MJ: the musical - Reviews- Page 5

[HogansHero]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 3:10pm

I've resisted engaging in this thread, and I am still disinclined to weigh in too deeply. A few thoughts.

1. I saw it. I liked the execution and appreciated the talent on display.

2. I don't like how this show was developed or what that says about Broadway.

3. A lot of what I'm reading falls in the general category of different people having a different take on the same artistic endeavor.

4. The criticism of "the critics" strikes me as silly. A critic needs to be an honest broker. There is no requirement that any human being's take on material needs to be guided by a singular set of rules. Some people review what they see on stage, some place it in a broader context. Some people, obviously, can't get passed the ickiness of what this show represents (and that can be because they don't approve of any show that focuses on - or whitewashes or whatever, or because they view the production as a commercial means of adding value to a brand and that ought not to be what Broadway is about [that ship IMO sailed long ago]). But let's recognize that criticizing a critic for their choice of approach to the material is the same ol' defense of something you liked and someone else did not. No critic owes anyone anything other than honesty. 

5. While I think what the estate has done is gross for reasons I touch on above, it does not own Michael Jackson's reprehensibility as a human being. One might not like the crass commercial motives, but those folks did not sexually abuse children. Likewise, one might question why some of the people in our community who were essential to getting this up chose to do so, but they are not morally responsible for Michael Jackson's behavior.

 

 

Updated On: 2/2/22 at 03:10 PM

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 3:25pm

MJ: The Musical...it's kinda like the Joe Rogan Podcast of Broadway. 

[adotburr]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 3:32pm

Borstalboy said: "MJ: The Musical...it's kinda like the Joe Rogan Podcast of Broadway."

This makes no sense. 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 3:33pm

Joe Rogan and Jeanine Pirro in VIRGINIA WOOLF. Give the right wing a show they can drool over. 

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 3:36pm

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 4:08pm

Joe as Nick and Jeanine as Honey.  Laura Ingraham as Martha and Tucker Carlson as George.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 4:22pm

SOLID GOLD CASTING 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 4:58pm

Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf…?

I am, George. I am. Because she’s here illegally and she’s using affirmative action to steal our jobs and teach critical race theory to preschoolers while they eat free lunch that my tax dollars pay for. 
 

curtain 

[BJR]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 5:02pm

Jordan Catalano said: "These people are in this thread complaining for the same reason the critics chose not to even review the show but Jackson’s life, instead - because it gives them a sense of superiority over the subject being discussed."

Uh I have seen the show and agree with the reviews. There are some incredible performers, fantastic staging, and impressive design in the show. It is also very clearly image rehab and the show itself suffers from dancing around it and him.

As one of the reviews noted, this was clearly a show made for those who think he's innocent or don't want to think about it. But you cannot expect everyone to be in that camp, and certainly not every critic.

 

[uncageg]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 6:25pm

BJR said: "Jordan Catalano said: "These people are in this thread complaining for the same reason the critics chose not to even review the show but Jackson’s life, instead - because it gives them a sense of superiority over the subject being discussed."


As one of the reviews noted, this was clearly a show made for those who think he's innocent or don't want to think about it. But you cannot expect everyone to be in that camp, and certainly not every critic."

 

and that is totally incorrect. You cannot make a blanket statement like that about thousands of people you don't know. Plain and simple.

 

[pagereynolds]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 6:28pm

uncageg said: "BJR said: "Jordan Catalano said: "These people are in this thread complaining for the same reason the critics chose not to even review the show but Jackson’s life, instead - because it gives them a sense of superiority over the subject being discussed."


As one of the reviews noted, this was clearly a show made for those who think he's innocent or don't want to think about it. But you cannot expect everyone to be in that camp, and certainly not every critic."

and that is totally incorrect. You cannot make a blanket statement like that about thousands of people you don't know. Plain and simple.

1. When you're quoting someone else, you need to un-italicize so people understand when you're commenting and not quoting.

2. The show was obviously made for people who either think he's not guilty or don't care. Those of us who believe that he had inappropriate, sexual and illegal contact with children aren't going anywhere near this show.

 

[pagereynolds]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 7:01pm

Sutton Ross said: "Uncageg can type however he wants and nobody involved in the production cares about people like you. Trust. "

At least you admit to shilling for the production, as you do in other threads for other productions.

[uncageg]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 7:29pm

pagereynolds said: "uncageg said: "BJR said: "Jordan Catalano said: "These people are in this thread complaining for the same reason the critics chose not to even review the show but Jackson’s life, instead - because it gives them a sense of superiority over the subject being discussed."


As one of the reviews noted, this was clearly a show made for those who think he's innocent or don't want to think about it. But you cannot expect everyone to be in that camp, and certainly not every critic."

and that is totally incorrect. You cannot make a blanket statement like that about thousands of people you don't know. Plain and simple.

1. When you're quoting someone else, you need to un-italicize so people understand when you're commenting and not quoting.

2. The show was obviously made for people who either think he's not guilty or don't care. Those of us who believe that he had inappropriate, sexual and illegal contact with children aren't going anywhere near this show."

 

1. Sutton is correct.

2. Then if you are not going anywhere near this show, maybe go somewhere other than this thread and vent about a show you haven't seen.

Back on topic... Jordan, you mentioned that the running time has been cut. Did you see it early in previous. If you or anyone saw it twice, I am interested in what they cut.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bk]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 7:42pm

"But false accusations of sexual abuse do not exist. It's so traumatic, and victims are treated with such hostility and disbelief. I refuse to believe anyone could actually lie about being sexually assaulted."

Okay, this is one of the most ignorant posts I've ever seen and shame on you for making it. Tell that to all the people who've sat rotting in jail for twenty years or longer for rape convictions, only to have their accuser recant and say it never happened. And that's not an isolated incident and mostly involves men of color. And the false accuser? It's rare if they're punished for their lie. So, you are VERY wrong.

[pagereynolds]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 7:45pm

Why are we even having this discussion? Michael Jackson paid the people who accused him of molesting them. He frequently shared a bed with children he wasn't related to. We aren't talking about people being falsely accused sitting in jail.

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 7:54pm

Sutton Ross said: "It sure gets shilly in here every time you make an appearance. I need a coat, a scarf and a blindfold to keep me from seeing the most shameless and cynical shilling done on this board in years. 

 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 8:17pm

OffOnBwayHi said: "mostly, if not all, white critics are giving it. (Race is important to note here, and it's sad that this still hasn't shifted when it comes to critics. This show is an example of why we need more Black voices as theater critics.)"

I agree with this as The Wrap review from Robert Hofler seemed to take particular pleasure in railing at Lynn Nottage like she wrote Oleanna and not a biomusical book for a paycheck. Why not put more of the blame on Wheeldon or anyone else? 

Aside from discussing the allegations and general jukebox musical criticism, at least the Daily Beast review made fair critiques of the book and remembered to review the performances. 

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 8:29pm

Just imagine if this had been written like Evita, critical of its subject’s crimes and scandals. The reception might be a little different than it is to this whitewashed trash.  In the meantime, this show has proved once again how stupid and selfish people are when they are willing to look the other way, defend, and outright shill for a show with a child molester as a protagonist, just so they get to groove to Thriller and Beat It in a Broadway theatre. 

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 8:53pm

There are allegations. Innocent until proven guilty. That’s how our system works. Sure he slept in bed with children - weird yes -  but the rest is just they said / he said. I was never a fan of Mj he always just came off a bit odd to me. The plastic surgery, the white skin, and he just felt unsexual. I always thought instead of being this malicious man that was molesting children he actually had a mental illness where he just stop progressing. 

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 8:58pm

I don't think they're stupid and selfish.  Michael Jackson meant a lot of things to a lot of people, particularly the Black community.  If people want to compartmentalize their feelings about the man for two and a half hours to be in the same room with the sheer nuclear joy of the man's genius, so be it.

 

Personally, I have no desire to see it.  The cynicism behind the need for this musical to happen isn't lost on me, but I don't blame the people buying tickets.  They may not be as stupid or as unsophisticated as you think. 

On a side note, it warms my heart to see people accusing others of being shills.  BWW of the Aughts is BACK!

Updated On: 2/2/22 at 08:58 PM

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 9:24pm

Color me intrigued.

Having not seen the show, Jesse Green and Peter Marks' reviews feel fair considering the subject matter. I remain appalled that Ayanna P is employed as a critic, when she continually churns out incompetent, adjective-filled consumer reports masked as "reviews"...shame on her editors.

Regardless, going into this project the producers had to know that this would not get critical praise, and I expect they have a plan to market the show without a need for anyone from the traditional theatergoing audience. Whether that plan works or not is another story.

Updated On: 2/2/22 at 09:24 PM

[HogansHero]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 9:39pm

SouthernCakes said: "There are allegations. Innocent until proven guilty. That’s how our system works."

As I have said, I don't care what people think the facts are, on either side, but let's cut this nonsense off at the pass. We are not talking about a criminal court (where that standard applies), or even a civil court (where a lesser standard applies). We are talking about the court of public opinion in which folks are free to criticize a production if that is their choice. "[H]e slept in bed with children" is plenty of a foundation for such criticism, if that's how someone feels. No one is going to "rot[] in jail for twenty years or longer" because of what some critic wrote.  

[bk]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 9:42pm

pagereynolds said: "Why are we even having this discussion? Michael Jackson paid the people who accused him of molesting them. He frequently shared a bed with children he wasn't related to. We aren't talking about people being falsely accused sitting in jail."

Since you're referencing my post, why don't you try reading what I'm responding to, which is a post about sexual assault in general. Here, let me help you out here: ""But false accusations of sexual abuse do not exist. It's so traumatic, and victims are treated with such hostility and disbelief. I refuse to believe anyone could actually lie about being sexually assaulted."

Do you see the name Michael Jackson in the post to which I responded, yes or no? Also, to Mr. Hogan, who I've blocked but whose post somehow showed up when I made this response, the above applies to you, too,  buckaroo, but you knew that.

 

Updated On: 2/2/22 at 09:42 PM

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 9:43pm

SouthernCakes said: "There are allegations. Innocent until proven guilty. That’s how our system works. Sure he slept in bed with children - weird yes - but the rest is just they said / he said."

That statement is not entirely accurate. There were finger prints found on the adult magazines. Both Jackson’s prints and his victim’s. And his victim testified that Jackson showed him the magazines. Even the jurors decided to ignore that evidence. They did so because the defense persuaded them to discount the physical evidence and instead focus on Janet Arvizo’s credibility and her values as a mother. The existence of that evidence was largely forgotten in the chaos and media circus surrounding the trial. And that tactic from the defense is largely credited for Jackson’s acquittal.

[TaffyDavenport]

Posted: 2/2/22 at 10:09pm

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Color me intrigued.

Having not seen the show, Jesse Green and Peter Marks' reviews feel fair considering the subject matter.I remain appalled that Ayanna P is employed as a critic, when she continually churns out incompetent, adjective-filled consumer reports masked as "reviews"...shame on her editors.

Regardless, going into this project the producers had to know that this would not get critical praise, and I expect they have a plan to market the show without a need for anyone from the traditional theatergoing audience. Whether that plan works or not is another story."

Ayanna Prescod got roasted on Twitter for comparing MJ to Assassins, because they're both shows about controversial figures. Embarrassing.