Pippin Reviews!- Page 3

[musicalman2]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:25pm

by the way, what has happened to Limelight Mike. Doesn't he usually start these review threads? I have not seen one of this review thread starts in a while.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:28pm

On a surface level, I get Brantley's problems, but I think he missed the entire point of the production. When I was watching the show, entertained as I was, I did think it was all just a bit too much as well, up until the final few minutes. When the razzle-dazzle was stripped away, when the insane stunts stopped, and all of the dizzying tricks came to a halt, I truly felt like I got the point of the production, the circus theme, and the impressive, but almost overwhelming "magic" that we were promised. And I felt like all of that mayhem made sense as a directorial choice, not just a "LOVE ME, LOVE ME, LOVE ME" statement. If you've seen the production, you know what I mean.

There's a purpose, a reason, and a vision behind the chaos and the razzle-dazzle of this production. It's not like it's another NEWSIES, where the dancing, flipping, and cracked-out chorus boy smiles all signify nothing beneath the surface.

Not sure if that makes any sense.

---

Wall St. Journal is mixed to negative: http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-221001/

Backstage is a rave, with an A: http://www.backstage.com/review/ny-theater/broadway/diane-paulus-pippin-stephen-schwartz-roger-o-hirson/ Updated On: 4/25/13 at 10:28 PM

[East Village]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:29pm

Brantley's a sour puss. If people are enjoying themselves, he's going to -- quite insincerely -- purposefully distance himself. In other words, he's a phony.

[kyl3fong2]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:31pm

Is the Set Design and Lighting Tony Awards going to be between this show and Matilda do you guys think?

[bjh2114]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:33pm

Yes.

[jnb9872]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:33pm

I'm glad Brantley gave voice to a lot of my reservations about the show, specifically that as written it is pretty mediocre.

"Yet it was originally perceived, rightly, as a work in need of camouflage, a skeleton that requires savvy stagecraft to give it flesh."

I'd say I enjoyed the production much more than he did, but it did feel like sugar rush to me; utterly thrilling, quick to dissipate once it ended with nothing underneath the razzle-dazzle to linger.

That's probably harsh. I'd still give it a qualified rave, myself. Also, MJT did nothing for me. I barely recognized him when their highlights clip came out, and I'd seen the show a few nights before. To each their own, I guess...

ETA: I also don't see how this contends with MATILDA in Lights/Set, personally. Costumes it's definitely a competitor, but MATILDA is a much bigger technical knockout than this, which is such a human spectacle.

Updated On: 4/25/13 at 10:33 PM

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:36pm

I Am speechless.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:42pm

I am speechless as well. I honestly thought this would get across the board raves. Don't let these reviews deter you - go see it. I LOVED PIPPIN!

[Trish2]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:43pm

I too, thought the show was totally void of sex appeal, especially in the dance department. I'm in total agreement with Brantley on the following :

"Fosse’s original dancing is evoked, largely stripped of its sensuality, by the choreographer Chet Walker. Even when it’s executed by a body as supple and sexy as that of Charlotte d’Amboise, it’s not the main event. And the connection between storytelling and style, between performer and self-expression, is only occasionally in evidence."

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:47pm

NY Post is a rave, with a rare four stars: http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/pippin_pip_pip_hooray_DsM7DdoXiJNL0wBRht9zEP?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Theater

[Sauja]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 10:49pm

I'm team Brantley on this one. It's enjoyable but whisper thin and hectic for the sake of being hectic. And I do NOT understand the love here for Miller whose performance I found incredibly one note. I think Rachel Bay Jones is doing the best work in the company with Andrea Martin nipping at her heels. And I liked Thomas in spite of some very shaky vocals the night I saw it.

It's a good production, but sometimes, as we learned in Chicago, folks are just being razzle dazzled and overlook the flaws.

Also, hey, if everyone agrees, it wouldn't be very interesting would it?

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:00pm

Told you Brantley wouldn't love it.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:04pm

Brantley's review is shot through with "I should be above this sort of entertainment so dagnabbit I'm going to be."

[NewYorkTheater]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:16pm

From “musical-theater showmanship at its best” to “bloated and soul-starved.” The reviewers are all over the map -- except about Andrea Martin, whom everybody loves.

So what's going to happen? Will it be a hit anyway?


Pippin reviews Updated On: 4/25/13 at 11:16 PM

[751guy]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:19pm

Brantley didn't like it. Does anyone really care? This is a crowd-pleaser and will run. The original was the first show I ever saw on Broadway. Saw it many times at the Imperial and later on other stages so it holds special memories.

Was anxious to see this new production. Was disappointed the voices were not there in the opening number. I guess you hire singer/dancers or circus performers? Can't get one in the same. Terrence & Charlotte are super. Andrea Martin is superb. Was not crazy about Patina who left me cold and I found her lacking Vereen's charm. Her scenes with Catherine frightened me.

Don't worry, kids... it'll run and it'll be a big hit. It's a terrific production, not perfection, but one of the better shows of the season. Brantley NOT loving it is no reason for alarm. Isherwood's review from last night is the talk of the realto. Even Bette's biggest fans are raising eyebrows over that one. Isherwood has finally exposed himself as a shill. He was much better suited writing about gay porn.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:24pm

Doesn't Brantley tend to harp on productions that transfer to Broadway from a regional theatre? He doesn't usually like regional theatre on Broadway.

[evic]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:25pm

Brantley is pitiful with his references to Barnes' opinion of the original production. It is ridiculous to go to Nostalgialand and it has nothing to do with this reinvented production. He was a powerful critic for the Times, but the now dead Barnes was a drunk who was known to have fallen asleep during many of the shows that he "reviewed". (his wife was rumored to have written some of them). And who cares about his knowledge of theater history mentioning another show called Pippin in 1870. It wouldn't matter if the cavemen put on a show called Pippin. But still....what a sourpuss he is.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:26pm

Just like BOMBSHELL, if you don't get that "love letter from the TIMES" you gotta work your ass off to make a Giant hit.
I can imagine Fran Weisler gettin' her inner bitch on right now.

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:27pm

Does no rave from the Times help Cinderella's chances just a little bit more to get that TONY?

[A Director]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:28pm

Go back and read the reviews of the original production. They weren't that great. What saved the show was a clever television commercial directed by Fosse.

Pippin's book is weak and the score is so-so and as written, the show has no ending.
Fosse's direction managed to hide the flaws in this mediocre show. Pippin is not a show for the ages. Take away the flash and there's no there there.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:34pm

Interesting. I'd say these were positive, but mixed from the Times. I agree with him about Miller and Jones. Miller wasn't charming enough and Jones became the heart of the show.

Will this hurt Patina's Tony win? Will Jones get a mom along with Martin?

I really liked the show, but it was not perfect...these are good reviews, just not great.

I do think Paulus won't take Director now. I thought she had a shot.

[evic]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:41pm

I am on a roll- lol. I do agree with Brantley that the show is stripped of the sensuality of the original. But again...it's reinvented and maybe that's what Paulus and Walker wanted to do. Fosse was all about sex. But the 2 girls jerking off their jausting poles in "Glory" was pretty raunchy.

[mjroberts972]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:47pm

Oh well. I love this show and this production. It is unlike anything I have ever seen on a Broadway stage. Patina is radiant, Matthew is stellar, everyone is splendid. I felt magic in that theatre, no matter what Ben Brantley says.

In a pool of rave reviews, I don't see why everyone is clinging to the mixed reviews. With the exception of about 2 reviews, this was a critical success. Pippin is here to stay.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:49pm

Huffington Post is positive: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-finkle/pippin-broadway_b_3158419.html

NY Daily News is a rave, with five out of five stars: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music-arts/pippin-theater-review-article-1.1327280?localLinksEnabled=false

[broadwaydevil]

Posted: 4/25/13 at 11:49pm

To those calling the Times review mixed, I'm sorry but that's just wishful thinking. Apart from praise for Martin, that is an all-out, Brantley claws-filled, pan. I love the production but let's not delude ourselves into thinking there's a single pull quote Pippin should be using from that review.

That said, the other major reviews were nearly uniformly raves and to think that Pippin will be challenged by Cinderella for Best Revival is strange considering Cinderella received far worse reviews across the board and doesn't have anywhere near the same level of buzz.