WICKED - why did the critics give it mediocre/bad reviews? ?- Page 2

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 2:39pm

The critics are a bunch of stupid ass idiots that have no purpose. Think for yourselves, people. Don't read their bull**** to decide if you should go to a show or not.

[MusicPos2]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 2:59pm

Also, Idina has really grown a lot in this role. She wasn't anything special in the beginning, now, unless she's having a bad night, she's just about the best there is. I think that accounts for the reviews of her. When I saw the show the first time, Kristin definitely outshined Idina.

[Plum]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:01pm

Critics have plenty of purpose- good ones, at least. Not everyone can afford to go to every show and judge it for themselves. Good critics don't just say what they think- they say why they think so. You can determine for yourself whether or not you agree with that reasoning.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:03pm

As well, critics are the guides of taste. Their opinions, whether we like them or not, usually constitute (in the long run) what counts as quality and what doesn't, and they influence how the artform evolves. We might not agree with them, but their constructive criticism changes the artform for the better.

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:03pm

They can still give shows a bad rep when someone could have gone anyway and loved it. It happens all the time and its their fault.

[Plum]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:12pm

So? I trust them (well, the good ones) more than I trust Joe Schmoe on the message boards- no offense to anyone here. Take Wicked. Most people here like Wicked. Heck, most people in general like Wicked. Even my own sister likes Wicked. Me? I thought it was quite mediocre, and given what I was expecting, a real disappointment. Idina Menzel does nothing for me. The score is a so-so mess with a couple of highlights. Wicked is a show that got tons of popular support despite a not-so-good critical reception. You'd think that would prove your point, bronxboundexpress. But to me, the critics were right.

I don't like the whole idea of "the common people" somehow always knowing better than the evil bastard critics. Sometimes critics are wrong, but the "little people" are wrong at least as often. At least the critics usually have good grammar.

You can't see every show- you've got to filter and choose somehow. Or at least I have to. And I think critical reception is an important thing- though not the only thing- to take into account. Updated On: 7/22/04 at 03:12 PM

[Becky]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:21pm

So in summary, Les Miz was "dismissed" by London critics (not really the same as a pan), and received rave reviews from New York critics.

But the point was that the reviews were bad - bad enough that Cameron joked about having to sell one of his homes - when it initially opened (doesn't matter what it went on to do in NY). I was just pointing out that the critics' opinions don't always reflect how the audience views a show.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:22pm

That's right. If there were not critics and people trusted Joe Schmoe, quality on Broadway would fall like a brick, and we'd be bombarded with more Mamma Mias, Wickeds and Catses.

I may not agree with critics some of the time, but the establishment of theatre criticism is important - otherwise we might never see challenging or complex work, and such work may never be produced.

Updated On: 7/22/04 at 03:22 PM

[Plum]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:23pm

In that case, I think most people didn't give a **** about how closely the musical resembled the book - kind of like Wicked now - because most of them hadn't read it. So the audience's perception of the show was different from the critics' from the very beginning- they were judging differently all the way through. Updated On: 7/22/04 at 03:23 PM

[wickedfan2]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:27pm

Plum - I certainly enjoyed reading your post...I usually decide on what to see BEFORE reading a critic review and read their comments AFTER. However, they ARE the experts I guess so when I'm undecided I let them sway me.


Blue- tried.. still can't figure out how to have a nice Cheno/Idina icon

MusicPos - I didn't know that about Idina. I'm glad she gave that role some humppppppf because I got chills hearding the CD I can imagine in person..

[Kelliexo90]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:37pm

Even though the book was better than the play, the play has much more audience appeal than the book. See, I think if they had based it solely on the book it would have gotten more critical acclaim and about the same audience appeal. The thing about the book is it is very dark, they definitely would have put an age limit on it(not just for the sex parts, but just the book in general is not child friendly), and it would have been like 6 days long. I like what they have done with the play because it is happier, its a light play. Don't go into it expecting to learn any life lessons or be changed as a person(unless Cheno changing from Galinda to Glinda really moved you that much), but it is just a fun play. I also think it has gotten so much audience draw is because The Wizard of Oz is a classic, and its a clever way to twist the whole story upside down.

Overall, I disagreed with the critics. I think they judged it a bit too harshly. For the type of play it is, I think it's pretty darn good.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 3:54pm

I think they had the chance to do something really clever with the material, but decided instead to dumb it down and add a happy face to it. *sigh* There are a lot of flaws and missteps in Wicked, most of which has been discussed in other threads, so I won't go into them here. But it was a pretty disappointing work, IMO.

One more thing: I had predicted that Idina would win the Tony. But now in hindsight, I'm surprised she won over Tonya Pinkins, who delivers a singular tour-de-force performance in Caroline or Change. It was a rediculously tough race in that category this year, but Tonya seemed the more obvious choice: a powerhouse performance in a difficult role, in a challenging musical.

And just to finish off the discussion on critics, I believe if you like a show and can adequately objectively argue/explain why you liked it, then your opinion is as good as any critics.

Blue- tried.. still can't figure out how to have a nice Cheno/Idina icon

Do you have a picture prepared already? When you click on "Upload new photo", on the next screen click on the Browse button and look for your picture. Then click the Upload button. Hope that helps!

Updated On: 7/22/04 at 03:54 PM

[MusicPos2]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 4:16pm

There are those of that like Wicked that actually have more credentials than the reviewers such as degrees in Music and membership in NATS...

[BroadwayMonkey]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 4:20pm

I guess they thought it was a confection.

[robbiej]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 4:21pm

OK...I'm gonna try not to sound rude...but how is it that a degree in music and membership in the National Association of Teachers of Singing (or what have you) makes you more qualified?

We're talking about musical theatre here, not music theory.

If a degree is the qualifier, than I guess my degree in musical theatre makes me the expert.

And I say WICKED is crap!

Yay for me.

[wickedfan2]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 4:21pm

Blue - no I don't have a pic and can't figure out how or where to get one I've seen great ones on lots of boards but can't copy them.

As far as Wicked - I loved it because I never read the book and to me it was clever the way certain people turned out to be "others", because Cheno made me laugh OUTLOUD with her delivery, because Eden gave me chills on Wizard and I, because I cried when Cheno/Eden sang For good...because Defying gravity looked spectacular and was a complete surprise to my entire family...and because I loved every song and now play it at least three times a week. Costumes and choreography don't matter to me as much as songs and performance.

[NYBroadwayNY]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 7:23pm

Wow!! I can't believe there are some here arguing about critics being "right" or "wrong". Or just regular theatre goers being "qualified" to make such a review. There was even mention about having a degree to be qualified to judge a show.
Someone wrote that whatever a Professional Critic writes is just his/her own opinion of the show.

I TOTALLY AGREE! and the rest of my point.

THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG! It's YOUR OPINION. Even the so-called flaws that several of you mentioned about WICKED are nothing more than YOUR OPINION. Some say the book of the musical is mediocre. Others say it was very clever. Some say the songs are weak except for a few. Others say they are the best part. Some say they love Idina. Some say she's not that good. Some say blah, blah, blah. Some say yada, yada, yada.

IT'S ALL UP TO YOU. There are no qualifications that you must have. I'm not a BOTINIST, but I can express my opinion that roses are beautiful. You may not think so. That's your opinion.

Broadway is an artform. ART is highly subjective to each individual. There is no "perfect" show. Maybe to YOU. Because it's your opinion.

Remember, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I personally think that WICKED is one of the best shows I've ever seen. Are there weaknesses? Are there flaws? Could it be better? Not to me. If you think different, that's your opinion, once again. But don't think that because YOU see flaws in it, makes you better than me and somehow more qualified to discuss it.

[ponine24601]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 7:27pm

i totally agree with everything you just said.

[MusicPos2]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 7:30pm

First of all, my degree is not in theory it's in music education, and I focused on the musical theatre aspect. Most critics are journalists that have learned about musical theatre. My point is that these so called experts are often not: not that we shouldn't listen to them b/c a good reviewer can tell you a lot, and if you know their opinions and they explain them, you can usually tell how you will react to a show. But, please don't tell me that only people that are unqualified like Wicked because that is completely untrue!

[NYBroadwayNY]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 7:36pm

Thanks Ponine!!!!

[daynite]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 7:51pm

I'm right there w/ you guys --- NYBroadwayNY & Ponine !!!

Wicked is by far for me, one of THE BEST Original shows I have ever been lucky to experience - I saw & felt no flaws whatsoever - although they should have kept Sean McCourt as 'The Wizard' ...

Many of the posts here get so personal, when what we are talking about is Broadway ... we are all here, I assume, because we LOVE Theatre, so let's keep it light.

I bet that if any one of us, or at least most of us, could be a part of any of these productions, we would take it in a NYMinute - it's here to entertain us & we are all entertained differently ...

[Malpheba]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 8:17pm

I totally agree. I read that people thought the lyrics were disappointing. They must have had water in their ears or something. Wicked has been the most meaningful show to me, and it is the only one I have ever cried had. Maybe they just couldn't find the meaning or refused to look. Kristin and Idina were amazing and such chemistry could not be recreated if lives depended on it. I think the reviewers need to get a broom stick shoved where the sun don't shine and they'll see it ain't easy being green. They don't get it I guess. Updated On: 7/22/04 at 08:17 PM

[MusicPos2]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 8:36pm

It also really depends on when you see it. It will make you cry on any night, but as far as how much you like it, if you get it with a performer having a bad night (especially Idina), you're not going to like it so much. Take it from someone that's seen her at her worst and her best.

[Delphine]

Posted: 7/22/04 at 10:41pm

When I see a show, I don't want my opinion of it to depend on one actor/actress. I think a show needs more than just strong leads to be great. Updated On: 7/22/04 at 10:41 PM

[wickedfan2]

Posted: 7/23/04 at 11:45am

Bluewizard - I did it... yeahhhhhh...although lots of people have the same...