Three Penny Flop- Page 3

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 3:26am

"To me, that means the story wasn't told"

Isn't that what they use previews for? I'm not saying you are wrong... your criticism is quite rational and clearly stated (which can not be said for most others)... or that it can be fixed... but... isn't fixing story clarity one of things previews or going out of town is for?

Also, the comments regarding previews from Michael Bennet are pretty disturbing to me. Yea, you pay full price... but they are previews... most always clearly labeled... and the PURPOSE of a preview is work out all the kinks and fine tune performances... so knocking a show during previews, while certainly your right, is kinda misguided and just sorta smells of bitchy-ness. If you don't want to give the show a chance... don't see it in previews.

Lastly...
"...as far as expectations, many people today seem to have an idea in their head of what a production SHOULD be and if it is not, they aren't willing to accept the director's vision or the playwright's work..."

I think this is a really spot on observation. It seems like a lot of people on this board have said "Oh well Threepenny Opera is supposed to be..." Why dislike the production because of what it doesn't do? Why not like it or dislike according to what appears on stage... not what you miss? I do understand that there is a certain integrity to a peice that should be maintained... but... it seems like a lot of the dislike of this revival... and many others... has a lot more to do with the reviewer's expectations and not the productions short commings.

kmc

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 3:32am

Go see TARZAN, then let me hear you complain.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 9:41am

the shills have died out this week. i wonder if they've given up.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 9:43am

not for Tarzan and The Wedding Singer...they are as vocal as ever.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 10:22am

oh i meant the 3 penny shills. there's some Drowsey ones out there as well. if you attack someone who doesn't share your "good" opinion of a show, you are a shill in my book. the 3 Penny ones were pretty nasty. all you can really do is put a show before the public, talk it up and let the chips fall. look at everyone who can't stand WICKED and it has done tremendously because it reaches people. ok, SOME people.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 11:12am

Well shill or not, apparently the Roundabout is expecting the reviews for THREEPENNY to be divisive at the very least.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 11:46am

I'll be going to Three Penny soon.
Regarding the shills, I happen to know that there are assistants in at least 2 PR and production offices that come on the web to rep shows -- they have "talking points" etc and instructions to "discredit" people with opposing views.
A show really makes it's own fortune based on what's on the stage, not what is spread over the web. If something is boring or bad, the chorus is pretty loud and damning. A flak doesn't "love" the show, they're just trying to dominate opinion, which is not compelling. The voice of someone who passionately believes in a show, despite what might be said about it, carries a lot of energy and is persuasive and interesting.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 12:02pm

Its fairly easy to tell a shill - at least on BWW. A poster, who say joined in January 04, and has posted maybe thirty messages in three years - 75 percent of them about one show in particular...well, you do the math.

I don't actually care about shills one way or another - an opinion is an opinion - and its a great marketing strategy - I always just argue to keep in perspective that not every praise or diatribe you read is from an uninterested party.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 12:11pm

it's the aggression i can't stand.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 12:13pm

Well, fortunately the aggression usually comes in the way of not well written, extremely unrational posts...see Munk's Tarzan review for examples.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 12:15pm

and that the shill, i mean poster, joined the first day of previews for that particular show.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 12:25pm

Sometimes that too, but the marketing companies are getting a little more savvy about that - a lot of shills have had accounts for years. This is a part time profession, remember? :)

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 12:38pm

Some of the negative views of shows are just as nasty and disgusting in their attacks on anyone who disagrees.

[mrkringas]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 1:24pm

"it's a show, not a term paper. the director must entertain."

Rubbish. Last time I checked there are some people who believe in challenging theatre that tests the mind.

Not seen this production so cant comment but not everyone likes an evening with Jerry Herman or Wicked.

I love musical theatre and adore high quality whether its Sondheim, Herman, Schwartz or someone new. However there are plenty of people I know who prefer to spend their evenings watching something that doesnt demand applause after every number.

Anyway I didnt mean to snap but to belittle something for not being entertaining is to miss the point.

[Brennan88]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 1:29pm

You said it, Penguin! (Although I can kind of understand the anger when you've just spent a hundred plus bucks on something you wound up hating.)

I hope I haven't been mistaken for a Three Penny Shill. It's true I did join right after I saw the show but only because I enjoyed the production and wanted to put in my two cents...or three cents, in this case. I've tried to be respectful while disagreeing with some of the detractors and have made comments on several other non-three penny threads.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 4/7/06 at 1:49pm

i believe you were quoting me kringas, and i was responding to posts that decried an audiences' lack of familiarity with brechtian staging, and whether or not this particular director fulfilled the exigencies of brechtian staging. (Certain folks were attacking posters who didn't like the show because they didn't know brecht) my point was that a show must reach people, provoke them, etc and should be evaluated on how effective the show has presented it's ideas and engaged the audience, not on how well the director has duplicated some set of aesthetic ideals. And even if an audience has no idea who brecht is, never taken a survey course in theater history, they should be able to "get" the show with their hearts and minds if the show is good.
Entertainment doesn't have to be "Happy happy joy joy". Entertainment is provocative, challenging and interesting.
I think you've taken a narrow view of the word "entertainment" where it was not meant at all.

Updated On: 4/7/06 at 01:49 PM