Who are the most important critics?

[Up In One]

Posted: 3/15/14 at 10:10pm

With all this talk of Rocky's demise with several rave reviews under its belt I'm wondering which critics are considered the most important ? Which have no impact? Is it truly an aggregate? Do the pull quotes mean more depending on who they come from?

I'm thinking these are the most important...

The NY Times
Associated Press - with the loss of local reviewers the AP review appears in many papers and on many sites across the country
Time Magazine - National
NY Daily News
NY Post
Newsday
Bergen Record these last four cover the metro area papers

[Melissa25]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 1:57am

Do you even have to ask? It's Whizzer!

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 2:08am

Corinne's Corner

[oasisjeff]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 2:32am

Rocky's demise? That seems a bit premature... if critics alone could kill a show Wicked, Mamma Mia, and many others wouldn't still be playing.

[RaisedOnMusicals]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 4:20am

All kidding aside, I love the Eiz and have a tremendous amount of respect for his knowledge of the theater, which puts mine to shame. His reviews are extremely intelligent and well written. But having said that, I do wonder why he writes his reviews based on the first (or a very early) preview, and then does not go back and write a second review of the show once it's frozen. I am not entirely sure what the point is of his thoughtful reviews, as articulate as they are. If it is to influence others as to whether a show might be worth the investment of time and money, then I ask whether or not that's entirely fair. How many authors or composers would like someone to review their first drafts?

I understand that this is Wizzer's trademark, so to speak. But he is such a talented critic, at least in my view, that I wish that he would write reviews based on the show that opens, at least as a follow up. If he did, I'd certainly pay more attention to his ultimate opinions. Yes, The Wiz has carved out a nitch for himself here, but I'd hope he'd trust his own ability enough to engage in serious criticism. I know I trust his ability, but I just have trouble taking anyone's reviews of first previews seriously.

[JayG 2]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 7:19am

Tourists- and they have lousy, middlebrow taste.

[WickedGinger]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 9:53am

Surely the biggest critic is the paying public??? Bad ticket sales then no show… Good ticket sales then guaranteed the show will have a long run.

[oasisjeff]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 12:02pm

Whenever the critics are negative, they are blaming for killing a show's chances. But then why isn't Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder sold out every show? They couldn't say enough good things about it... can't have it both ways.

[Up In One]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 1:20pm

Agree Oasis but they do help create the hype and form perception.

Look at Pippin the producers picked a very small theatre, 1000 seats, and you would have thought after the reviews it got every seat would have been sold at premium prices. There hasn't been a week where you couldn't find regular or or most times TKTS priced seats for Pippin. The last few weeks it hasn't broken even.

[oasisjeff]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 1:25pm

When Pippin first opened, it was sold out often, and they were selling standing room tickets.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 1:47pm

I don't think critics make a show a hit with their praise. How many shows on the longest running shows actually got a critics pick by The New York Times, but on the other hand I think the critics will hasten the demise of a show that is poor.

[Up In One]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 2:03pm

But nowhere near as sold out or selling as many premium seats as a Kinky Boots proving that reviews alone do not make a hit. Aside from the Times Pippin got the kind of across the board raves and awards not seen in years which should have kept its grosses in line with KB. The tiny house should have ensured SRO every night. Hopefully it's just the winter months being unkind to it otherwise they may regret not bringing in names sooner. Aside from Chicago revivals never do well so they are doing better than most revivals.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 3:19pm

I don't really think critics matter for the most part. People see a show, then talk to their friends and family about it. If it's good, they see the show, they tell people, etc. When someone wants to see a show because they liked the book, movie, or a particular performer, no critic will prevent that from happening.

[Parsley]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 3:42pm

The paying public.
I dont think the journalist critics are that influential any more and can easily be ignored. Some are just pompous hacks who seem to live only to spout their own self- importance.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 4:13pm

The tourists make or break a show.

[Up In One]

Posted: 3/16/14 at 9:47pm

A show needs to hang around long enough for the Tourists to catch wise so the early months depend on the locals and fanatics like us so the reviews are important to get the show established.