What kind of reviews did 'Cats', 'Phantom', and 'Les Miz' get when they first opened?

If you want, go to The New York Times' website. They have an archive of all their reviews. I am pretty sure POTO was positive.

Edit:
NYTimes Cats Review

---

Updated On: 7/9/05 at 03:06 PM

To the best of my recollection, the reviews were all "very good" to "raves" overall. But I do remember that there was a bit of sourness in many of them, since each arrived in New York following phenomenal successes in London. Critical backlash on shows that come here as ready-made smashes isn't something new. I remember the harsh criticism of Sarah Brightman in Phantom. Rude and severe. (One going so far as to say "Ms. Brightman couldn't act scared on a subway at three o'clock in the morning." I've always remembered that quote, since it was such a direct zinger!)

There were also many criticisms of the elaborate CATS set and its "partial viewing" for audiences.

Both of these negative notices trickled into the Tony Awards. Brightman wasn't nominated for her performance in Phantom, while virtually everything else was. And the Cats set lost out to the central park unit set for the play "I'm Not Rappaport" (which was an amazing effort itself).

---

It is interesting that while LES MISERABLES got raves on Broadway, it did get poor reviews in London when it first opened ( "the glums", as it was called then). Only a handful recognized the potential dramatic and emotional appeal it will eventually draw worldwide.

Margo,

I don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but could you also post the reviews for ASPECTS OF LOVE and SUNSET BOULEVARD, if you have them on file? I found Frank Rich's commentaries on Andrew Lloyd Webber's work ( CATS and PHANTOM) very interesting. Thanks.

Jo

I have Frank Rich's review of ASPECTS where he commeneted that there is more heat and excitement generated by a trip to the bank than from a visit to the Broadhurst theatre. He hated the book, the score, the set, the direction. It was an outright pan.

"Brightman wasn't nominated for her performance in Phantom, while virtually everything else was..."

With good reason, I'm afraid. Though she sang the role well, her acting was woooden Part of that is the role itself. All Christine does is react to everything aroud her.

The overall reviews of CATS, and PHANTOM were mixed to negative. CATS drew praise for its spectacle and in some papers for the music, but the reviewers felt that PHANTOM didn't live up to its hype. LES MIZ got generally positive reviews in New York (unlike the original London production which received mostly negative notices.)

ALL of these shows arrived in New York pre-sold by the London cast recordings and the hype surrounding the British stagings. This made the shows critic-proof. AUdiences had already decided they wanted to see these productions and had bought up millions of $ in tickets long before opening night.

By the time of ASPECTS OF LOVE and SUNSET BLVD. audiences were not quite as sold. SUNSET drew on the strength of Glen Close's name and the reviews were favourable enough to enable it to run 2 years. Had it not been for the power of her performance, SUNSET might have closed a lot faster. Even so, despite the length of its run it was not a financial or artistic success.

ASPECTS got terrible reviews and managed to hang on for 9 months, but it was never a big draw at the box-office.

---

Not to threadjack or anything, but I can't find a review of 'Carrie'. Does anyone remember a quote from them?

---