Relying on Critics reviews versus BWW posters

There's a really interesting convo happening on the TUCK EVERLASTING Review post in regards to how we evaluate what we want to see. As someone who only comes into NYC 2xs a year, I rely heavily on word of mouth for reviews on a show. I know what I like and I know what I like, but if wom is really bad, then I'm not going to spend my valuable time (and money) on a show with meh reviews. Likewise, if wom is really good, I'll take another look at something I would have otherwise disregarded. Do I pay attention to reviews from critics? - not really.... I read them, but I take it with a grain of salt. I don't really know them and their reputation nor do I know their motivation. So, I'll continue to read the posts on BWW and make my decisions based on what you're saying. You have not led me astray yet!!

How about the rest of you? Do you put much validity in critics' reviews?

Some people that post here are really dumb. Just remember that. Take everything you read here with just as much or more salt than the critics.

I usually agree with most of the critics, but since I live here, I often see stuff before the reviews.

There are posters here that I am always interested to hear from because they are perceptive, articulate, knowledgable, open-minded, and have a sense of taste. There are many posters who do not fit this description.



Same for critics.

like you i only go to nyc once a year so i really want to make sure the 6-8 shows i see are ones im likely to enjoy and appreciate.

There are posters here who i really like and respect(whizzer marvin for example) who really understand theatre and provide thoughtful reviews. I also like among paid reviewers Chris Caggiano who reviews for about.com. i would say with both these two reviewers my tastes and opinions have lined about about 90% of the time, which is fantastic.

i find its helpful to follow several reviews by a reviewer, see the shows and see how aligned your and the reviewers tastes are.

I put very little stock in reviews from the mainstream, like NYT other than curiousity and entertainment and knowledge that the reviews may impact a shows financial run or health....

Shocking, AE!

Kad said: "I see what I want to see and use reviews, critical or otherwise, as supplemental information."



Same here. Sometimes I agree with critics and chat boards and sometimes I don't. But if a show interests me, I will see it no matter what I am reading on the boards. I usually see shows in previews in NYC so reviews aren't out. Even when I lived out west and saw turing shows, I still saw what I wanted to see no matter what the reviews were. I think the one big example for me was "Hott Feet". Awful word of mouth but I bought a ticket during previews. Word of mouth was pretty much on target but I still enjoyed the music. The rest of the show was a hott mess!

if you decide what you're going to see based on the OPINION of someone else, whether critic or casual theater-goer, that says more about you than anyone else. go to what interests you the most... go to what sounds appealing to you... go to what looks enticing... no opinion, based on a completely subjective form of art, can be the arbiter in what you may or may not enjoy.

Updated On: 4/27/16 at 03:17 PM

I prefer the reviews on this than what I read on the Facebook group I'm apart of.

HogansHero said: "@JM226 "go to what interests you the most... go to what sounds appealing to you... go to what looks enticing... "

That sounds like a recipe for seeing a lot of disappointing theatre.

I know moderation is in short supply around here but in this case a little of it would go a long way: Honor what appeals to you, of course, but process it through the opinions of those you respect. Otherwise, what you are actually doing is succumbing to the enticements of the marketing people. And we KNOW they are not honest brokers.



"

Reading a brief synopsis of a shows plot and finding it appealing is hardly being hoodwinked by marketing. 9 times out of 10 if I follow my own gut instinct regarding a show I end up being glad I bought that ticket regardless of what reviews say.

Updated On: 4/27/16 at 04:18 PM

Mr. Nowack said: "I listen to the score (if possible) and watch whatever video is available. Really it all comes down to the music for me, If I like the music I can forgive pretty much anything else.

For some odd reason, I really like to go into a musical cold turkey. The one exception was Hamilton. I started listening to cast recording about a week before I went. It was nice that I knew a few of the songs, I will admit. But usually I don't listen and then I just either fall in love with everything at the same time, or I leave thinking - that was a good show, but no real interest in listening to the music again.

I guess I knew HATAI as well. Tuck Everlasting is a great example though because when I first heard it was coming to Broadway, I was elated. Loved the book. But as previews started and now opening, I am less inclined to go and 99% sure I won't go because I've only got time for 5 shows and its just not going to make it - all that due to the posts I've been reading here. And I feel good about that decision because there's a lot of you that I respect your opinion.

Scarywarhol said: "There are posters here that I am always interested to hear from because they are perceptive, articulate, knowledgable, open-minded, and have a sense of taste. There are many posters who do not fit this description.



Same for critics.

Pretty much my opinion too.



"

In all my years of theater going,I have never ever listened to professional theater critics. This spans 50 plus years . I saw shows because I liked the subject or composer or playwright.

Shows which were considered the worst ever produced by critics and posters here alike, were among my favorites. I ignore all reviews.