not you liked the show.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 6:55pm

I loved Brantleys review too, and his first line was priceless. I still long to hear what John Simon would have made of this mess.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 7:08pm

Simon still reviews theatre for Bloomberg.com

[TennesseeTwang]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 7:19pm

"writing reviews is its own little art, and appreciating/recognizing clever or entertaining writing is not mean."

I couldn't agree more. I frequently catch myself enjoying reviews that pan shows I liked or that give raves to shows I disliked. And I can't bring myself to get all huffy and dismissive about a particular critic because they happen to disagree with me.

As to the artists' feelings, well, aren't bad reviews part of the game? Nobody's ever supposed to get bad reviews because everyone worked hard? C'mon!