The Color Purple Reviews

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 6:19pm

Broadway.com is a Rave:

Jukebox musicals and chamber pieces are fine and well. Ditto theme-park spectacles and ironic lampoons. But the new musical The Color Purple reminds us what Broadway's for, and all that Broadway can be: big-hearted, broad-stroked storytelling, with the epic emotional sweep only music can conjure.

On its own terms, this deft, moving adaptation of Alice Walker's seminal feminist novel works like gangbusters; that's cause for rejoicing enough. We should also save some hallelujahs for what it represents: another alive-and-kicking incarnation of that seemingly endangered species, the straightfacedly serious book musical. A breed born with Show Boat, nurtured to adulthood by Rodgers & Hammerstein, and most recently invoked by Ragtime and Caroline, or Change, it has miraculously survived generations of deconstruction, mockery and, worst of all, indifference.

Maybe it takes outsiders and first-timers to ignore the steep odds against such a leap of faith. Though the book is by seasoned librettist Marsha Norman, the inventive, infectious score and lyrics were fashioned by an unlikely triumvirate of pop tunesmiths, Brenda Russell, Allee Willis and Stephen Bray. And director Gary Griffin, though no musical-theater neophyte, is making his Broadway debut here. They've made some choices we can quibble with, and, given the show's incendiary subject matter, even squabble over. But you'd have to have ice water in your veins not to be stirred by this unabashed paean to human resilience, and impressed by a production as masterfully executed as it is soulfully intended.



http://www.broadway.com/gen/Buzz_Story.aspx?ci=522088

Updated On: 12/1/05 at 06:19 PM

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 6:20pm

Missed it by a minute.

[Amy Archer]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 6:26pm

I've heard that the Broadway.com review may be the end of the good news.

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 6:28pm

It always makes me happy to sit back and read the Margo Channing compilations and commentary.

Thank you Margo.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 6:33pm

Talkin Broadway is Mixed-to-Negative:

"Like a paint-by-numbers portrait missing its pigment guide, the new musical The Color Purple is a staid outline of a show more notable for what it lacks than what it contains. A true artist should have taken a brush stroke or two (if not a bucket of primer) to the sorry spectacle that just opened at the Broadway, but that old axiom about washing garbage generally goes for painting it, too.

For despite the layers of high-gloss slathered over everything in sight, not a moment passes in this wayworn adaptation of Alice Walker's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel that you're not keenly aware that everything has been done better before. A black musical that opens with a spirited gospel rouser? Encores! did Purlie earlier this year. A showcase vehicle for the boundless talents of the beauteous LaChanze? Once On This Island opened at the Booth 15 years ago. An American exploration of racial and social identity unfolding over several turbulent decades? Try Show Boat, 1927.

Not that there's anything wrong with standing on others' shoulders - the greatest musical theatre talents always have, and continue to do so today. But the authors of The Color Purple - Marsha Norman (book), and Brenda Russell, Allee Willis, and Stephen Bray (music and lyrics) - haven't learned from anyone what's necessary to make this story work. Sadly, that includes Walker, whose work remains but in scant remnants scattered throughout Gary Griffin's production."


http://www.talkinbroadway.com/world/ColorPurple.html

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 6:57pm

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter is Mostly Positive:

"Emerging as a musical in far better form than might have been expected, "The Color Purple" entertains even while not fully overcoming the problems inherent in translating its sprawling story to the stage.

The show boasts many strong elements, including a terrific score encompassing blues, gospel and pop and a powerhouse cast of talented performers. But, much as with Steven Spielberg's 1985 film adaptation, the subtleties of Alice Walker's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel often are sacrificed in favor of schematic characterizations and broad sentimentality that undercut its message of female empowerment. The undeniably audience-pleasing show, while a long shot to reach major hit status, should have a decent Broadway run, thanks in no small part to Oprah Winfrey's presence as one of its producers.
_______________________________________________________________

The story line is thankfully conveyed with more humor than was present in the heavy-handed film version (the device of a comic chorus of church-lady busybodies is particularly effective in this regard), but it nonetheless has an awkward feel, especially in the more convoluted second act.

Director Gary Griffin keeps things moving at a sprightly pace, though he has some difficulty managing the show's tenuous balance of melodrama and musical ebullience. The score, composed by Brenda Russell, Allee Willis and Stephen Bray, is a highly effecting blending of such musical styles as gospel, blues and pop, faltering only with such generic ballads as the bland "Too Beautiful for Words" and the "Lion King"-style production number "African Homeland."



http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=filmNews&storyID=2005-12-01T234356Z_01_ARM185332_RTRIDST_0_FILM-STAGE-COLOR-DC.XML&archived=False

Updated On: 12/1/05 at 06:57 PM

[apdarcey]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:23pm

anytime i read a matthew murray review i feel as if i have seen a different show than he has. he compares the show to in my life and credits joseph brooks with a better score than the composers here? i'm sorry, that's not right. he says the only satisfying song is "ms. celie's pants?" wow. and "lachanze, however, is an unfortunate casualty." this man has got to be kidding. i just can't ever find it in me to respect him. if he had real issues that could be dealt with i would like it, but he just makes stuff up.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:35pm

Aren't all of his reviews negative anyways?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:36pm

He liked Jersey Boys.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:37pm

He isn't always negative.

I checked some of his others. He raves about CHICAGO every time he sees it. LOVED Wonderful Town (especially with Brooke.) He was rather kind to SWEET CHARITY also.

[apdarcey]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:38pm

i know rb. except the shows that deserve negative reviews, then he lauds them. i just don't understand what productions he sees

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:38pm

so the Weisslers pay him well then?

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:42pm

Well CHICAGO and WONDERFUL TOWN pretty much got raves across the board.

And why would the Weisslers care much about his review? He is an online critic. He's not Brantley, Barnes, etc.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:43pm

It was a joke.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:45pm

True. Did Wonderful Town make back its investment? Doesn't seem like it was a "hit"

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:53pm

Oh, Im so happy this shows getting good reviews so far!!! :)

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:58pm

...and I didnt see the appeal of WONDERFUL TOWN. The first time I saw it (with Linda Muggleston), I found it to be alright. Mildly entertaining but a uniformly excellent cast. When I saw it with Brooke, I found her to enhance the shows best aspect(s) and it was a lot better and much more entertaining. CHICAGO, however, I found to be an excellent revival (no matter who was in the cast). And I loved CHARITY. Didnt understand the mixed reviews at all. It was wonderful.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:59pm

WT ran most of the year at a loss, doing 50 - 60% attendance. Murphy missed dozens of performances which didn't help. When she was replaced by Brooke Shields there was a brief bump up, but within a month the numbers were back in the 50s. It very likely lost its entire investment.

Updated On: 12/1/05 at 07:59 PM

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:01pm

Margo: what did you think of WT?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:25pm

oh okay, just wondering. I mean it heard it was good, but it didnt seem to stick around too long. And didn't garner any awards or any of the major ones. And it didnt tour.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:27pm

It was supposed to tour (with Luci Arnez) but she really wasnt a big enough star to sell that show on the road. Most people really haven't heard of it.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:33pm

WONDERFUL TOWN is a classic. And was a HUGE smash with Rosalind Russell in the early 50s. Roz got incredible reviews for the role. Her reviews for WT are considered among the best reviews of a Broadway performer in history. Carol Channing replaced Roz and the show lost its heat, and wasn't as successful, and eventually closed.


The revival got GREAT reviews. With Donna and Brooke. But sadly just wasn't a hit with the crowds.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:42pm

I'm no Murray defender, but a friend who just saw PURPLE -- one not prone to crepe-hanging or viciousness -- said almost the same things about it. I think the show's mainstream accessibility and old fashioned (Murray's concept of recycling) craft and styling put off those awaiting, say, the next SUNDAY IN THE PARK. I think this stands to be an audience pleaser, perhaps a review-proof one like SHENENDOAH.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 9:11pm

yeah, MB, I've never heard of her, but I probably would have seen the show if it toured. Not like i'm running out to get the OBC or anything. But it intrigues me a little. Sorry for the threadjack ha.

[Testing1232]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 9:49pm

<< he says the only satisfying song is "ms. celie's pants?" >>

That was probably the one song that we couldnt stand !!