|
|
Post by newyorkcityboy on May 30, 2023 20:10:56 GMT
Was planning on waiting for the show to ‘bed in’ -but with these reviews I’d better not hang about. Can I ask those who have seen it whether they use the solo or duet version of There Is More To Love?
|
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on May 30, 2023 20:37:47 GMT
It’s so disappointing to see so many squeamish reviews for this. People need to grow up and do some research before they go rather than being faux shocked at the subject matter. Most of the needlessly ‘enlightened’ on-line reviewers have clutched their pearls at this in their reviews. It’s 34 years old ffs! I remember someone posted something similar to my sentiment further up but I'll say it again, I don't think a lot of people dislike the show because they're appalled at the content, I think a lot of people don't like it because they just don't think it's a good show. I'm not offended by the subject matter I just think it's weird, unearned and incompletely explored. It's hard for me to imagine in the abstract how people shooting their lovers and having intergenerational relationships and sure why not a bit of child-love as well could be boring, but my god somehow this show does it. It's completely fair to say that the subject matter felt interesting and engaging and an excellent basis for a show if that's your take, but it's disingenuous to suggest that if your negative reaction is partly based on the frankly bizarre plot then you are somehow at fault. There's a strange GBNews-esque idea that seems to float about online about this show that people who rail against the story are part of the woke-brigade and can be dismissed, but if people are like me they're happy to see something provocative and edgy, as long as it's good. And I didn't find this good, sorry. Also a minor take, but I don't read what most shows or films I see are about, I just go. You sometimes like things you didn't think you would, and vice versa. It's still valid to critique them. |
|
608 posts
|
Post by chernjam on May 31, 2023 4:05:39 GMT
Was planning on waiting for the show to ‘bed in’ -but with these reviews I’d better not hang about. Can I ask those who have seen it whether they use the solo or duet version of There Is More To Love? I had asked the same thing - either here or in BWW forums. The response I got was that its the single version. There is more to love is one of my favorite all time ALW's songs (especially underrated) I kind of prefered the duet version. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 31, 2023 5:29:11 GMT
It’s so disappointing to see so many squeamish reviews for this. People need to grow up and do some research before they go rather than being faux shocked at the subject matter. Most of the needlessly ‘enlightened’ on-line reviewers have clutched their pearls at this in their reviews. It’s 34 years old ffs! I remember someone posted something similar to my sentiment further up but I'll say it again, I don't think a lot of people dislike the show because they're appalled at the content, I think a lot of people don't like it because they just don't think it's a good show. I'm not offended by the subject matter I just think it's weird, unearned and incompletely explored. It's hard for me to imagine in the abstract how people shooting their lovers and having intergenerational relationships and sure why not a bit of child-love as well could be boring, but my god somehow this show does it. It's completely fair to say that the subject matter felt interesting and engaging and an excellent basis for a show if that's your take, but it's disingenuous to suggest that if your negative reaction is partly based on the frankly bizarre plot then you are somehow at fault. There's a strange GBNews-esque idea that seems to float about online about this show that people who rail against the story are part of the woke-brigade and can be dismissed, but if people are like me they're happy to see something provocative and edgy, as long as it's good. And I didn't find this good, sorry. Also a minor take, but I don't read what most shows or films I see are about, I just go. You sometimes like things you didn't think you would, and vice versa. It's still valid to critique them. Do you have an online review site Andrew? You appear to have interpreted an awful lot of things that just aren’t there in my post? My ‘actual’ comments were in relation to both WEW and Mickey Jo’s reviews where they start by enjoying it, then pull back because of the ‘ick’ factor. It is about what it is about. Reviews don’t exist in a vacuum. They filter a show through the life & opinions of the reviewer. That is why here is such a lovely space. |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on May 31, 2023 6:56:30 GMT
It’s so disappointing to see so many squeamish reviews for this. People need to grow up and do some research before they go rather than being faux shocked at the subject matter. Most of the needlessly ‘enlightened’ on-line reviewers have clutched their pearls at this in their reviews. It’s 34 years old ffs! I remember someone posted something similar to my sentiment further up but I'll say it again, I don't think a lot of people dislike the show because they're appalled at the content, I think a lot of people don't like it because they just don't think it's a good show. I'm not offended by the subject matter I just think it's weird, unearned and incompletely explored. It's hard for me to imagine in the abstract how people shooting their lovers and having intergenerational relationships and sure why not a bit of child-love as well could be boring, but my god somehow this show does it. It's completely fair to say that the subject matter felt interesting and engaging and an excellent basis for a show if that's your take, but it's disingenuous to suggest that if your negative reaction is partly based on the frankly bizarre plot then you are somehow at fault. There's a strange GBNews-esque idea that seems to float about online about this show that people who rail against the story are part of the woke-brigade and can be dismissed, but if people are like me they're happy to see something provocative and edgy, as long as it's good. And I didn't find this good, sorry. Also a minor take, but I don't read what most shows or films I see are about, I just go. You sometimes like things you didn't think you would, and vice versa. It's still valid to critique them. This is excellently put. |
|
2,480 posts
|
Post by zahidf on May 31, 2023 8:01:54 GMT
It’s so disappointing to see so many squeamish reviews for this. People need to grow up and do some research before they go rather than being faux shocked at the subject matter. Most of the needlessly ‘enlightened’ on-line reviewers have clutched their pearls at this in their reviews. It’s 34 years old ffs! I remember someone posted something similar to my sentiment further up but I'll say it again, I don't think a lot of people dislike the show because they're appalled at the content, I think a lot of people don't like it because they just don't think it's a good show. I'm not offended by the subject matter I just think it's weird, unearned and incompletely explored. It's hard for me to imagine in the abstract how people shooting their lovers and having intergenerational relationships and sure why not a bit of child-love as well could be boring, but my god somehow this show does it. It's completely fair to say that the subject matter felt interesting and engaging and an excellent basis for a show if that's your take, but it's disingenuous to suggest that if your negative reaction is partly based on the frankly bizarre plot then you are somehow at fault. There's a strange GBNews-esque idea that seems to float about online about this show that people who rail against the story are part of the woke-brigade and can be dismissed, but if people are like me they're happy to see something provocative and edgy, as long as it's good. And I didn't find this good, sorry. Also a minor take, but I don't read what most shows or films I see are about, I just go. You sometimes like things you didn't think you would, and vice versa. It's still valid to critique them. Good point! i enjoyed the show overall, but the plot is completely ridiculous. I dont see how an audience/reviewer can take it seriously at all |
|
|
|
Post by newyorkcityboy on May 31, 2023 10:22:33 GMT
Was planning on waiting for the show to ‘bed in’ -but with these reviews I’d better not hang about. Can I ask those who have seen it whether they use the solo or duet version of There Is More To Love? I had asked the same thing - either here or in BWW forums. The response I got was that its the single version. There is more to love is one of my favorite all time ALW's songs (especially underrated) I kind of prefered the duet version. Me too. Shame it’s never been recorded. Though Sarah Brightman’s single version is sublime. |
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on May 31, 2023 10:39:27 GMT
Band A and B tickets have just been added to Tkts for £39.50 for this evening.
|
|
10 posts
|
Post by stitcher on May 31, 2023 10:46:30 GMT
Saw it last week in previews, didn't think it was great. I only saw the Menier production (which I seem to recall enjoying?) so only have that to compare it with, but this new version seems so disjointed and uneven in tone. I just wondered if the rewriting to pull the older character more front and centre has been at the cost of some of the other characters, and if it's been trimmed down and made some of the plot transitions a bit sketchy? True, there aren't that many sympathetic characters in the show, but at least at the Menier I understood a bit more about them than just apparently being only motivated by sex and possession. 'Anything But Lonely' seemed the highlight for me, dramatically and vocally it gave Laura Pitt-Pulford something to finally sink her teeth into. Danielle de Niese made the most of what she had to work with, Michael Ball was more avuncular uncle than distinguished lothario, and Jamie Byogo was a serviceable Alex - hard to tell if he was limited by having the role filleted in the rewrite or not?
Tonally it seemed a bit all over the place, that sudden 'Bohemian Rhapsody'-style quartet stuck out like a sore thumb, and the impressionistic set cloths didn't hang together with the really unnecessary film bits (the month in the country reel felt like a computer game, and the Venice footage looked like holiday video from last week, definitely not when the action was set). Didn't understand the placement of the orchestra reveals either. Found some of the melodies going around my head for a good few days after too, so worth seeing if you love the score, but the show might be a bit WTF if you're not familiar with it...
|
|
80 posts
|
Post by jay78uk on May 31, 2023 12:03:27 GMT
Saw it last week in previews, didn't think it was great. I only saw the Menier production (which I seem to recall enjoying?) so only have that to compare it with, but this new version seems so disjointed and uneven in tone. I just wondered if the rewriting to pull the older character more front and centre has been at the cost of some of the other characters, and if it's been trimmed down and made some of the plot transitions a bit sketchy? True, there aren't that many sympathetic characters in the show, but at least at the Menier I understood a bit more about them than just apparently being only motivated by sex and possession. 'Anything But Lonely' seemed the highlight for me, dramatically and vocally it gave Laura Pitt-Pulford something to finally sink her teeth into. Danielle de Niese made the most of what she had to work with, Michael Ball was more avuncular uncle than distinguished lothario, and Jamie Byogo was a serviceable Alex - hard to tell if he was limited by having the role filleted in the rewrite or not? Tonally it seemed a bit all over the place, that sudden 'Bohemian Rhapsody'-style quartet stuck out like a sore thumb, and the impressionistic set cloths didn't hang together with the really unnecessary film bits (the month in the country reel felt like a computer game, and the Venice footage looked like holiday video from last week, definitely not when the action was set). Didn't understand the placement of the orchestra reveals either. Found some of the melodies going around my head for a good few days after too, so worth seeing if you love the score, but the show might be a bit WTF if you're not familiar with it... I really don’t understand comments complaining about the believability and depth of the narrative given Aspects is a musical, an art form, rather like opera, that is largely considered escapist and not known for realism. Critics of the set and staging are not acknowledging the show is being advertised as a limited season- it was never going to have a multi million budget. What I experienced was, apart from some of the stock video footage, a fine cohesive effort. Regarding the previous poster country scene looking like a computer game it feels like we were a different the country scene was gorgeous and dreamy, with the orchestra reveal adding to that. ‘Falling’ which the poster describes as a Bohemian Rhapsody quartet has always been in the score, and helps with character development and motiation, and picked up again in the new lower key ending. I appreciate everyone is entitled to their views, but the extent of criticism of this show seems unfair, and seems to largely stem from disquite in the Alex/ Jenny narrative and a dislike of Lloyd Webber rather than a fair appreciation of the material and production. I really hope London isn’t turning into Broadway with critics and theatre goers alike trying to out do each other in how bitchy they can be about shows. |
|
1,442 posts
|
Post by theatrefan62 on May 31, 2023 13:49:38 GMT
Plays mostly have short runs and can have excellent set and projection design. The length of run doesn't come into it.
I was keen to see this but three sets of friends who have seen it (and are alw fans) haven't been positive. Mainly on the set, story changes and cast. They also mentioned about people laughing, especially at Michael Balls final scene. So I'll wait until I can get a deal I think.
|
|
8,097 posts
|
Post by alece10 on May 31, 2023 13:55:58 GMT
From the votes cast by board members 27 have given it 3/4/5 stars and 8 have given it 1/2 stars. Now I'm no maths expert but seems a lot more people liked it than didn't.
|
|
10 posts
|
Post by stitcher on May 31, 2023 14:28:59 GMT
Critics of the set and staging are not acknowledging the show is being advertised as a limited season- it was never going to have a multi million budget. What I experienced was, apart from some of the stock video footage, a fine cohesive effort. Regarding the previous poster country scene looking like a computer game it feels like we were a different the country scene was gorgeous and dreamy, with the orchestra reveal adding to that. ‘Falling’ which the poster describes as a Bohemian Rhapsody quartet has always been in the score, and helps with character development and motiation, and picked up again in the new lower key ending. I appreciate everyone is entitled to their views, but the extent of criticism of this show seems unfair, and seems to largely stem from disquite in the Alex/ Jenny narrative and a dislike of Lloyd Webber rather than a fair appreciation of the material and production. By Month In The Country I meant the filmed footage leading up to Rose's second backstage play of the same name - I thought the impressionistic Cezanne type set landscape was lovely. To me the film parts were such a different visual language I'm afraid I didn't find them cohesive, the piece would have worked well without them. The Bohemian Rhapsody reference was about the staging of the song Falling, it was so stark and stylistically different to everything else that I felt It jolted. I assure you I have no problem with ALW - the score and orchestrations in this are gorgeous, and I really liked the Menier production, this one not so much. |
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on May 31, 2023 15:12:05 GMT
I remember someone posted something similar to my sentiment further up but I'll say it again, I don't think a lot of people dislike the show because they're appalled at the content, I think a lot of people don't like it because they just don't think it's a good show. I'm not offended by the subject matter I just think it's weird, unearned and incompletely explored. It's hard for me to imagine in the abstract how people shooting their lovers and having intergenerational relationships and sure why not a bit of child-love as well could be boring, but my god somehow this show does it. It's completely fair to say that the subject matter felt interesting and engaging and an excellent basis for a show if that's your take, but it's disingenuous to suggest that if your negative reaction is partly based on the frankly bizarre plot then you are somehow at fault. There's a strange GBNews-esque idea that seems to float about online about this show that people who rail against the story are part of the woke-brigade and can be dismissed, but if people are like me they're happy to see something provocative and edgy, as long as it's good. And I didn't find this good, sorry. Also a minor take, but I don't read what most shows or films I see are about, I just go. You sometimes like things you didn't think you would, and vice versa. It's still valid to critique them. Do you have an online review site Andrew? You appear to have interpreted an awful lot of things that just aren’t there in my post? My ‘actual’ comments were in relation to both WEW and Mickey Jo’s reviews where they start by enjoying it, then pull back because of the ‘ick’ factor. It is about what it is about. Reviews don’t exist in a vacuum. They filter a show through the life & opinions of the reviewer. That is why here is such a lovely space. Absolutely each reviewer has a different take, this thread is a testament to the variety of opinion you'll get to the same piece of work. I only went because of the overwhelmingly positive reaction to the first few previews, and was pleased when some started to filter in later on that reflected what I got out of it. It just sounded like you were echoing other comments which effectively disregard what I see as valid criticism because the reviewer 'couldn't handle' the subject matter, which really grinds my gears. But thinking about what you've said about the 'ick' factor, I still disagree with you on the validity of criticising it. I'm not sure I would disregard someone's opinion because they found themself alienated from the story because of a plot point in the second act. I think it's fair that if I go to a play about football and I hate football then I probably shouldn't have gone and probably shouldn't complain. But if I go to a musical that examines how love affects our lives, and reading the aspectsoflove.com description just talks vaguely about a sweeping romantic story in France, and they pull out a bit of potential paedophilia, I think it's fair game to say I didn't enjoy that and found it weird and uncomfortable, it ruined the show. That's not my opinion because I already disliked it by that point but in my view that's a sensible opinion to hold and share with others. I haven't seen Mickey Jo's review (and hopefully never will) so if there's more complexity to this issue than I understand it then fair enough. |
|
27 posts
|
Post by mickeyjotheatre on May 31, 2023 15:29:19 GMT
I wouldn't say I started by enjoying it tbh - I speak first about the creative elements that were strong before spending much more time talking through shortcomings including (but not limited to) the plot. I knew the story beforehand, I just thought it was also poorly executed.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 31, 2023 15:57:29 GMT
Ok, great! Battered into submission. Discussion board no more. Autocratic dominance only. I get it. I do intend to see it in the next few weeks, and will make sure not to share my opinion of it.
|
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on May 31, 2023 16:27:16 GMT
Ok, great! Battered into submission. Discussion board no more. Autocratic dominance only. I get it. I do intend to see it in the next few weeks, and will make sure not to share my opinion of it. I hope you don't really feel that way, I thought we were discussing it. I'd love to hear your thoughts in a few weeks and I hope you enjoy the show. |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Jun 1, 2023 12:55:21 GMT
Ok, great! Battered into submission. Discussion board no more. Autocratic dominance only. I get it. I do intend to see it in the next few weeks, and will make sure not to share my opinion of it. *Oh no, someone is disagreeing with me, the idea of discussion is RUINED* Solid snowflake behaviour tbh |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Jun 1, 2023 13:05:00 GMT
*Oh no, someone is disagreeing with me, the idea of discussion is RUINED* Solid snowflake behaviour tbh Totally! I am a delicate little flower. |
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jun 1, 2023 14:37:49 GMT
Going for the 2nd time this evening.
Personally, if you're on the fence, I wouldn't worry too much about the reviews. The likes of MickeyJoTheatre were always going to hate it because it's popular to hate on Lloyd Webber at the moment. I really wouldn't pay any notice.
|
|
19,661 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 1, 2023 14:57:13 GMT
Can we keep the comments/criticisms directed at the show and not other members please.
|
|
|
|
Post by capybara on Jun 1, 2023 14:59:54 GMT
Still so confused why people aren’t allowed to dislike this show because they didn’t enjoy it. I generally like ALW shows but I thought this was rubbish.
Others liked it. And you know what? That’s OK…
|
|
2,848 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Jun 1, 2023 16:00:32 GMT
Still so confused why people aren’t allowed to dislike this show because they didn’t enjoy it. I generally like ALW shows but I thought this was rubbish. Others liked it. And you know what? That’s OK… Especially since the show has a long history of getting lukewarm reviews. Both the Menier and the Southwark Playhouse productions received mixed notices, and the show famously flopped on Broadway, where it got poor reviews and lost its entire investmenet. The original London production was a hit, but that's the exception and not the rule in the show's history |
|
4,955 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Jun 1, 2023 17:12:56 GMT
I disagree with the notion that you can't critique a popular (or unpopular) composer. Subjective or objective views are both valid and should be encouraged
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jun 1, 2023 17:23:47 GMT
I think what I have found frustrating with the responses from some who haven't liked the show is the reliance on terms like awful or rubbish rather than a more detailed reason as to what did or didn't work for them.
By all reports, the score is pretty much the same as are the basics of the narrative and characters. Yes, there have been some cuts and some reordering. And there are the well known (and unnecessary) tweaks to the age of Jenny.
So it is not a radical reworking of the piece. And so I find it hard to understand what has made it 'rubbish' this time round.
It is perfectly fine for some people to like productions that others don't enjoy. But articulating what you like/dislike is important when discussing things. Reducing things to terms like awful doesn't help me understand where people are coming from.
I can't afford to see it. Nor will my joints permit a trip into London. So I have to experience this vicariously. So more detailed analysis is what I am craving!
|
|
