XANADU Reviews

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:10pm

Since I'm the de-facto new review poster, I'll just save this for when the newspapers start posting.

[mominator]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:12pm

I am a bit worried about reviews. Does anyone know who the Times sent?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:27pm

Audrey, Cindi, and Randi loved it.

Audrey was "blown away," while Cindi thought it was "a great show," and Randi says it's "a lot of fun."

http://www.broadway.com/gen/general.aspx?ci=550242

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:28pm

^ Big surprise.

[Born To Reign]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:29pm

...and that's good enough for me! If Audrey likes it, it can't be bad... right?

I also LOVE that Cindi and Randi are both "with an 'I'"

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:30pm

.... and reviews from real critics please.

[Sondheim Geek]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:35pm

I think her name should be Audri

[Princeton78]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:37pm

They all seemed to enjoy it, but with hesitation. I think the critics will respond similarly, trashing the writers and creative team, but praising the cast for a fun night at the theater.

[Born To Reign]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:39pm

...which, unfortunately, they couldn't do for Legally Blonde. I mean, I could tell the reviewers liked it in spite of themselves. Why all the hate, yet all the love for Xanadu? Ugh, I will never know.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:44pm

No matter how bad the reviews are for Xanadu, one thing to keep in perspective:

They set out to make it intentionally bad.


Born To Reign - because there are problems in Legally Blonde. There are problems in Xanadu, but I seem to think the creatives set out to create them. Updated On: 7/10/07 at 06:44 PM

[Born To Reign]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 6:47pm

But does that make it okay? If you sell me sh!t, it doesn't make it better that you're TELLING me it's sh!t, it's still sh!t.

And I don't think Legally Blonde's problems are any worse than most shows. But that's just my opinion (obviously)

[chinkie azn jai]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:00pm

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/Living/theater_reviews.jsp

NY1 is up.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:02pm

"If one must adapt the stupendously awful Olivia Newton John movie “Xanadu” for the stage, and it's hard to imagine why anyone would want to, it's at least in the right hands. Douglas Carter Beane's book is a perfectly-pitched parody in Christopher Ashley's infectiously campy production featuring some of the year's most comically inspired performances.

And while it's awfully light fare for Broadway, considering the amount of laughs you get per dollar spent, it's a comedy bargain.

“Xanadu” may be a lot of fun, but that doesn't make it great theatre, more of a guilty summertime pleasure. I still question the wisdom of doing this, but it does prove that, given the right talents, anything can fly on Broadway."

From NY1.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:04pm

“Xanadu” may be a lot of fun, but that doesn't make it great theatre, more of a guilty summertime pleasure. I still question the wisdom of doing this, but it does prove that, given the right talents, anything can fly on Broadway.

This quote might sum up this whole event PERFECTLY.
Updated On: 7/10/07 at 07:04 PM

[mominator]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:04pm

Looks pretty positive.

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:16pm

But seriously...who goes into Xanadu looking for good theater??

Updated On: 7/10/07 at 07:16 PM

[bjh2114]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:23pm

Variety is most definitely a positive review from David Rooney.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117934132.html?categoryid=33&cs=1

The only criticism seems to be for Tony Roberts as Danny, though it says he's better as Zeus, which I agree with.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:26pm

Why do they ALL insist on mentioning the "horrible crime" that is the movie?! Just write about the show for gosh sake's! The two shouldn't even be compared.

[Born To Reign]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:27pm

Not to beat a dead horse, but it's going to happen. How many comparisons were made between LBB and Reese Witherspoon?

Unfair? probably. But that's how it goes.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:28pm

It's kind of hard not to mention the movie when it was the spring board for the concept. It's like not mentioning the documentary Grey Gardens or the Wendekind play Spring Awakening. It's kinda necessary. Plus the critics seem to be saying "Don't be fooled by the badness of the movie. The show is good." What's wrong with that?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:31pm

The comparisons with Reese Witherspoon were expected...especially after seeing Laura Bundy's performance, which paled in comparison. Butler's performance was as good, if not better, than Newton-John's.

Butler has what Bundy lacks: star quality.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:34pm

Nothing is wrong with mentioning it, but I think most of the populus gets the point. Anyway, if people are reminded of the beyond horrible movie, they might think the concept is beyond repairing. (That's what I thought at first)

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:37pm

'Whatever the show's future, Beane and the young producing team of Broadway neophytes have made it a guilt-free pleasure to visit "a place where nobody dared to go."'

Woo hoo! A rave!

[bjh2114]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 7:39pm

"Anyway, if people are reminded of the beyond horrible movie, they might think the concept is beyond repairing. (That's what I thought at first)"

Katurian, that's exactly why the critics ARE mentioning it. People are being reminded of the horrible movie just from the title of the show, so the critics are saying that the concept is not only beyond repair, but pretty good. They don't want people to be left assuming that it's just the wretched movie on stage.

[mominator]

Posted: 7/10/07 at 8:01pm

Well so far so good!