Posted: 4/27/16 at 7:16pm
Shows which were considered the worst ever produced by critics and posters here alike, were among my favorites. I ignore all reviews.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 7:18pm
Loved such dogs as Via Galactica, Prince Of Central Park, Metro among others.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 7:21pm
Dance of the Vampires and Taboo are among my favorites.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 7:29pm
How could I forget Count Orlock and the sponge? Add to the list every Frank Wildhorn show.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 7:38pm
Jane2 said: "There's no such thing as a good or bad show.."
You read it here first, kids. This, incidentally, is Exhibit #1 in my "moderation is in short supply around here" point. Yes we all have our own opinions, and yes most everyone likes some show that is widely despised. But it is kinda risky to urge a "stick your head in the sand" philosophy and then include the word "dumb" in the same paragraph.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 8:04pm
^^ dude. shut it. you're growing super tiresome with your constant condescension and snobby attitude. people who refuse to choose what they see based on the SUBJECTIVE OPINION of a total stranger on a website or a professionally paid critic of a news outlet are NOT having their head buried in the sand. they are just free-thinking independents who choose what they see based on information provided to them on behalf of the production (synopsis, multimedia, website, etc.)
Posted: 4/27/16 at 8:27pm
I am one person who relies on the Critics to cull the shows for me. Specifically, I have relied on Ben Brantley.
I come to NYC four times a year, and see 2 or 3 shows each trip. I am not able to see everything (which I would do if I lived nearby), and I want to see the "best" of the current season, with the original casts.
Brantley has been a reliable, if imperfect, guide for me for many years. I find that Isherwood's taste is somewhat different than mine, but, again, I need some guidance, so I read his thoughts, and those on "didhelikeit" as magnification.
I like to read the Boards, and to hear the thoughts expressed here -- but let's be honest -- every show "reviewed" by Board participants has evaluations ranging from "the worst thing since Civil War" to "the best thing since Oklahoma."
Actually, I've ever seen comments from folks who thought Civil War was great...
For example, last night, the Board "reviews" were all over the lot -- and one of the folks even went to the trouble of "reminding" everyone that you were all just offering opinions. (For which a side-discussion arose as to whether that was a permissible comment.)
Over the years, I've gotten a "feel" for Brantley/Isherwood, and have learned to "filter" them to find what I will probably like. Kind of like reading TIME and then reading US NEWS and trying to filter them both to find out what really happened.
m
Posted: 4/27/16 at 8:36pm
JM226-
1. telling people to shut up=not cool.
2. misapprehending the import of a post and then castigating it=not cool.
3. if you don't like what I have to say, and it bugs you so much that it prompts you to lash out inappropriately, by all means keep your eye on the avatar and move on.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 9:10pm
Tuck Everlasting? This is one where I would tend to go with the BWW posters over the critics.
Too many uses of the word "boring," and too many questionable comments about the score itself. In fact, the majority seem to lean that way so far.
But then again, part of that lack of interest might simply be just that. My lack of interest in the story to begin with. Back that up with the word "boring," and I'll pass on this one.
American Psycho, while not a slam dunk on these boards, has enough people liking it that I'm going to give it a try. Same goes with Waitress.
One thing I will say about a recent musical that I saw, Shuffle Along, and the opinions of that show on here so far. I saw it in VERY early previews and even then I didn't consider it a mess as some have called it on here. I didn't even find it to be a "meh" experience. Loved it, even despite the flaws that some have seen in it.
It's all subjective, I know.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 9:44pm
I know that one reason i have such unique taste in theater is because I'm not a fan of show tunes. Since Taboo and DOTV were not typical show music, I liked them. That's why I'm probably going to like Psycho if I get to see it.
Posted: 4/27/16 at 10:01pm
Jane2 said: "I know that one reason i have such unique taste in theater is because I'm not a fan of show tunes. Since Taboo and DOTV were not typical show music, I liked them. That's why I'm probably going to like Psycho if I get to see it."
That makes sense. I don't tend to like "typical" musicals either (although I also don't like those two so I guess there are all sorts of atypical 
).
Posted: 4/28/16 at 12:12am
If the subject matter or creative team are of interest to me, I will buy a ticket to see a show and purposely avoid reading reviews or BWW discussions about the show until after i have seen it. I might then seek out discussion threads to talk about it afterward if i feel like i want to process what i have seen, or am curious about what others thought about it.
On the other hand, if i have decided not to see a show because either the subject matter doesn't interest me (e.g. American Psycho, Amazing Grace) or because the preview videos released by the producers turned me off of the show due to music that i found unappealing (both American Psycho and Bright Star), then i will usually read the preview threads on here basically looking for a reason to change my mind and see the show after all, even though my initial inclination was to skip it). Sometimes what i read confirms my initial inclination (AP, Amazing Grace), and sometimes i read enough favorable responses about the story despite unappealing music to change my mind (Bright Star).
No subject matter or reviews could ever stop me from going to see a musical written by Kitt and Yorkey, directed by Michael Greif, produced by David Stone, or starring Kelli O'Hara. :)
Posted: 4/28/16 at 12:30am
I find reviews useful even if I don't agree with them. Usually when reviewers like a show, I do too. But there are exceptions, and I can usually sense that going in. An example was View from the Bridge. It just wasn't my style, and I could see it coming. Even though it was getting raves, I wondered whether I would like the modern take, and I didn't. Negative reviews I am much less likely to agree with, but again, I can often get a sense of whether I'll like it or not because sometimes they're criticizing shows for reasons that don't really matter to me. (Like Bright Star, which was criticized for being sappy, predictable, and unrealistic--I don't care.). Chris Jones from the Chicago Tribune is one I usually read and appreciate, particularly since he reviews all the local Chicago productions. I find I often agree with him (although I didn't agree at all with his Long Day's review today and frankly, it surprised me). His Bright Star review is actually a good example of why I listen to him frequently--I agreed with his criticisms but he was still positive about the show and so was I.
I typically like a lot more shows than I don't. I've liked a lot of show most people on these boards hated. However, the boards are very helpful for me in elevating something from "would like to see" to "absolutely must see--probably more than once." She Loves Me is an example of that.
Updated On: 4/28/16 at 12:30 AM
