ROCK OF AGES Reviews

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 1:30am

Post 'em here!

My best to all involved.

Having caught the show at New World last October (and) at the Brooks Atkinson on Sunday, I can attest and humbly admit to being a fan and championing this show. Sure, it's goofy, it's sophomoric, but at the same time, it's an all-out enjoyable outing! I didn't notice much drinking in the orchestra section on Sunday night, the mezzanine was pretty tanked, though. Nowhere near the disruption as it could've been, I'm sure. The performances were equal to that of the original company's, in my opinion. Can't really play favorites here. The new additions to the company made some wonderful choices, adding some new depth and perspective to their characters. I thought the book scenes that were tweaked worked very well. Kudos to Chris! Long story short, I want this one to hold true to it's 'following' and garner a whole new bunch of fans (be it theatre people, 80's fans, whomever). I wish it the absolute best. It's not life-changing by any means, but it'll make you feel good for 2 1/2 hours - With some killer riffs, soaring vocals, scantly clad women, toilet humor, and blazing and blaring guitar solos that will melt your face off!

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 12:47pm

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 12:49pm

Uh-oh. ROA will be panned.

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 1:19pm

I'm going to predict it again: I think we might be surprised by critics' ability to see this show for what it is (like they did with XANADU), and see reviews the equivalent of a half-hearted shoulder-shrug or a "eh, it was fun."

I'm sure there will be some pans, but I really don't think all the major publications will be crapping all over it.

[BustopherPhantom]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 1:31pm

I think that at least a few critics will fall for the show; don't be surprised if Brantley does (he liked MAMMA MIA!, after all).

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:05pm

Agreed, though I think Isherwood is reviewing it, not Brantley.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:05pm

Did Isherwood review (and rave about) the show off Broadway?

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:08pm

A third-string critic reviewed it Off-Broadway. The review was short, and more like a summary than any opinion of the show.

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:09pm

No, Andy Webster reviewed it off-Broadway for the NYT and gave it a mixed review.

"Sooner or later it had to happen. The immortal hair bands of the 1980s finally receive their due in the brash jukebox musical 'Rock of Ages' at New World Stages. It's a natural fit: the era's album-oriented radio -- this production has no time for the British synthesizer bands, R.E.M. or the great dance music of the period -- was closer to Broadway in its grandiosity than you might expect. But like much of the music that inspires it, 'Rock of Ages' too often lacks a human pulse. "

"...aspiring musician Drew (the 'American Idol' alumnus Constantine Maroulis, appealingly self-effacing). Complicating their entanglement is Stacee Jaxx, a preening rooster of a singer (Will Swenson of this summer's Central Park 'Hair,' stealing the show with Axl Rose moves and Tim Curry overstatement)."

"And yet 'Rock of Ages' draws surprising mileage out of Poison's 'Every Rose Has Its Thorn' and taps a warm vein of sincerity with Bon Jovi's 'Wanted Dead or Alive.'"

"The flash-and-trash ambience -- in Beowulf Boritt's sets, Gregory Gale's costumes and Jason Lyons's lights -- is on the mark, and Kristin Hanggi's direction never lags. But Ms. Barrett, who has a pretty voice, is overwhelmed by Walter Trarbach's echoey sound production and can't find her inner Joan Jett. And where is the shredding? A wailing guitar solo? (A fleeting teaser near the end doesn't qualify.) The show winds up, inevitably, with Journey's anthem 'Don't Stop Believin'. With 'Rock of Ages,' that's easier said than done."



And please WithoutATrace, if you truly don't want to have argumentative back-and-forth on the boards, then don't send me antagonistic private messages and then block me from being able to respond to them. I'll leave it be this time, but it's just childish.
Updated On: 4/7/09 at 02:09 PM

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:16pm

I'm sorry. I just checked my settings and it says I don't have anyone blocked...there must be a glitch...please email me your response. [e-mail]. Thanks.

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:19pm

Right, must be a glitch.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:21pm

My settings say that I am allowing Private Messages right now...and I'm able to get PMs from other posters. Believe me, I have not blocked you.

[Testing1232]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:40pm

I like "ROA" for what it is, but "Xanadu's" book is far better.

As a matter of fact, its brilliant compared to the "ROA" book.

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:42pm

"Xanadu" was fun to watch PURELY because of the brilliantly talented and funny cast, and the delightful ELO songs from the original film. The book was piss-poor, with even the jokes being lame on paper -- the fact that laughs were gotten out of the show at all was a testament to the likes of Butler, Jackson, Hoffman, Testa.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:43pm

I didn't like XANADU at all, but yes, XANADU is outstanding compared to ROA.

[Testing1232]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 2:57pm

<< "Xanadu" was fun to watch PURELY because of the brilliantly talented and funny cast, and the delightful ELO songs from the original film. The book was piss-poor, with even the jokes being lame on paper -- the fact that laughs were gotten out of the show at all was a testament to the likes of Butler, Jackson, Hoffman, Testa.
>>

Have to respectfully disagree with you here.. Many people (myself included) thought that Beane would win a Tony for "Xanadu's" book.

[AvenueQResident]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 3:14pm

From what I've read and heard about, this show sounds like Broadways equivalent to 'We Will Rock You' which got panned on its opening in London.

Be interesting to see if the critics have a similar response.

Posted: 4/7/09 at 4:48pm

It's nothing like WWRY.

Not one of the biggies, but an early review from a regular theater blogger who claims to have seen all the new musicals and didn't see the show off-Bway: Very Positive

"Rock musicals are tough...so often, the performers are on stage trying to ?melt your face," and audiences are sitting politely in their seats, because they are at a musical, and that is how one behaves. Rock of Ages, on the other hand, is more of a musical-rock concert hybrid, one that thrives on the energy of the audience. While I missed the off-Broadway run, my guess is that Rock of Ages works even better on Broadway, since a bigger audience means more energy. The energy was palpable as soon as I entered the theatre, and continued to build as more people came in. "

"Of course, Rock of Ages also has alcohol, and tipsy audiences may be more easily pleased. Given my tendency to glare at fellow audience members who unwrap candies, and all but bludgeon those who have their cell phones out, I had wondered if I?d be bothered by the whole selling-drinks-during-the-show thing; I wasn?t at all. In fact, I hardly noticed it."





Theater is Easy: Rock of Ages Updated On: 4/7/09 at 04:48 PM

[BlueforBroadway]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 4:58pm

If the show tonight is at 6:45pm, which means it ends around 9pm and then the after party, how long before the reviews would start coming in?

All I can think of is those old B/W movies about Broadway where they waited nervously until the papers came out. You'd see a bundle of newspapers thrown to the ground and then switch to the actors who are either elated or ready to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge.

Nowadays, the reviews can be sent in via a Blackberry.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 5:03pm

The first-string media (invited to review performances this past weekend) will have reviews online at any point during the night; in fact, I'm shocked the AP review hasn't popped up yet.

The second and third string media are invited to performances next week.
Updated On: 4/7/09 at 05:03 PM

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 5:05pm

Wow, do people seriously not know how these things work by now? It seems someone asks a question like this on every review thread.

The critics see the show at one of a few invited-press preview performances so their reviews are ready by the time opening night rolls around. We'll likely see some reviews posted even before 6:45.

[Jane2]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 5:10pm

I've noticed that reviews start showing up on line right after the curtain goes up.

[being.jeremiah]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 5:28pm

Here we go...

amNY is 3 out 4 stars, Very Positive:

"The jukebox musical, built on familiar pop songs, is the most reviled genre of modern theater. But what makes 'Rock of Ages' so refreshing is how it makes no reservations about offering a paper-thin story, clichés and poop jokes set to distorted guitar riffs and hard-hitting drumming."

http://tinyurl.com/roaamny

Posted: 4/7/09 at 5:47pm

Wow! A theater reviewer who knows about David Lee Roth and Axl Rose!

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/7/09 at 5:52pm

I'm not saying this one review is a sign of things to come -- but if it is... I told you so.