LENNON Reviews- Page 5

[Plum]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 7:29pm

Besides, reviewers aren't writing for the benefit of performers or the creative team; they're writing for the benefit of their readers, the theatergoers. So if a show stinks, it's their duty to say so. And I think that encouraging the good and discouraging the bad is healthier for the larger theater community than refusing to be negative for the sake of a weak show.

[justme2]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 7:37pm

That's true...I have no problem with the reviews. Moost have good points.

I hope you all aren't responding to my earlier post?

Mine is only about the sheer joy that many on this board are taking in WATCHING the show get trashed.

[thisdude]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 7:54pm

I am enjoying watching this show get trashed and I am not ashamed to admit it. I agree the actors/singers/songs were good, but it was a terrible show--torture to watch, at least in SF. Just because I enjoy something doesn't make it good. I can admit that. Just because I don't enjoy something doesn't make it bad. I know that. Lennon was bad-bad, bad, bad. AND I've been saying that all along AND I've seen it more than once, unfortunately, AND I see lots of theatre, new shows and old. If Lennon was a $30 Vegas show, then that would be a different story. If it was on a cruise ship, it might be acceptable. It's not and it ain't

[justme2]

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

Now, I saw it twice in SF and enjoyed it! And I, too, see lots of theater (new, old, regional, etc) and certainly didn't think it was the best thing I'd ever seen, nor the worst. Isn't it amazing that so many people can see the same show and come away with such different opinions? This seems to be a love it or hate it type of show, doesn't it?

AND...I totally agree with your statement, thisdude... "Just because I enjoy something doesn't make it good... Just because I don't enjoy something doesn't make it bad." We all should try to remember this when we are posting.

[thisdude]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 8:40pm

Yes...I agree with you, justme2. It is a "love it or hate it type of show." I just get upset when people discredit people's negative opinions of this show by rationalizing why they don't like it. Like, it's impossible for someone to see it and not like everything about it. Do you know what I mean? You do not do that, justme2, and that is appreciated.

I was a tad harsh on the show, but I didn't like it.

[overthemoon419]

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

hugs for Starbuck and Wayman.

i don't understand why the same people who damn Lennon for being different from the traditional musical or the so-called "jukebox" musical are the same people who are condemning it for being too "out there", too "conceptual". Lennon is a leap, it is different without being so strayed from the norm that it is hard to grasp. i'm talking about the show and the concept, not the cast. the cast, in my opinion have done and can do no wrong. [squee! for terry and darin, namely]

why do people who loathe this show feel the need to come onto a thread of discussion and bash it, deeming it "worthless"? i am not a fan of Mamma Mia, Hairspray, or Phantom, but i don't stop on all of their threads and ripping the productions apart while a group of people who like the show, or who have an interest in the show and are looking for more information, are trying to have a civilized, adult discussion. if you don't like Lennon, congratulations, you get a gold star. some of us do, so let us have our discussions and opinions without tainting each thread of Lennon appreciation.

i am not ashamed to say that i enjoyed myself at All Shook Up and at Good Vibrations. while the former was a more quality show than the latter, i don't see why either should be condemned solely because its score was pre-existing. a show doesn't have to be Shakespeare for it to be a good theatre experience. i'd rather leave the theatre humming songs and with a smile on my face than with the knowledge that i saw ben brantley's (sic) [or any other critic's, for that matter!] opinion of "legitimate" theatre.

show tickets are not cheap. and, as it was already pointed out, many people go to the theatre on vacation and only get to see one or two shows a year. but is it anyone's responsibility to "TELL them what shows stink"? no. it is our responsibility as avid theatregoers to give complete reviews of different productions, and as avid theatregoers we should have the knowledge to realize that while we may not like a particular show, that doesn't mean the person on vacation will not. would i steer a vacationing disco fan away from Mamma Mia? no. i would, however, steer myself away from it, and i would tell them that while i was not pleased with the show, there's a boatload of talent on the stage and the music carries the show. not everyone is a fan of the Tony Awards' "best musical", and that is why it makes more sense to give a prospective ticketbuyer a clear, COMPLETE overview of the show, not just one statement that it "stinks" and should therefore be avoided.

and personally, i think many of these critics are crazy. brantley (sic) noted that there were 5 people playing john. beg pardon? what about the other 4? and one reviewer commented that julia sings "beautiful boy" as john's mother, to baby sean. did i miss something in my 7 viewings of the show? or the one who decided that the show would be better if marcy played every part and the rest of the cast were at other jobs? i love marcy, but let's be realistic and have a little appreciation for the overwhelming amount of talent, devotion, and drive that shines up on the broadhurst stage every night.

[StarbuckQAF]

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

leefowler: That's funny -- I wasn't being hypocritical - when I mentioned "Mamma Mia", I stated that I didn't like it, but I didn't say it was crap. Just not something I liked. The performers ARE talented and I like the music fine. When I start bashing the show, saying it's worth less than a pile of dog-****, then I'd welcome your sarcasm and acknowledge my hypocrisy.

As for the reviews, I enjoyed reading some of them too (the Associated Press review was marvelous - negative, but it was thought-out and not rude). Whether I agreed with them or not doesn't make me blind to what they're saying. I really have no qualm with the reviews. Bad ones happen, so what am I to do about it? My only thing involved peoples' harsh responses to it that I didn't feel were necessary when it comes to a show that's trying to make it. However, I suppose if you enjoy being harsh, all the power to you.

And I agree with BOTH thisdude and justme2 -- "Lennon" is definitely a "love it or hate it" type of show. I just happen to love it.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 08:54 PM

[Plum]

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

Isn't subjectivity implicit in any review? When I say a show stinks, it's pretty clear whose opinion we're talking about. You can choose to believe me or not.

And when I see talent like Chuck Cooper stuck in a show like this, it makes me sad, not supportive.

[overthemoon419]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 9:07pm

call me crazy, but i doubt a man like Chuck, who comes out of the stage door with a big grin on his face and nothing but good words about the cast, the music, the book, and the overall production, feels like he is "stuck" in this job. if he or anybody else felt that way, no one's holding a gun to their heads, they should have stayed 50 feet away from the show from the beginning. i was under the impression that the entire lennon cast and crew was loving every moment of their time together, sharing this musical with the audience every night.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 9:11pm

Yeah, seriously -- Chuck's not sad for Chuck, so you shouldn't be either.

[Plum]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 9:19pm

Selfishly, I'm sad for me. I'd rather be watching him for the third time in Caroline.

[StarbuckQAF]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 9:23pm

haha, gotcha -- I'd actually love to see him in "Caroline" again too - I loved it, he was remarkable.

But he's also remarkable in "Lennon" (as he always is), and he fits in well, with his deep bass and incredible range. Really gives it his all, so I honestly can't complain too much.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 9:25pm

Not to mention, there's not an endless supply of featured roles on Broadway for 50-something black basses out there. He's smiling because he has kids to support and he's happy to have a job.

[dReAmiNgAwAkE]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:31pm

If this means anything Marcy Harriell has been in my restauraunt 44 and a 1/2 on 10AVE and she has been nothing but kind. She was there for her birthday about a week er so ago and again Sunday night for after party celebration. Her father is one of the funniest people I've ever met and her husband is funny and charming as well. I hope to see her in the show but know that she is wonderful in person and seems to be as well on stage...take care

[thisdude]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:35pm

Let me just say I've seen the show before it's first preview and several times between then and the last curtain call in SF.

That being said, let me say everyone is entitled to an opinion and opinions can vary and that is ok. At the same time, there are merrits to judge a show by, just like any other piece of art. Think of it like a restraunt. They are being critiqued on service, presentation, taste, ambiance, price, etc. Yes, it's objective to a point, but can you really say the service was good when the only time you saw the waiter was when he took your order and you had to hunt him down to get your cheque? Even if you liked the food, it's okay to say the establishment sucked. That's valid. You shouldn't down anyone for that.

Liking a show just because can be enough sometimes, but I really feel that this show had so much potential and really fell short. That's why I am so passionate about my previous critiques of it.

Also, Chuck Cooper is amazing. I loved Caroline, or Change, but if you notice, he stood in one spot most of the show. I think he shouldn't be prancing around the stage doing jazz squares and what not like he does in Lennon.

On a side-it just shows the poor direction when people are confused about who was singing "Beautiful Boy."

[showbiz]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 12:05am

What kind of critic could confuse Julia with Julie, they look and sound nothing alike? Very sloppy reporting on the part of the critic. Makes me wonder if that critic even bothered to see Lennon or just phoned in his review?

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 12:54am

I want to speak up for Howard Kissel, the Daily News critic. I've edited Howard before, and can vouch for the fact that he doesn't 'phone in' his reviews. Though I didn't edit his 'Lennon' review, I'll bet it was a honest mistake on his behalf. If you look at the songlist, it reads: 'Beautiful Boy ... Julia with All.' Howard probably misread it and thought it said 'Julie with All.' Most all of the actors were playing multiple characters, which isn't the easiest thing to keep track of, and let's face it: Julie and Julia at not household names and faces ... yet. Critics don't like to make mistakes because it undermines their credibility, but it happens now and then. Hard as it might be to believe, they're only human.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 12:56am

Oops. Just to show you how 'human' I am, I just made a typo: That should read: Julie and Julia ARE not household names and faces ... yet.

[dry2olives]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:00am

Just a quick defense of critics who make the occasional factual error. You're sitting in the dark, trying to take in as much as possible, scribbling down notes that you usually can't read, trying to remember the lyric you just heard while you notice something about the staging that you want to comment on. Please forgive the occasional error.

[jonartdesigns]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:19am

another possibility was it was simply a typing mistake, it wou;dn't be too hard to hit an e instead of an a, and spell check would never catch that for you

[overthemoon419]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:21am

hm. where to start.

i was not speaking of howard kissel (of whom i am not a fan, anyway), but rather of the broadwayworld.com article that praised julia but then noted the "lovely solo" where she "she sings as John's mother to her newborn grandson Sean". actually, kissel made no mention of julia OR "beautiful boy" in his review, so i'm not sure why you jumped to to defend him--unless he has made mistakes such as this often in the past.

wayman_wong, if he or any critic was taking the time to remember that julie played john's mother, and then looked to the playbill to see who was singing "beautiful boy", he most likely would have remembered other facts too, such as:

-julie is asian with dark hair, julia is very blonde.
-john lennon's mother PASSED AWAY about 20 years before sean's birth, and therefore would not be singing to him.
-chad is portraying JOHN during that song, sketching on a pad wearing the signature john glasses.
-when julia wore the green shirt and apron, she was playing john's aunt, not his mother.

any one of these facts would have been key in realizing that the song was not being sung by grandmother to grandson. it is my opinion that this was not poor direction, thisdude, if i and so many others understood it, but rather poor notation on the critic(s)'(s) parts.

and it is also my opinion, dry2olives, that if a critic is being paid to do his job, which is to view a show and properly pass a correct critique on to the public, he should pay closer attention. if he is not sure of a fact, he should either ring up someone who would have the correct answer or he should simply not use that fact in his review. i don't think it's too much to ask for a critic to give correct information when he knows how much influence he holds, if he doesn't care enough to do that then maybe he should find another outlet for his opinions.

ach. don't you hate when you're typing one thing and the seventeen other things you wanted to say fly right out of your head? ::frustration:: i shall return.

Updated On: 8/16/05 at 01:21 AM

[dry2olives]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:39am

You know something, I made a mistake. Thank you for pointing it out. I did my best to get the facts straight, and I thought I was accurate, but I made a mistake and I'll correct it immediately.

[overthemoon419]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:57am

thank you. i will not apologize for what i said, but i will apologize for how i said it, it was rude. but i still believe that if there is a fact that ANY journalist is unsure of (s)he should either find out the truth or omit it from their article.

[dry2olives]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 2:05am

No problem. I'm thinking a lot of rude things about myself right now because I hate that I got that fact wrong. But keep in mind that a mistake is not necessarily a case of someone not being sure of a fact and being too lazy to check it. Sometimes you honestly think what you wrote was accurate, even though you later find out it wasn't.

[BwayBaby18]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 3:20am

I am sry if this comes off as stupid but i am getting no help from reading the reviews....Is Lennon like a concert with a very thin time line peiceing it together or is it a show that has a plot in which the songs emphasis the story of Lennon's thoughts and ideas?

The only reason i ask this is because i am confused by reading some of the reviews