I'm on board with the "a good show is a good show, irregardless of length" ideology.
It seems a lot of people think 90- 100 minute shows or intermission- less shows are of a lower quality. That creative teams/ producers make certain shows short because their idea is thin or unworthy of a full- length night.
Well, I think this a completely false misconception. There are many excellent, successful shows that are one- act or of a short length because of their specific content and the nature of their dramatic arc. An intermission would be extremely detrimental to A Chorus Line because the tension built in the "audition room" of the show would dissipate, and the illusion of being an observer at an actual audition would be diminished and require rebuilding. The show's dramatic arc works best without a break.
Other wonderful shows with many fans are short or intermission- less for just as substantial reasons.
I would hate to see Hairspray without an intermission. I don't think Follies works as well WITH an intermission. I don't think one minute of Miss Saigon should be cut- it's an epic tale. I don't think Assassins should be one minute longer, or more than one act- and it's another KIND of epic tale.
These are genuinely artistic choices based on the nature of the musical, and I don't think they reflect on quality, writer laziness, or producer cheapness. Good musicals come in all shapes and sizes, and so do bad musicals.
[title of show] on Broadway. it's time. believe.