Mixed Review of "ONCE" in the Times. — Page 2

I'm not exaggerating in saying that the book brought down the entire show by a large load. And maybe Girl doesn't quite hit Natalie Portman-Garden State levels of annoyingness, it's a fact that she still seems to exist in the show solely to function to his character, and when the independence of the two in the film was so clearly stated, that's a problem.

Looking as a reminder off TV Tropes list of Manic Pixie Dream Girl, it really does fit at least half of her purpose: giving new meaning to male character, stunningly attractive, full of wacky quirks, inexplicably obsessed... But she is sort of the 'downbeat' classification of the type.

Again, if you don't go in looking for it, I'm sure you won't go out *offended* like maybe you would after suffering through MPDG crud like 'Elizabethtown,' but it's certainly there if you're looking for it, or any depth to her character. There's one thing in the film to have both of the characters have sort of enigma aspects to them, but it's another in the show to give her little or nothing to do other than mutter cliches and support Guy. The best love stories don't call attention to the fact that they're love stories, and that was what gave the film the bit of technique it had in the area. The show isn't so delicate.

---

eh, maybe I'm just being cynical because I read 'A Lover's Discourse' a few months back- haha, but to see Brantley affirm the same type of problems with the book really shows there's something lacking there. Again, this doesn't make it an awful show, and I'd still probably give it around a 'B' grade. The songs are beautiful, and when Girl does get her moment with 'The Hill,' it's quite breathtaking. But the 1st act in particular, probably because it's more book-heavy, needs work to fix itself up pre-Broadway.

---

aw, thanks Spork. Much nicer than some exes of mine who've called it blunt or dour!

---

It's not just the cliche, which admittedly, isn't AS bad as it could have been in the show, thanks to some of the character outlines that were established from the film. The biggest essential problem stems a bit from that quote Brantley pulled about Guy comparing Girl to an angel. In the film, Guy/Girl were on the same level, they both aided each other, they both had problems, they worked together. Here, it seems like she exists to aid him, which throws the entire equilibrium of the thing.

Despite what some men like to think (and women too on occasion), there is no such thing as a 'Muse' or an 'Angel,' unless that is, we're talking about a certain *other* play on Broadway this season.... But really, everyone's got problems, everyone looks for love to to give or take inspiration for a specific reason, usually rooted in narcism at the start, which may transcend to love as the relationship develops. But we don't see that here.

One of musical theatre's best circumventions of the MPDG cliche is Sally Bowles in 'Cabaret,' who may seek to be a bit of a floating enigmatic muse of talent encouragement, but really carries some seriously deep rooted problems and nihilism with her, which make her into a 'real' character, instead of an idealized version of one. That' ideal is what Girl is right now, and unlike some really awful books, this one CAN be fixed, probably pretty easily with some line retractions and additions. It's not like looking at the book of say 'Spider-Man' or 'Bonnie and Clyde' and saying that nothing is salvageable. There is quite a lot of good there, it just needs something to make it true.

---

Updated On: 12/8/11 at 09:58 AM

Here's the problem:

In early previews, people post hats in the air raves of shows that turn out to be mediocrities or busts.

One would think that masterpieces were rolling off the assembly line, as if every night a Death of a Salesman or a South Pacific were being unveiled before our eyes. But then what we see in actuality are Queen of the Mist, Sons of the Prophet, and now, Once.

It's setting people up for a big letdown.

It's not really a question of curbing one's enthusiasm, it's one of being more judicious in one's assessments.