NICE WORK IF YOU CAN GET IT Reviews- Page 4

[srg129]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 12:24am

Theatermania is positive:

http://www.theatermania.com/broadway/reviews/04-2012/nice-work-if-you-can-get-it_55258.html

[BroadwayFan12]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 1:14am

I'm surprised Broderick got such negative reviews. I don't always like his shtick, but I thought this role suited him very well.

[TheatreKid3]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 2:05am

2 out of 3 reviewers on Word of Mouth on Broadway.com pan Broderick, with one literally saying "It was almost, at times, painful to watch him."

The same reviewer also states that he thinks the show would be a hit if it wasn't for Broderick.

Harsh comments are rare on Word of Mouth these days.



Updated On: 4/25/12 at 02:05 AM

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 5:56am

I don't know why anyone is surprised. Matthew Broderick is giving his same old performance he has given for the past two decades. It doesn't change. This was proved last year when he tried "The Philanthropist". The role demands a gifted actor. Mr Broderick failed miserably. Why? He isn't a gifted actor. He has one role that he plays over and over again. Imagine what a gem this show would have been had the leading man been cast with someone extremely talented. Oh well.....



Updated On: 4/25/12 at 05:56 AM

[Kalimba]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 7:28am

It would have been interesting to see how Harry Connick Jr. would have done considering he was attached to this show originally.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 8:05am

I think Harry Connick Jr. would have been great. It would be wonderful to hear him sing the standards the way they should be sung, instead of the braying sounds that come from Matthew. Also, he's charming and could definitely look believable as a playboy.
Too bad. Losses all around. Harry went into a show that should have stayed unproduced and the producers of "Nice Work" went and totally miscast their leading man.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 8:20am

As someone who was so over Broderick's schtick - which was wearing on me years ago - I'm surprised at his negative reviews as well.

Broderick's signature deadpan poor schlub quality is very funny and - for once - had a freshness precisely because it was employed in a character one would expect to be suave and debonair. The result was a lovable but almost Thurston Howellish life-challenged goofball - so much more interesting than the stock 20's musical comedy playboy. Am I the only one who got this?

[CockeyedOptimist2]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 9:21am

Nope, I'm with you henrik and said so, less eloquently, a page ago. Somehow I feel like someone as smooth as Harry Connick, Jr. would be less likable than Matthew Broderick is here. I felt we are able to forgive Jimmy the fact that he won't just commit to Billie because he his weak-willed as Matthew plays him. Try to imagine Harry Connick, Jr. in this part and I don't think it would be compelling at all. In a different story, perhaps.

[mc1227]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 9:24am

Henrik..I got it for sure. From the many people I've spoken with who have seen it, they also got it. I guess they just don't write reviews for newspapers. The show is highly entertaining and Broderick is part of the reason it is. The rest of it doesn't matter. This show will continue to sell tix because it's a crowd pleaser.

Updated On: 4/25/12 at 09:24 AM

[egghumor]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 9:33am

I realize this is pure speculation on my part, but on the question of how would the show be different with Harry Connick, Jr., I say A LOT! I seem to remember that the reason Connick and Kathleen Marshall parted company over NICE WORK was because of a power struggle between his managers and the creative team. This leads me to think that the Connick team was trying to take the show and the character in a very different direction from what Marshall, diPietro, et al, had in mind. Bringing Matthew Broderick on board either returned the character to the original idea, or more likely, took Jimmy in yet another, star-tailored direction.

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 9:51am

I am a HUGE Matthew fan and I am sad about the reviews he has gotten...

... That said, I'd LOVE to see Harry Connick Jr in the role...

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 10:57am

This has been one of the worst seasons for musicals in history.

So, you're saying it's like every other season when someone invariable says the same thing.

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 11:00am

^

They ddn't say the same thing in 1964, or many other years.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 11:49am

But they certainly did in 2010 when Memphis won the Tony...

This season is CERTAINLY better than that one.

[broadwaydevil]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 3:03pm

Your counterexample, After Eight, is a season from 48 years ago? Sorry, that doesn't even make any sense.

[justafan2]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 4:05pm

The Bergen Record liked the score and performances, but didn't care for the lack of a storyline:
http://www.northjersey.com/arts_entertainment/theater/148826775_Theater_review___Nice_Work_If_You_Can_Get_It__on_Broadway.html

[cornerstone7]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 4:26pm

All the reviews on Curtain Critic have it at
70 Overall
72 Cast
62 Book
93 Music
80 Tech
http://www.curtaincritic.com/Shows/NICE_WORK_IF_YOU_CAN_GET_IT_REVIEWS-145.html

[JimCo]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 5:15pm

3 out of 4 stars is a good review. 2 stars would be mixed!

[bdn223]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 5:29pm

@After Eight

This has actually been one of the better Broadway Seasons..yes there have been no original musical hits...but when that happens you get a season like 2008 whose hits were In the Heights, South Pacific, August Osage County, and the 39 Steps...at the cost of shows like Young Frankenstein, Little Mermaid, Cry Baby...the list goes on...
Honestly this has been one of the better broadway seasons, the only reason that people are looking down on this season was because last season was The Book of Mormon and War Horse...this season has some of the best plays broadway has seen in a long time, all but 2 are home grown, and 2 GREAT musicals Once and Newsies, a couple Decent ones..Nice Work LJ and depending on the time of day Bonnie and Clyde..and a few atrocious ones Spiderman, Ghost and Faith..

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 6:29pm

lol good defense

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 11:00pm

Or there's always 1989... (I only just recently saw the Tony clip from Starmites and Angela's introduction of it, and can't get past the brilliance).

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 11:26pm

Bdn,

I was referring to this season's musicals, not plays. (Although with the exceptions of Don't Dress for Dinner, and One Man..., the plays were pretty lamentable as well).

So sticking to the musicals, Newsies is a mediocrity, (I'd give it a C-, though I'm certainly rooting for it to win the Tony over the horrific Once, even though there is no way that will happen, that gloopy glop has it in the bag.) As for Once and Lysistrata Jones, they also belong in the atrocious category, in fact, even more so than the ones you listed.

Which leaves Nice Work as the sole decent musical this season. Which means it is indeed one of the worst seasons for musicals in history.

[bdn223]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 11:41pm

@After eight...
DID YOU NOT REMEBER 2 years ago when MEMPHIS WON THE TONY?!?!?! the only decent musical which wasn't even a musical as much as it was a performance piece was American idiot
And you are a clearly a cynic...because even Ben Brantley a cynic says its one of the best seasons for plays ever!!

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/25/12 at 11:48pm

Bdn,

I don't know how long you've been following things theatrical. I have for a long time. I've read a lot of critics, and I know the good ones from the bad ones.

Ben Brantley is one of the bad ones. He doesn't know what he's talking about.

[breathyfemalevocal]

Posted: 4/26/12 at 12:06am

After Eight, based on your opinion of Ben Brantley, maybe you have more in common than you realize.