Saturday, January 22, 2011
Spider-Man: 'Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark' previews should be reviewed
LATimes.com: "Even though 'Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark' has delayed its official opening for the fifth time, the L.A. Times' Charles McNulty says critics should weigh in on previews of the expensive musical so that audiences will know what they're paying for: a problem-plagued work in progress.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Spider Man is starting to become not only a controversial show for the length of the previews and the scope of the show, but by audience members and people saying they need to know what they are getting. Just like the advertisements that Spider Man produced, people feel that they do not know what they are going to when they see Spider Man. Reviews are for when a show opens, but that should not stop critiques from commenting on the shows progress. There are ways in which the critiques could comment on the show without including too much of their opinion. If they track the show through the previews and tell prospective audience members how the show is developing and how it is panning out, then maybe Spider Man and the audience will be a little happier.
Spider man never ceases to make the news on a weekly if not daily basis. I always think that the authors have beat this information to death but surprisingly there is always something else to say about this show. It still astonishes me how many previews it has run. As of today it has run 50 previews, only 21 to break the record set by the famous flop Nick & Nora that only ran 9 performances after its 71 previews. I can't wait to see how long Spider Man lasts after it finally opens if it ever does.
So critics are getting frustrated that they can't review Spiderman yet? So what? If the show needs work, and they can afford it, then why not. It's their choice. The critics will just have to deal with it.
But even being delayed again has it's positives. The show has maintained its spotlight. Good or bad people know that this is something "big" and a spectacle. Business has been decent as far as we know. If this show weren't such a spectacle in the news it wouldn't be doing nearly as well as it has been. I mean, were this a production that didn't stir up much controversy, wouldn't it just float by as something that wasn't that great? Whether we like it or not, it's a way to keep people interested in the show, and it's a way to hopefully regain some of the $65 mil.
While of course we are all curious to know what shape this "Spiderman" show is in any day of the week, I have to say I think it is a bit unfair for papers to be sending their critics to do reviews on a show that technically isn't finished yet. I enjoy the horrible stories as much as the next person, but I'm not going to place too much judgment.
Yet it's not quite accurate to compare this to Taymor's mega-hit "Lion King" either. Sure, both storylines sound a little (or a lot) silly to be performed on stage, but Lion King is much simpler technically and doesn't have any of that crazy flying stunt nonsense that Spiderman seems to be all about. Lion King worked. Spiderman has been pushed back time and again, and is still plagued by major issues. We'll see what happens.
Post a Comment