WAR HORSE Reviews

So is BroadwayWorld no longer putting show logos up on opening Days? Have not seen them for "Anything Goes" or "MotherF**ker.."---- now, no "War Horse". Just asking!

Never say "Break a leg" to a horse or a dancer

Terry Teachout is negative. He says the puppetry is stunning but the play is crap. He hits the nail on the head by saying that the play misses the point and feels not authentic.

"The synopsis of "War Horse" with which this review began is all you need to know about the events of the play, which is a straight-off-the-rack pageant of sibling rivalry, youthful rebellion, crazy courage and folk songs. Since critical etiquette forbids the revelation of surprises, even when they're not surprising, suffice it to say that what happens thereafter is a cross between "Black Beauty" and "Saving Private Ryan." Small wonder that Steven Spielberg is turning "War Horse" into a movie-only without the puppetry. That, however, will be like performing "La Boheme" without the music, since the puppetry is the point of the show.

...

The fundamental flaw of "War Horse" is that Nick Stafford, who wrote the script "in association" (that's how the credit reads) with South Africa's Handspring Puppet Company, has taken a book that was written for children and tried to give it the expressive weight of a play for adults. Not surprisingly, Mr. Morpurgo's plot can't stand the strain. Dramatic situations that work perfectly well in the context of the book play like Hollywood cliches onstage. In the first act, the craftsmanship is so exquisite that this doesn't matter-much-but things go downhill fast after intermission. The really big problem is the last scene, about which, once again, the drama critics' code commands silence. This much must be said, though: A play that is so forthright about the horrors of war owes its audience a more honest ending." YES!!!! Thank you!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704529204576257154004608860.html

Updated On: 4/14/11 at 05:24 PM

That's basically my opinion. The production is fantastic. The puppetry astounding. Its sheer epicness is exhilarating.

The script is sappy, sentimental, and when the horses aren't on stage I found it hard to care. It's a play that cannot live on past its initial production.

---

Everyone I know who has seen it has felt the same way. I'm glad I'm saw it, simply because of the production. I saw it in London over a year ago, and I cannot muster a slight desire to see it again.

Even as an animal-in-peril story (basically the most emotional manipulative story you can have), I found it lacking.

---

I also feel the show's only draw is its epic scale and puppetry. The play is sentimental crap. There is not a single developed character. But the positives about this production are MORE than enough reason to see it.

I disagree. Going into the show, I expected a great production, but I didn't expect to be that emotionally affected by the show. I found myself caring about the story as well. Yes, some of the characters were a little one dimensional (I wish they did a bit more with Billy) but I thought the simplicity of it is what made it so relatable and beautiful. They are characters that everyone can relate to (even disregarding the background of the War). Because they're characters that everyone knows, they didn't need to be too developed.

Hollywood Reporter is incredibly positive: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/war-horse-theater-review-178714

"It’s easy to see what attracted Steven Spielberg to British children’s author Michael Morpugo’s novel War Horse. But it’s hard to imagine how the screen version, due in December, can improve upon the thrilling experience of this stage adaptation, which is as emotionally stirring, visually arresting and compellingly told as anything on the filmmaker’s resumé."

---

Updated On: 4/14/11 at 08:37 PM

Brantley is mixed to positive (mostly positive with good things to say about the production, but less loving statements about the play):

"The show’s storybook sensibility is enhanced by projections of drawings by Ms. Smith on what looks like an outsize strip of torn paper, which fluidly convey shifts of time and setting. After Joey is sold by Albert’s father to a cavalry regiment bound for France, the production’s look segues from idyll to nightmare, with harrowing images of walking corpses, enveloping shadows and death-machine tanks and guns.

The human factor in the war-is-hell scenes (which feature a horse-loving German officer, played by Peter Hermann) is less convincingly drawn, incorporating clichés that have been staples of combat-theme films since the dawn of movies. Some of the melodramatic plot turns used here were old when David Belasco started out. And though the show has been trimmed and tightened since I saw it in London in 2009, at more than two and a half hours, it starts to feel ponderously long."

http://theater.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/theater/reviews/war-horse-from-national-theater-at-lincoln-center-review.html?ref=theater

I think to call War Horse a children's show is a mistake. I understand that it's based on a children's book, but on the darkness and fear factor alone, it's definitely not a terribly child-friendly piece, let alone one meant for kids. I've heard of a few instances in which people thought it was a children's show, though I'm disappointed to see that perpetuated in press. I know the puppets pre-existed from some kind of children's theater, but it seems like that's mixing people up.

---

NY Daily News is a 5-star rave.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/2011/04/15/2011-04-15_it_behooves_you_to_see_war_horse.html?r=entertainment

---

I loved it. I found it intense on two levels; the cruelty of war and the love of an animal and that animal. The relationship between the boy and his horse was something I related to on many levels, being a animal lover.

---