Well, that’s that. Once again “Spider-Man” makes front page headlines, this time for getting lousy reviews. Because whenever a show gets lousy reviews, naturally that’s front page news.
Particularly cited are the scathing comments from Ben Brantley of the New York Times. This, of course, spells the end. Nothing can possibly survive being shredded like that.
Brantley called it a “bloated production” that, save for the performance of one actor, otherwise “spends three hours flapping its wings without taking off…”
Oh. Wait. That’s what he said about “Wicked.” Too bad that closed right afterward.
No, about “Spider-Man,” he said, “If you take it apart ingredient by ingredient, you can only wince,” and went on to say that it was “bland, hokey, stilted, self-conscious,” and a canny “exercise in klutziness.”
Oops. I goofed. That’s what he said about “Mama Mia.” Good thing that closed quickly.
Ah. Got it. He said it is “most distinctive for its wholesale inability to hold on to a consistent tone or an internal logic…”
Dammit. No, he said that about “The Addams Family.” But it’s not like that has continued to play on Broadway.
Well, I’m sure his exact wording has been reported in plenty of other places.
Sometimes I find myself wondering what gets reviewers angrier: Shows that they feel are lousy, or the knowledge that audiences frequently don’t give a dámņ what they say.
PAD
• 
Does anyone actually pay any attention to “professional” reviewers?
I go for actual human beings and firends and family and colleagues rather then read any of the “reviews”.
For whatever reason – possibly the relatively high ticket prices of a Broadway show compared to that of, say, a movie – Broadway reviews do generally carry a LOT of weight.
.
It’s national mews because the show has become national news, as much for it’s $65 million budget and star power as for it’s accidents and problems.
.
In the end, that $65 million price tag is what makes “SM:TOD” much less likely than the others to overcome it’s obstacles. Not that it can’t or shouldn’t. Just a lot less likely.
.
It reportedly would have to have four years of sellouts to make it’s money back. With the reviews,and little evidence to show that it is fixing it’s “fixable” problems, estimates are that the show will be done by August.
.
Which I would hate to see happen. I would actually like to see it. But that’s the way it looks right now.
It’s win-win for the newspapers.
If the show does fail, they can do a post-mortem.
If it succeeds, they can run pieces on how the show defied all expectations.
And yet, the producers of the show freaked out awhile back because the reviews were being released. Obviously somebody is concerned about what the reviews are saying, regardless.
.
But then, there are delays, injuries, rewrites. None of which are fault of anybody outside the production itself. Those are the things that will ultimately doom the show.
And here’s Brantley’s review, one that’s sure to get audiences filling seats. Everybody wants to see a train wreck.
.
http://theater.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/theater/reviews/spiderman-review.html?ref=theater&pagewanted=1
I’m confused. Are you saying that reviewers shouldn’t bother giving a show they didn’t like a lousy review, because if the show is enough of a spectacle or catches the public’s fancy it’ll be a hit anyway? I assume you’re actually saying that bad reviews aren’t an indicator of popularity, which would seem pretty obvious to anyone who reads movie reviews, as well as to anyone familiar with the HL Mencken quote “No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.” 🙂
Interesting to contrast this with his Timecop review.
I’m saying the latter which is, as you say, obvious. So obvious that one is left wondering why bad reviews of a show are newsworthy, much less worthy of being reported in other venues.
.
It’s not news. It’s just more showdenfreude.
.
PAD
Is it really showdenfreude? If these are professional reviewers, then their job is to review the show. Their opinions may be worse than yours was, but you had enough problems with it that it’s not surprising to see other reviewers who liked it significantly less than you.
.
Mainly this seems like reviewers doing what reviewers do.
.
That said, I still trust your opinion on the show over any of theirs. I’m hoping that the writer they hired to redo the book basically follows what you outlined and keeps things that worked like Arachne and works on things that you said had problems, like the Geek Chorus.
But it’s not just reviewers doing what they do; it’s so-called “news reporters” that seem to feel that the reviews count as “national news”.
.
For crying out loud, I live a bit south of Seattle, and I get to read reviews of the previews of the Spider-Man musical in the papers here. “News” outlets are pretending that this is something I actually need to be informed about on a daily basis.
.
That’s not reviewing – that’s not even criticism (which is a different beast, just ask Spider Robinson); this is classic showdenfreude.
Jonathan’s response is right. It’s not the reviewers; it’s the fact that the reviews are being treated like they’re news. When was the last time you saw bad reviews treated as newsworthy?
.
PAD
PAD: “When was the last time you saw bad reviews treated as newsworthy?”
.
The last one I can think of was Waterworld, which was another “most expensive production ever” that wasn’t very good.
.
PAD, are you really surprised that Spider-Man gets more attention than anything else? Are you really surprised that something that breaks records for expense gets more attention?
.
High profile + high stakes = big story
.
This reaction isn’t out of the ordinary. It may not be a good thing that trivial nonsense is considered news while real stories are underreported, but it’s not unusual at all.
For example, look at this clip from June 14th, 2001. Remember that date, it’s significant to the clip.
.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-14-2001/i-on-news—first-family-privacy
Bad reviews won’t doom the show, obviously. Though it’s worth noting that this show costs more than all those others Brantley panned (possibly more than all of them combined), has been plagued by delays and technical problems that don’t yet appear to have been resolved, and doesn’t have big stars headlining it. I think you could easily argue that, without Nathan Lane and Bebe Neuwirth in the cast, Addams Family might very well have closed under the weight of bad buzz. Wicked had good buzz outside those bad reviews, and the mass appeal of The Wizard of Oz behind it. (Mama Mia, the goofy charm of audience interaction and upbeat ABBA songs.) Spider-Man, however, is a big name, but I don’t think its mainstream appeal comes close to matching that of Oz and related projects. And I think there just aren’t enough geeks with enough money to make Turn Off the Dark a hit. (If the enthusiasm of geeks was enough, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World would have been a hit.)
And that’s leaving out altogether the unlikelihood that TOTD will be able to mount any real touring productions, given its elaborate sets, and make back any money that way.
I won’t write it off now, especially since I haven’t seen it — and even Brantley’s only seen a work-in-progress — but it’s definitely got an uphill, twisted-in-wires battle ahead of it.
Spider-Man, however, is a big name, but I don’t think its mainstream appeal comes close to matching that of Oz and related projects.
.
Really? Here’s a challenge: Go to a park or someplace that’s very out in the open and sit there for an hour or so, and see how many people go around wearing Spider-Man t-shirts or shoes or carrying Spidey backpacks. And at the same time, count up how many people have Wizard of Oz stuff and Abba caps.
.
Do NOT underestimate just how much Spider-Man has penetrated the American consciousness or how prevalent he is.
.
PAD
Yeah, that’s just 100% backwards. Half the people in America grew up watching one Spider-Man cartoon or another. The Wizard of Oz is certainly a big cultural touchstone for Americans, but Spider-Man is definitely bigger.
Memphis is another one that got a bad review from the Times, and not only is it still playing, it won the Tony for Best Musical.
.
On the other hand, I don’t think the reviews for any of these shows were as bad as those for Spider-Man. Wicked and Mamma Mia got mixed reviews, while Spider-Man’s are almost all negative, and (correct me if I’m wrong) I don’t think any critics were calling those shows “one of the worst musicals ever,” as in the case of Spider-Man. That, combined with the show’s unusually high profile, is why this is front-page news.
Memphis is another one that got a bad review from the Times, and not only is it still playing, it won the Tony for Best Musical.
.
And for good reason: it’s an amazing show. (Sorry, but I saw it last year and it’s still stuck with me.)
.
Nothing is ever completely review-proof, but I certainly agree with Peter here that negative reviews are not exactly front page news. Here’s hoping Spider-Man is a good show.
“And for good reason: it’s an amazing show. (Sorry, but I saw it last year and it’s still stuck with me.)”
.
Oh, good, I’m seeing it in April.
Unlike the other snippets you posted, he was completely accurate about Addams Family. It was the first play I wanted to walk out of at intermission. The only thing that stopped me is remembering how much I paid for the dámņ thing.
.
3 hours and $250 I’ll never see again….
I’d say he was accurate about Wicked and Mamma Mia, too (I’m an ABBA fan, and even I think Mamma Mia is kind of lame).
Again, not the point. Rightness or wrongness doesn’t apply because it’s all opinion. The point is that “Wicked” and “Mama Mia” and “Addams Family” (and “Memphis,” thank you) all got slammed…and none of those were tossed onto the front page of newspapers or the front cover of “Entertainment Weekly,” because negative reviews in and of themselves don’t necessarily mean anything in the lifespan of a show.
.
PAD
Well, my comment was just an aside directed at what Kevin said, and not an argument for or against your original post.
It’s making the fate of ‘Love Never Dies’ the ‘Phantom Of The Opera’ sequel here in London seem much brighter… they’ve rewritten it a few times since it opened and it’s halfway decent now.
I actually found the negatives far outweighed the positive in PAD’s review here, a while back. Even folks who don’t outright trash it still find plenty of problems with it.
And, thanks to the Moment of Zen from THE DAILY SHOW, here’s a positive that could hurt it:
Glenn Beck absolutely loved it.
Yeah, Beck loved it. That was disconcerting. I almost changed my mind just out of reflex.
.
PAD
In fairness, SPIDER-MAN: TURN OFF THE DARK may be how Glenn Beck *actually* sees the world.
It sure would explain a lot, wouldn’t it?
Particularly cited are the scathing comments from Ben Brantley of the New York Times. This, of course, spells the end. Nothing can possibly survive being shredded like that.
I have a playwright friend that would absolutely positively agree with that.
Heh.
Critics are like áššhølëš, everyone has one.
Some people loved the show. I hated the show but I still hope it does well. Having a hit on broadway featuring a comic book hero would be pretty cool.
Wicked was mediocre (IMO) and is being kept alive by legions of teenage girls who love the story of the friendship between two girls, one popular and one shunned. A female empowerment and success story. Don’t believe me about the audience? go buy a ticket and look around. Can you really sing anything from that show after your first hearing except maybe a little from Popular and a little of Defying Gravity? It is certainly a Bdwy boxoffice phenomenon but do you really want to consider it one of the greatest musicals ever written based on the number of performances it has achieved?
Addams Family was cute but I question its staying power after Nathan Lane (who was amazing) leaves the show and after the summer tourist season. Can you sing anything from that show at all except the TV theme song. And BTW–you can easily buy discounted seats for the Addams Family.
You are really going to defend Mama Mia? I didn’t like ABBA back in the day and the music hasn’t improved in the years since. The entire idea of jukebox musicals is lame. Also discounted seats available.
And yes, I saw all of these with the original casts and almost all musicals that hit Broadway and most of the off Bdwy ones also.
There are great shows that close far too early and mediocre shows that last far beyond when they should. That doesn’t minimize what Ben Brantley said. All the other major critics were pretty much unaminous in panning it. BB is just the most prominent.
The same can be said of film criticism as well as of music criticism. Nothing new, Peter.
We all understand how psychologically invested you might be in having Spiderman be a success and I do hear that it’s a fun evening in the theater–sort of like a Cirque show. But can you sing any of Bono’s music because I hear it’s pretty generic. Do you mean to tell us that you couldn’t have written a better more coherent book for a Spiderman musical because all the critics say it is a mess.
Glad you enjoyed it. I am taking a teenaged niece and nephew to NY in June and they want to see it so I will buy tickets but I doubt I would go see it on my own.
I loved “Defying Gravity” when I was first exposed to it. I have Kristin Chenowith’s rendition of it on my iTunes/iPhone.
Really? Chenowith recorded her own version of it? Because Idina Menzel sang it in the show.
.
PAD
We all understand how psychologically invested you might be in having Spiderman be a success
.
Uh…no. I’m really not. It’s no skin off my nose if the show succeeds or fails. I just don’t like bad journalism, and I believe the dogpiling on this show is bad journalism.
.
and I do hear that it’s a fun evening in the theater–sort of like a Cirque show. But can you sing any of Bono’s music because I hear it’s pretty generic. Do you mean to tell us that you couldn’t have written a better more coherent book for a Spiderman musical because all the critics say it is a mess.
.
Well, if you’d read my original review, I think you’d see both of those questions answered.
.
PAD
PAD, I think you’re a little emotionally invested in the show succeeding. You see, just like there is showdenfreude, there is the opposite. There’s that urge to root for the underdog.
.
I think that sometimes when we see people attacking something, we want it too succeed just to prove those people wrong.
Really? Chenowith recorded her own version of it? Because Idina Menzel sang it in the show.
Luigi Novi: All I know is, when I used to do my market research recruiting at the Loews Kips Bay, they had that song on the CD or whatever they played on a continuous loop, and it was Chenowith. You’re saying Chenowith didn’t sing it when she played Glinda? Like I said, I’m no expert in theater, but since Menzel played Elphaba, why would she sing it, given that the singer addresses Elphaba in it?
They’re a lead-up to the body of the song during which Glinda and Elphaba sing to each other and then Elphaba sings the bulk of the song.
.
PAD
And of course there are two version of the song. The Elphaba/Glinda version at the end of Act One and the solo version that Menzel and others have done (including people on Glee).
Wicked is a special show for me as it played a part in the early relationship of my wife and myself. We even had part of Defying Gravity played as we were introduced in the reception.
Thanks for the info, guys. I haven’t heard Menzel’s version of it, but Peter, if you haven’t heard Chenowith’s rendition of it, I highly recommend you give it a try. It’s very uplifting.
I wonder if audiences would be more affected if it was the opinions of audience members who were reported on, especially if they were aggregated, or if better yet, critics themselves were influenced by what they knew to be the audiences’ feelings.
.
I saw Act 1 of the show as part of a focus group of about twenty people on February 11. Despite not having seen a lot of Broadway shows, and not being particularly into musicals, overall it was entertaining, and the audience applauded at the end of each number. I was astonished at the special effects and set designs, which I didn’t even know were possible in theater. The humor, including the bit at Oscorp with the human ear on the lizard, and Jameson’s quips in his establishing scene, were welcome, as was the surprise appearance of Hammerhead.
.
The biggest problem I had was that they didn’t establish the loving relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben. The fight that they had in the first film before Ben is killed is the first and only scene with them in the play before Ben dies, thus emphasizing their relationship as antagonistic rather than loving, which is NOT how it was in the comics. Even worse, the burglar who killed Ben is gone, replaced by a random hit-and-run accident in which Ben is killed after being hit by a car. I was like, “WTF??!!” They totally removed the guilt that drove Peter to become a crimefighter, and when Peter suddenly shows up tied up atop the Chrysler Building after a confrontation with the Green Goblin (that we were strangely only told about but never shown), Peter asserts to Goblin that with power comes responsibility, despite the fact that the story destroyed the means by which he was supposed to learn that lesson. I also don’t understand why Goblin bought it at the end of Act 1, and the Sinister Six appearing as the villains in Act 2, since you’d think the story should’ve consisted of a struggle against one villain, but then again, I didn’t see Act 2, so I’m not as informed as I could be. I also didn’t care for the “Geek Chorus” or the Arachnae bit, as it had nothing to do with the story.
.
That said, the comments by others during the focus group were interesting, as they seemed to well, focus on things I hadn’t thought about. When asked if they rated it “Excellent”, “Very Good”, “Good”, “Fair” or “Poor”, most gave it “Very Good”, and when asked why it wasn’t Excellent, most cited the music and songs, saying they couldn’t understand the words, and that they weren’t any memorable songs. They also all agreed with my comments about the removal of the burglar from Spider-Man’s origin. Despite this, I got the the sense they they were mostly entertained.
.
It’s not that they didn’t like it, but thought that the production needed to be tweaked before opening night.
.
I’m curious, Peter: What did Brantley cite as his reasons for his opinion, and what was his overall feeling about the show insofar as a good/bad standpoint?
Oh, okay, I see Mike posted Brantley’s review. He says no one applauded until a mechanical malfunction occurred? Either he’s lying, or they must’ve made some profound, sweeping changes between the show he saw on February 5 and mine on February 11.
.
He says it looks cheap. Well, to each it own, I was amazed by the set design and effects, as were others who saw it with me.
.
He says the Geek Chorus hinders the story. Agreed.
.
A lot of the plot-propelling fights are merely reported to us. Well, one of them was. (Were there more in Act 2?)
Btw, if anyone wants the large Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark T-Shirt I got on February 11, which has never been worn, I’ve just placed it on ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300528405116
So does the play explain why it’s called Turn Off the Dark or what? Also, anybody see that SNL skit aboot it? Pure gold!
“Again, not the point. Rightness or wrongness doesn’t apply because it’s all opinion. The point is that “Wicked” and “Mama Mia” and “Addams Family” (and “Memphis,” thank you) all got slammed…and none of those were tossed onto the front page of newspapers or the front cover of “Entertainment Weekly,” because negative reviews in and of themselves don’t necessarily mean anything in the lifespan of a show.”
.
To be fair, when has the sorts of things put on the front page of the NY Post or the front cover Entertainment Weekly ever passed muster for journalism?
.
But just because a place like the Post might inappropriately put such entertainment news on the front page doesn’t mean that Brantley, reviewing the show where reviews always go in the Times, is guilty of dogpile by association. And so I am not sure why you are singling him out as a target in your post.
.
If others choose to cite Brantley as proof that the production will fail or is “doomed”, that is their conclusion, not his. His review makes no such predictions. Rather, he just reviews what he saw the night he saw it, and what he thought of the quality of the work. In other words, he did his job as a theater critic.
.
So I am not really sure what your point is in getting all Meet the Press and citing his dislike of shows in the past that turned out to be popular. As he is not writing to make such predictions. He is a theatre critic, not an investment adviser or market strategist.
Apparently, SM:TOD now has some competition:
http://thespideyproject.blogspot.com/
Quick quote from the press release (full press release on the site):
“Feb. 16 2011, New York, NY: ____ Veteran humorist and playwright, Justin Moran, launches “Spiderman Smackdown”, a guerilla theatre project to write, rehearse, and perform a fully realized musical based on the character Spiderman in under 30 days with a budget of $0. Set to open one day before the $65 Million Broadway musical “Spiderman: Turn Off the Dark”, Moran’s musical will be the first Spiderman Musical to officially open in New York City.”
I barely pay attention anymore to any mainstream news outlet. I scan various news websites to try and separate the wheat of the news from the chaff of the hyperbole, but since it’s so lopsided towards whatever “buzz” is being generated toward a particular story or set of stories, invariably I miss things.
I think it was much better when a reporter’s job was to report the news, not to try an inflate an relatively inconsequential event (Lindsay Lohan, anyone?) into something that will boost viewership in the short term.
That said, I’m really glad the Batman musical Jim Steinman was attached to never made it to stage. I think the hype would be along similar lines.