THE QUEEN OF VERSAILLES Reviews- Page 5

[BroadwayBen]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 1:54pm

The TIMES has lost all credibility.  Critics Picks and RAVE for SMASH; Critics Pick and positives for REDWOOD and QUEEN OF VERSAILLES.   

Frank Rich must be eye-rolling to the heavens....

[CoffeeBreak]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 1:55pm

WorldWithoutYou said: "As an out of towner who hasn’t had the (dis)pleasure of catching this show, I’ve rather surprisedto hear the response it’s gotten. Namely, how did Michael Arden create such a mess? Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t he at LEAST been nominated for every show he’s ever directed on Broadway, and had successes with his non-Broadway as well? He has never missed before. And sure, maybe he was bound to misfire eventually, but the gist I’ve gotten is that the show seems to lack any sense of concept or messaging, which are the specific strengths of Arden’s that have given him such an impressive track record. I can’t seem to wrap my head around the fact that he would direct such a toothless show."

This is his first Broadway show that is new and he developed from the beginning.  The others were revivals or already developed.

[CoffeeBreak]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 1:56pm

BroadwayBen said: "The TIMES has lost all credibility. Critics Picks and RAVE for SMASH; Critics Pick and positives for REDWOOD and QUEEN OF VERSAILLES.

Frank Rich must be eye-rolling to the heavens...."

Frank Rich was pretty honest.

[Little Nub]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 2:07pm

I know plenty of people who enjoyed Smash, myself included!! I went in completely blind so I wasn't expecting some bitch fight that apparently people wanted. The beginning of the show was dull, but once Susan Proctor came in and everything started going to $hit, it really took off for me. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

i haven’t seen Versailles yet, theres too much off broadway stuff im trying to get to first.  Theres many months left to see Versailles, I’ll see it in the slower winter months. 

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 2:13pm

Little Nub said: "I know plenty of people who enjoyed Smash, myself included!! I went in completely blind so I wasn't expecting some bitch fight that apparently people wanted. The beginning of the show was dull, but once Susan Proctor came in and everything started going to $hit, it really took off for me. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

i haven’t seen Versailles yet, theres too much off broadway stuff im trying to get to first. Theres many months left to see Versailles, I’ll see it in the slower winter months."

Is there? Many months left?

[JSquared2]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 2:34pm

Little Nub said: "I know plenty of people who enjoyed Smash, myself included!! I went in completely blind so I wasn't expecting some bitch fight that apparently people wanted. The beginning of the show was dull, but once Susan Proctor came in and everything started going to $hit, it really took off for me. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

i haven’t seen Versailles yet, theres too much off broadway stuff im trying to get to first. Theres many months left to see Versailles, I’ll see it in the slower winter months."

 

This has GOT to be (yet) another Broadway Flash burner account.

Updated On: 11/10/25 at 02:34 PM

[quizking101]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 4:04pm

CoffeeBreak said: "WorldWithoutYou said: "As an out of towner who hasn’t had the (dis)pleasure of catching this show, I’ve rather surprisedto hear the response it’s gotten. Namely, how did Michael Arden create such a mess? Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t he at LEAST been nominated for every show he’s ever directed on Broadway, and had successes with his non-Broadway as well? He has never missed before. And sure, maybe he was bound to misfire eventually, but the gist I’ve gotten is that the show seems to lack any sense of concept or messaging, which are the specific strengths of Arden’s that have given him such an impressive track record. I can’t seem to wrap my head around the fact that he would direct such a toothless show."

This is his first Broadway show that is new and he developed from the beginning. The others were revivals or already developed."

To Arden’s credit, the material itself is awful - even the best director couldn’t sculpt a clay pot out of this pile of s#!+

[JSquared2]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 5:18pm

quizking101 said: "CoffeeBreak said: "WorldWithoutYou said: "As an out of towner who hasn’t had the (dis)pleasure of catching this show, I’ve rather surprisedto hear the response it’s gotten. Namely, how did Michael Arden create such a mess? Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t he at LEAST been nominated for every show he’s ever directed on Broadway, and had successes with his non-Broadway as well? He has never missed before. And sure, maybe he was bound to misfire eventually, but the gist I’ve gotten is that the show seems to lack any sense of concept or messaging, which are the specific strengths of Arden’s that have given him such an impressive track record. I can’t seem to wrap my head around the fact that he would direct such a toothless show."

This is his first Broadway show that is new and he developed from the beginning. The others were revivals or already developed."

To Arden’s credit, the material itself is awful - even the best director couldn’t sculpt a clay pot out of this pile of s#!+"

 

Well then he (or at least his reps) should have had the good sense to turn down the show.  It's not like he needs the work (or the money)! It'll definitely tarnish his brand.

 

[CoffeeBreak]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 5:21pm

Agreed.  It's the first for him to shepherd and shape from the beginning and yet another to not recoup at extreme costs.

Updated On: 11/10/25 at 05:21 PM

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 7:37pm

I can’t imagine Michael Arden - or any director for that matter - turning down the opportunity to develop and direct Stephen Schwartz’s newest (and sadly, probably last) musical. He probably knew it wasn’t working but thought/hoped he could save it. And of course he needed the money - he may have two Tony Awards, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s rollling in dough. 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 8:41pm

The morning after, the culpability for disaster here feels so organic to the unsuitability of subject chosen for a musical play, and the better critics -- notably Feldman and Teeman in the Daily Beast - strongly support it. The reviews do not suggest that more development, selection of different moments to musicalize, tighter control over the narrative or any other after-the-fact corrections would offer fixes. Though not universal, the consensus finds the piece's unworkability tied to its DNA: few if any people want to spend an evening in the company of this particular woman. Nice enough songs sung by a gifted performer are ultimately irrelevant.

If Arden and Schwartz are to blame for not taking leadership roles, pulling the plug after Boston, Chenoweth is arguably as responsible. She's more than talent for hire: a producer who is selling this product with her name, reputation, and larger-than-life theatrical persona. I'm not singling her out for attack, just pointing out: a posse of smart, thoughtful creatives made a series of wrongheaded decisions together. I'm not sure that this debacle can be laid at the feet of one collaborator. 

[chernjam]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 8:58pm

Auggie27 said: "The morning after, the culpability for disaster here feels so organic to the unsuitability ofsubject chosen for a musical play,and the better critics-- notably Feldman and Teeman in the Daily Beast - strongly support it. The reviews do not suggest that more development, selection of different moments to musicalize, tighter control over the narrative or any other after-the-fact corrections would offer fixes. Though not universal, the consensus finds the piece's unworkability tied to itsDNA: few if any people want to spend an evening in the company of this particular woman. Nice enough songs sung by a gifted performer areultimately irrelevant.

If Arden and Schwartz areto blame for not takingleadership roles,pulling the plug after Boston, Chenoweth is arguably as responsible. She's more than talent for hire:a producer who is selling this product with her name, reputation, and larger-than-life theatrical persona. I'm not singling her out for attack, just pointing out: a posse of smart, thoughtful creativesmade a series of wrongheaded decisions together. I'm not sure that this debacle can be laid at the feet of one collaborator."

Yeah I was surprised to see that Kristin was also a producer for this.  More knowledgeable people on here can share whether a star of a Broadway musical is also a producer is as rare as I think.  It's interesting to see how often that clouds judgment for creatives (I'm thinking how much better things have gone for Andrew Lloyd Webber when he's simply a creative and not a producer). 

[blug]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 9:21pm

We will have no idea what was going on behind the scenes of this one until somebody starts squealin'.  

[Observation]

Posted: 11/10/25 at 10:22pm

I'm interested to see if there will be any hasty speeches at closing curtain like we've seen from producers in the past. Will we be told that the political climate just didn't get it? Or will someone acknowledge, somewhere along the way, this project took a turn. I'm inclined to think the real Jackie Siegel got too involved and influenced decisions. I do think there is a great story that could have matched the moment we're now experiencing somewhere. The fact that they aren't performing at Thanksgiving Parade makes me wonder if they know they're in trouble? If I were opening a new musical (very aware that I am not) so close to the holiday, I'd want something to get eyes on the show. The whole marketing for this show is a bit absurd to me as well, and the selected clips they're posting are not it.

I think Arden will fair OK from this, as someone mentioned earlier, I can't blame him for taking an opportunity to direct a brand new Stephen Schwartz musical. I had the funny thought today, Andy Mientus' character in SMASH would have obsessed over this show. 

I wonder how Kristen will respond, I imagine it will be some time before we see her back on Broadway. I wonder if she'd consider replacing a role at some point in the future? I imagine both her and Idina have got to be exhausted carrying vehicles like this. Given enough time and the correct role, they could become the event casting a show may need.

I also am really excited to hear some Sherie Rene Scott recordings on Nov 25.

Updated On: 11/10/25 at 10:22 PM

[AlexMiller2]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 5:35am

it’s quite a spectacle. Kristin Chenoweth is perfectly cast as Jackie Siegel; she balances the over-the-top glamour with real vulnerability. Stephen Schwartz’s score feels very classic Schwartz,  melodic, theatrical, and emotional,  though a few numbers could use tightening.

Michael Arden’s direction keeps the tone shifting smoothly between satire and empathy, which is no easy feat given the subject. The design team really went all in,  it’s visually stunning, with just the right touch of gaudiness to reflect Jackie’s world.

That said, the second act drags a bit once the financial crisis hits. Some of the dramatic beats felt repetitive, but overall it’s a fascinating piece about the illusion of the American Dream.

Curious what others thought,  do you think it works better as a critique of wealth or as a character study of Jackie?

 

Updated On: 11/11/25 at 05:35 AM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 8:29am

"Michael Arden’s direction keeps the tone shifting smoothly between satire and empathy."

Question posed - oppositional to the consensus on boards and now in print and cyberspace - by someone who joined this site yesterday? 

Updated On: 11/11/25 at 08:29 AM

[GottaGetAGimmick420]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 9:00am

AlexMiller2 said: "it’s quite a spectacle. Kristin Chenoweth is perfectly cast as Jackie Siegel; she balances the over-the-top glamour with real vulnerability. Stephen Schwartz’s score feels very classic Schwartz,melodic, theatrical, and emotional,though a few numbers could use tightening.

Michael Arden’s direction keeps the tone shifting smoothly between satire and empathy, which is no easy feat given the subject. The design team really went all in,it’s visually stunning, with just the right touch of gaudiness to reflect Jackie’s world.

That said, the second act drags a bit once the financial crisis hits. Some of the dramatic beats felt repetitive, but overall it’s a fascinating piece about the illusion of the American Dream.

Curious what others thought,do you think it works better as a critique of wealth or as a character study of Jackie?

"

How many more burners do you guys need to make? This can't be one crazy person -- part of this has to be the younger and inexperienced co-producers feelings as though they should fight online for their shows

[CoffeeBreak]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 9:21am

chernjam said: "Auggie27 said: "

Yeah I was surprised to see that Kristin was also a producer for this. More knowledgeable people on here can share whether a star of a Broadway musical is also a producer is as rare as I think. It's interesting to see how often that clouds judgment for creatives (I'm thinking how much better things have gone for Andrew Lloyd Webber when he's simply a creative and not a producer)."

Arden is also a producer.

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 10:10am

east side story said: "What happens when KC starts missing shows? Her attendance gets spotty after the flash of opening night is in the rear view."

What show(s) did she have spotty attendance post-opening? This isn’t true of Wicked, Promises, or Twentieth Century…

[BJR]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 10:44am

CoffeeBreak said: "Arden is also a producer."

Wow, this is a lot of creatives on the producing team. 

[east side story]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 1:11pm

GiantsInTheSky2 said: "east side story said: "What happens when KC starts missing shows? Her attendance gets spotty after the flash of opening night is in the rear view."

What show(s) did she have spotty attendance post-opening? This isn’t true of Wicked, Promises, or Twentieth Century…"

Categorically false.
 

Example: She was in Wicked for 9 months. Laura Bell Bundy was her original standby, and by her own admission and my memory, she performed the role over 45 times. KC was out for two weeks to do Candide at Lincoln Center, took at least one week of vacation, and the rest her good old fashioned call-outs. That’s over a month of missed performances.

[JSquared2]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 1:23pm

east side story said: "GiantsInTheSky2 said: "east side story said: "What happens when KC starts missing shows? Her attendance gets spotty after the flash of opening night is in the rear view."

What show(s) did she have spotty attendance post-opening? This isn’t true of Wicked, Promises, or Twentieth Century…"

Categorically false.


Example: She was in Wicked for 9 months. Laura Bell Bundy was her original standby, and by her own admission and my memory, she performed the role over 45 times. KC was out for two weeks to do Candide at Lincoln Center, took at least one week of vacation, and the rest her good old fashioned call-outs. That’s over a month of missed performances."

 

You are being disingenuous with your reasoning (and your math skills).  The 2 weeks for CANDIDE and the 1 week of vacation were contractual -- so that's 24 performances right there.  That leaves 21 missed performances over 9 months -- or just 2-3 shows a month that she missed. Those are stats that we would DIE for these days.

[JSquared2]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 1:27pm

chernjam said: "Auggie27 said: "The morning after, the culpability for disaster here feels so organic to the unsuitability ofsubject chosen for a musical play,and the better critics-- notably Feldman and Teeman in the Daily Beast - strongly support it. The reviews do not suggest that more development, selection of different moments to musicalize, tighter control over the narrative or any other after-the-fact corrections would offer fixes. Though not universal, the consensus finds the piece's unworkability tied to itsDNA: few if any people want to spend an evening in the company of this particular woman. Nice enough songs sung by a gifted performer areultimately irrelevant.

If Arden and Schwartz areto blame for not takingleadership roles,pulling the plug after Boston, Chenoweth is arguably as responsible. She's more than talent for hire:a producer who is selling this product with her name, reputation, and larger-than-life theatrical persona. I'm not singling her out for attack, just pointing out: a posse of smart, thoughtful creativesmade a series of wrongheaded decisions together. I'm not sure that this debacle can be laid at the feet of one collaborator."

Yeah I was surprised to see that Kristin was also a producer for this. More knowledgeable people on here can share whether a star of a Broadway musical is also a producer is as rare as I think. It's interesting to see how often that clouds judgment for creatives (I'm thinking how much better things have gone for Andrew Lloyd Webber when he's simply a creative and not a producer)."

 

When in recent memory has ALW not been a producer on one of his shows?  Michael Harrison runs his producing arm, and I think he and/or ALW have been a lead producer on all of his shows in the past 20 years or so -- even JELLICLE at PAC. 

[Kad]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 1:33pm

east side story said: "GiantsInTheSky2 said: "east side story said: "What happens when KC starts missing shows? Her attendance gets spotty after the flash of opening night is in the rear view."

What show(s) did she have spotty attendance post-opening? This isn’t true of Wicked, Promises, or Twentieth Century…"

Categorically false.

Example: She was in Wicked for 9 months. Laura Bell Bundy was her original standby, and by her own admission and my memory, she performed the role over 45 times. KC was out for two weeks to do Candide at Lincoln Center, took at least one week of vacation, and the rest her good old fashioned call-outs. That’s over a month of missed performances."

We're keeping score on her attendance from 20 years ago? I don't recall there being many issues in 20th Century or Promises Promises. 

Updated On: 11/11/25 at 01:33 PM

[chernjam]

Posted: 11/11/25 at 1:54pm

JSquared2 said: "chernjam said: Yeah I was surprised to see that Kristin was also a producer for this. More knowledgeable people on here can share whether a star of a Broadway musical is also a producer is as rare as I think. It's interesting to see how often that clouds judgment for creatives (I'm thinking how much better things have gone for Andrew Lloyd Webber when he's simply a creative and not a producer)."



When in recent memory hasALW not been a producer on one of his shows? Michael Harrison runs his producing arm, and I think he and/or ALW have been a lead producer on all of his shows in the past 20 years or so -- even JELLICLE at PAC."

I could be wrong, but I thought that the recent revivals of Evita, Sunset Blvd. and even Jellicle Ball were done "in arrangement" with RUG  where ALW would have been listed as one of the producers but that others were basically the lead in all of those.  Cinderella/Bad Cinderella would have been one of the ones where ALW and RUG was still the lead - which speaks for itself