Mary Poppins Reviews- Page 3

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 1:58am

Curtain: y'know I never got around to reading the Times' Somers review, but if he did in fact make a camel-toe reference then that does sink lower than simply utilizing an annoying slang. on the other hand, the Suzanne Somers show was an entirely different animal than POPPINS. her show was so off-the-map awful that it was essentially free range for the critics to unleash all of the horrible things they might otherwise have held back for another show that was simply sub-par. POPPINS seems to be getting its share of decent mentions and is on such a large scale, I thought Brantley would at least try and take the high road when bashing it. Eh, such is life.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:09am

Newark Star-Ledger is Mixed:

"Unveiled yesterday at the New Amsterdam Theatre, the musical "Mary Poppins" resembles a vast, elaborate clockwork toy of yesteryear. It's festooned with an array of bells, whistles and cute mechanical figures.

Whether kids will be thrilled by such a vintage gadget is debatable. Adults are likely to mix fond smiles with yawns. While the energetic Sherman Brothers parts of the score are enjoyable, the cluttered musical isn't as wonderful as hoped.

A patchy merger between P.L. Travers' whimsical stories about a magical English nanny and the beloved 1964 Disney movie musical derived from them, "Mary Poppins" features a colorful parade of upbeat song-and-dance sequences, literally tons of handsome scenery and an agreeable company.

True enchantment appears to be in short supply, however.

__________________________________________________________________

Certainly a more fulfilling experience than the vacuous "Tarzan," this over-stuffed version of "Mary Poppins" strives very hard to satisfy viewers. Sometimes it succeeds. But for a show about enchantment in everyday life, isn't magic supposed to seem effortless? "

http://www.nj.com/entertainment/ledger/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-0/1163743846307060.xml&coll=1

[clarkstallings]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:13am

I'm going to go out on a limb and call it. Mind you this, isn't based on any logic, more like gut, as we still have shows to open this season and what not, but I'm going to put my money on Poppins taking home the big prize in June.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:21am

Clark - please don't go to Vegas.

[clarkstallings]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:31am

I don't intend to. The great thing about this message board is that there are no stakes. One of us will be right in a few months. I know that my prediction is a stretch. I acknowledge it is entirely whim driven, but stranger things have happened. "Anything can happen if you let it!" (Please note the sarcasm, I couldn't resist)

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:35am

Stranger things have happened, but it is very rare that a show with these kinds of reviews wins the top Tony Prize. And frankly, the New York theatre community is not very supportive of the Disney franchise. They are over it. Disney isn't going to win another Best Musical Tony award until they come up with something that will ARTISTICALLY top THE LION KING.

[Julian2]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:38am

I didn't know that Mary Poppins transferred to the Hilton. Did the big broadway commercial fish swallow the broadway commercial minnow? Awww . . .

And just so there's no debate, I am kidding and being VERY sarcastic.

[clarkstallings]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:45am

I certainly see your point. It makes sense. To me, this show has more soul than any Disney has done and I've seen them all except for Tarzan. I walked out of the theatre shocked for that reason. I was expecting more themepark on stage but go much more than that. Is it flawed? Yes it is. Even the most lovable people are flawed however. At anyrate, it doesn't really matter.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:47am

depending, of course, on your definition of art I do think that the book, music and lyrics for Mary Poppins has a bit more sophistication to offer then The Lion King, and visually they're both quite intoxicating. the only thing the Lion King has going for it more so than Poppins is Julie Taymor.

[AnythingCanHappen]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:49am

NYSun... Poppins is at the New Amsterdam... Grinch is at the Hilton. Srsly.

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 3:14am

both shows have a lot going for them, but when it comes to the comparison you have to admit that Julie Taymor is a MAJOR "thing" to have on your side. she could make the Bob Dylan show into something respectable

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 3:16am

The Washington Post is Mixed-to-Negative:

"If a few mechanical marvels are enough for you (or your little ones), then the charms of this highly anticipated adaptation of the 1964 movie musical will not feel too fleeting or sporadic. But anyone hoping that this show -- staged by director Richard Eyre and choreographer Matthew Bourne -- would provide much in the way of robust musical pleasure or emotional sustenance is likely to find it a wee bit of a letdown.

All the va-va-va-voom is contained here in the environment created by designer Bob Crowley. The new songs by George Stiles and Anthony Drewe that supplement the Poppins standards by the Sherman brothers, Richard M. and Robert B., are fairly flaccid. In other words, what this "Mary Poppins" primarily has going for it is sets appeal.

_______________________________________________________________

A bigger problem has to do with the portrayal of Mary herself. It's clear that Mary, as drawn in the stories of P.L. Travers, was never meant to be as saccharine as "A Spoonful of Sugar" makes her out. In this incarnation, however, she's neither sweet nor sour: She has almost no personality at all. In the placid mien and clipped vowels of Ashley Brown, Mary seems not so much a calming influence as she does an automaton. She walks and talks with a robotic briskness.

Brown, possessed of a fine voice, wages an uphill battle with the memory of Julie Andrews, who had the ability to radiate warmth as well as efficiency. This new recruit to the role conveys only the competent dimension."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/16/AR2006111601844.html

[FoscasBohemianDream]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 3:20am

Clark - please don't go to Vegas.

LOL!

I certainly found Mary Poppins to be a very theme-park rendition of the story. I believe--like one of the reviews mentioned--that the actors seem so mechanical on stage, so easy to replace that even troupers of the like of Jenkins and Luker can't save the evening for me, at least. I know 90% of Broadway audiences disagree and I am OK with that. As for the Best Musical Tony Award, I *HIGHLY* doubt that with Grey Gardens, Curtains and Spring Awakening running it will hace a chance; as a matter of fact, if Legally Blonde is any good, Mary Poppins might not even be nominated.

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 3:27am

well now this is sad to see. Peter Marks needs to come back to NY and focus his attention on Broadway. He was fantastic when he was 2nd string at the Times, but now he's so busy running all around trying to find theatre in DC that his Broadway reviews are lazy and half-baked. Notice that he has the exact same headline as Linda Winer's review, and that many of his observations seem to be lifted directly from Brantley (he even uses the same Nanny911: The Musical joke)

what would it take to get this talented critic back to NY? he could easily replace whoever the Daily News is using now. And he would be a nice break from Isherwood, who has his old job.

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 4:11am

well the other major review is in, and you MP fans should be THRILLED! when a British show is on the fence, you can always rely on good old Clive to tip the scale in inexplicable ways. He gives it the only real "rave review" out of them all, so you can be sure that there will be plenty of NY Post quotes under the POPPINS marquee in a few days. I love Clive Barnes. He's one of the best writers out there, you never know what he'll take a liking to, and nobody sticks to their guns like he does. With how well Disney markets things, this could very well turn the show into a long-running moneymaker. It will be around longer than TARZAN to be sure.

--------------------------------
November 17, 2006 -- LOVELY! With her carpetbag, a parrot-headed umbrella for airy transport and the rare ability to slide up banisters, the inimitable heroine of "Mary Poppins" put down and took off at the New Amsterdam last night, courtesy of Cameron Mackintosh, Walt Disney and the original author, P.L. Travers.

"Mary Poppins" was fine as a Disney movie and is even better as this Broadway musical, imported sound and whole from London's West End. Let's play cute and call it - and the cast led by Ashley Brown, Gavin Lee, Daniel Jenkins and Rebecca Luker - supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. Or words to that effect.

This story - of a supernanny who literally descends upon the unruly, unhappy Banks family on 17 Cherry Tree Lane, somewhere in Edwardian London, proceeds to restore order and then just as literally takes off into the heavens - has its own built-in magic.

And it's a magic that the musical, with its urbane and knowing book by Julian Fellowes, cleverly evokes in a manner a little darker, more mysterious and a good deal more authentic to the novel than the overly jolly movie version.

Most of the music, of course, is taken from the film's original score by Richard M. Sherman and Robert B. Sherman, so you probably go in humming the tunes. But the new and amiable songs by George Stiles and Anthony Drewe make a decent fit, and the whole patchwork, orchestrated by William David Brohn, has just that right Broadway belt and lilt.

What makes Mackintosh currently the best producer on Broadway and the West End is his creative touch and the manner in which he picks his collaborators, places them on the same page, and makes sure they stay there.

"Mary Poppins" looks and sounds complete - a perfectly engineered piece of musical theater.

The staging by Richard Eyre and co-director Matthew Bourne and choreography (Bourne and Stephen Mear) seem seamless, although perhaps Bourne, with a set of smoothly energized and imaginative dance numbers, deserves the most laurels.
--------------------------------



NY Post Review

Updated On: 11/17/06 at 04:11 AM

[kec]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 4:24am

NY Daily News is very positive:
It's Eye-Poppin

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 4:34am

well, looks like they're gonna be just fine based on those last 2 reviews. what a sharp turn of events from the previous ones. the conspiracy theorist in me almost wants to believe that the all-powerful Disney pulled some strings after that negative NY TIMES notice. i'm sure that's not the case, but those guys have a lot of money and these are going to wind up being very important reviews for the MP team.

[AnythingCanHappen]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 4:37am

Regardless of reviews. I hope (amd im quite pleasantly happy to say that it more than likely will) stay on Broadway for awhile.

And I hope the cast got to do SOME partying tonight.

[jv92]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 6:34am

Old Man Barnes loves this, but hates Grey Gardens. Figures. Although I think his review is really pushing it, (I'd give it three stars to three and a half) it's nice to see that someone liked it. I knew he would anyway.

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 6:54am

Go-figure...Brantely's overly condescending!

But I respect all critics opinions, nonetheless.

[billynj]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 7:21am

looks like some want to be Frank Richs cant handle the show doing 20 million in box office before they were able to anoint it as something wholesome, that a family visting New York might enjoy. There is only one Lion King and anyone trying to make another will produce a TARZAN ...when magic happens it happens thats why its called magic...stop looking for the next Lion King it will be a very long time........

The only review that will really matter is ROSIES>>>>>>

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 9:22am

I agree more with the POST, DAILY NEWS, VARIETY, & the AP...I loved it.

https://www.nycriticscorner.broadwayworld.com/marypoppins.htm

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 9:35am

I don't consider it validating in any way that several of these critics agree with my own sentiments stating this show isn't very good. I'm not looking for others to join my "team."


It's depressing NOT liking a show. I go in, having spent my money (well, unless it's a comp), and I'm hoping each time to have an enjoyable and hopefully satisfying experience. But that doesn't always happen.

And for those of you who think that we're symbolically "crapping on your car" for not liking a show... you really need to grow up.

It's an opinion... nothing more... but nothing less. It counts only as much as your own.

[PaintTheMusic]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 9:55am

I knew it wasn't you "crapping on my car", best12bars! It's from all the Bird Woman's birds flying above the Cathedral.

Posted: 11/17/06 at 10:04am

Old Man Barnes loves this, but hates Grey Gardens. Figures.

he hated DROWSY CHAPERONE too!