| Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I finally got to see Gentleman's Guide and found it to be funny, beautifully played, full of some imaginative effects, and maybe the best musical of the season. So why were great seats available at a great discount, why do some friends of mine think it's a British import (?) and "too precious" to bother with, why are so few people on this board tossing its title around when they handicap the Tonys or make recommendations on what to see ? I think it's a terrific show and I can't figure out why it seems to be below the Chat radar | |
| reply to this message | | |
| it remains THE BEST MUSICAL ON BROADWAY | |
| Posted by: | showbusy 11:48 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I've seen everything else once and "A Gentleman's Guide...." 4 times. So far. I paid full-price each time. I believe it's important to support good theatre and this is GREAT theatre. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| I think you might be a bit late, Upstate | |
| Posted by: | DistantDrumming 10:38 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I recall seeing dozens -- literally dozens -- of new threads being started on ATC over the winter praising this show to the heavens. It also got rave reviews from most critics. To me that says that it caught on just fine with the seasoned theatregoers and Broadway superfans who often make up the first couple of months of a production's box office, but hasn't caught on with the general public. I'm not quite sure why that is. You'd think that in the age of Downton Abbey's massive success, this show might be a bigger attraction. Perhaps word of mouth with the general public isn't as strong? If the show were as funny as it thought it was, it might be able to attract bigger audiences. Those of us who don't connect with this work are, quite rudely, told that we don't appreciate adult, sophisticated work. I think that's hogwash. This was one of the most amateurish and unsophisticated things I've seen on Broadway. It feels like dinner theatre with a slightly bigger budget. I'm afraid I'm in lonely company with the NY Post's Elizabeth Vincentelli (and a few others on here) in finding the show a monumental disappointment. When I first heard about the show last Autumn, it shot to the top of my must-see list for my winter NY trip. A sophisticated, adult, urbane, witty (and also silly) British music hall style farce with a new Broadway score composed for adults? No painfully bad attempts at power pop and what passes for "rock" music on Broadway, but instead and honest-to-goodness old fashioned Broadway score? Fabulous! It sounded great on paper, but I found the entire enterprise duller than dishwater -- including a merely serviceable score, a painfully unfunny book, and a ridiculously overpraised performance from Jefferson Mays. He's essentially doing one long, broad MAD TV-esque sketch after another. To me the true star and anchor of the show -- and really only reason to see it -- is Bryce Pinkham. Pinkham is dashing, sharply funny and devastatingly charismatic. I hope we see him in something a bit more substantial in the future. He's got the chops. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | RonAnnArbor 08:01 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I'm not sure its below the chat radar....I think it is "past" the chat radar -- it opened last year and was discussed very much here. Personally, I've seen every musical eligible this season, and I think Gentleman's Guide is currently the show to beat for Best Musical -- current chat has been obsessed with the newest shows of course, kind of forgetting GG along the way. When all is said and done, it is the best reviewed show of the season, and the Tony voters will remember that when they go to cast ballots. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | meeditoria 05:40 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I also found it to be funny, and the amazingly talented Jefferson Mays doesn't disappoint. I don't agree with others that the title is a handicap. I wasn't that interested initially in the show, but I thought that with a bizarre title like that I simply had to learn more before I decided not to buy tickets. I'm thrilled that I looked. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 04:19 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| i think it's the best b'way musical of the year. by far. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | singleticket 01:37 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I don't think it is a quality show. I think there's a great deal of talent and skill involved but I think it largely fails at what it wants to do. I personally would have liked the show to have been a bit more precious because that's where the humor is located, not in a frantic theatricalization of the source film's defining gag. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | MikeP (ACL15@aol.com) 12:47 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I think the show is getting alot of advertising but not alot of press buzz. For example, its not getting a segment on the "Today Show" (like Rocky...which was really awful)or the hype around Aladdin. I also it doesn't have alot of musical numbers that would easily pull out of the context of the show and sell well in advertising on TV. I like this show alot. I thought it was fun, creatively staged and brilliantly performed. The story is well constructed...but its a bit thin and repetitive. I found myself looking at my watch during act 1. It does drag on a bit. Its a small show that will only thrive on word of mouth...and Tony wins. I don't think this is anything new. Blockbuster musicals get the hype, the buzz and the attention. They have the production numbers, the costumes, the dancing that gets noticed. Its just harder for a smaller musical to get attention. This has been the case for as long as I can remember. Avenue Q won the Tony over Wicked (and bravo to the voters). But, which show is the international juggernaut? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Passion beat Beauty & The Beast | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 04:31 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - MikeP 12:47 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| and we know which one made way more money over the years. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | duckylittledictum 11:49 am EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| Totally agree. I was wary of something too precious for words, but was surprised and delighted by what I found. Mays was great, but for me Pinkham was every bit his equal. It's the only new musical since Book of Mormon I wanted to see twice. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 11:34 am EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | Gentleman's Guide - upstate 11:24 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| The simple answer is that the folks charged with marketing the show have dropped the ball big time. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 11:51 am EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - ryhog 11:34 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| "The simple answer is that the folks charged with marketing the show have dropped the ball big time." I don't know that I agree, and even if that is true, there's MUCH more to it than that. The real, tragic answer is that, at least among the general public, there's little or no appreciation for quality on Broadway at a time when at least six of the musicals now on the boards (both old and new shows) are trash, yet are very popular with audiences NOT because of quality but because of audience familiarity with the movies on which they're based or the popular song catalogs they have plundered. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | chrisampm 06:44 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - Michael_Portantiere 11:51 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| If this were true, how do you explain the quick failures of shows based on easily recognizable movie titles (9 to 5, Ghost, etc) or song catalogues (Good Vibrations, Come Fly Away, etc)? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 11:40 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - chrisampm 06:44 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I certainly did not mean that EVERY show based on a popular movie or song catalog has been a success at the box office. I meant to argue from the other direction -- that several shows based on popular movies or song catalogs have been huge successes despite those shows being of extremely low quality, in my opinion. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 09:21 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - chrisampm 06:44 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| formulas and facile generalizations don't work in either direction. Shows succeed when folks want to see them, and fail when people don't. Great shows fail, lousy shows succeed. As I like to say, there are no rules. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show | |
| Posted by: | BrianJ 12:20 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - Michael_Portantiere 11:51 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I don't begrudge anybody loving this show, and obviously a lot of people do. I didn't hate it - I was engaged during it and not so bored I was tuning out, I was mildly amused enough a few times to chuckle - but I wouldn't ever really recommend it to anybody. And I assure you, the basis for my feelings is NOT because I evaluate musicals on whether they're based on a movie I'm familiar with or a popular song catalogue. Again, I don't begrudge the many who do like it, but this isn't a CAROUSEL, MY FAIR LADY, WEST SIDE STORY, a work of such staggering quality that it seems clear that anyone who likes or loves musicals should embrace it, and whose rejection by the public would have been an indictment of audience taste. This is one that some people love, some people don't. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Thank you, BrianJ! | |
| Posted by: | DistantDrumming 10:42 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show - BrianJ 12:20 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| Kind of sick of being told that if one doesn't connect with this show, one simply doesn't have good taste or the ability to appreciate great, old fashioned musical comedy. Perhaps the problem is with the execution, not the intent of the creative team. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show | |
| Posted by: | EvFoDr 04:57 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show - BrianJ 12:20 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| Obviously can’t speak for the masses, but isn’t it known (as much an anything in this business can be known) that especially after a show has been open for a bit, it’s word of mouth that matters most rather than advertising? I generally don’t pay attention to advertising. I don’t watch live television (with commercials) and don’t read much print media anymore, or listen to the radio. I did see some posters and I have to admit I was intrigued but slightly turned off by the title. If it’s bad marketing that they didn’t change the title…well that’s a much bigger conversation… I went to see the show because it got strong reviews and the buzz I interpreted from ATC and friends was primarily positive. My reaction was just about identical to BrianJ. It’s “fun”, but thin. And further, for me it matters that there is no heart or emotional content to the story. It’s all about the style. That’s fine for some shows, but if a show isn’t going to have heart or emotional stakes than it either needs to be mind blowingly funny, like a great farce, or sharp and witty, for example like Chicago. People don’t go running around telling all their friends to see a show they think is merely pleasant. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show | |
| Posted by: | Thom915 06:56 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show - EvFoDr 04:57 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I really loved Bryce Pinkham and adored Jane Carr and the two young ingénues. And yet for whatever reason this show does not stick with me when discussing shows. I also think the advertising campaign is not the best for the show. I do hope it gets some recognition at awards time. I am not sure if there are any awards I feel it deserves to win however. My opinion only. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 05:51 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: It IS possible for somebody both to have taste and not like this show - EvFoDr 04:57 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| there are no rules but it is certainly not "known" that anything trumps advertising for long running shows, especially after the demand starts to get wobbly. WOM is great but not dependable. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 12:00 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - Michael_Portantiere 11:51 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I think it is bullshit to say that there is little or no appreciation for quality. I think it is far more reasonable to say that there are a lot of producers who are lazy, and these producers apparently don't care to sensibly market their shows when it requires more than exploiting a movie or song catalog and a thought process more taxing than accepting the monumentally insipid ad campaign that they were presented. If I were to decide whether or not to see this show based on the ad, I would run the other way. You are right that there is more to it than that, but that is enough to kill its prospects. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 12:21 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - ryhog 12:00 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| "I think it is bullshit to say that there is little or no appreciation for quality." As regards the general Broadway theatergoing public, I strongly disagree. I wish I didn't. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 01:13 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - Michael_Portantiere 12:21 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I am genuinely sorry to hear that. However, I also believe that to be the same thinking that prompts people to produce garbage. I blame the people who make garbage because they are too lazy to do anything else; I do not blame the theatre-going public who has committed no sin other than wanting to be entertained by a live performance. I think it is a matter of aspiration. When I watch a show like Cabaret or Hedwig, as examples, it is my sense that the creators aspired to achieve something meaningful by their work. Of the current crop of new shows, I think If/Then is the only one that has such aspirations, and unfortunately it does not fulfill its aspirations. Most of the rest seem to have no aspiration other than to exploit a movie title for profit. I think we get off track when we blame audiences. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | Zelgo 11:49 am EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - ryhog 11:34 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| I'm baffled too as to why this isn't getting more press. Much of the reason must be that it opened long ago. It was the best time I had at the theatre all year. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | TheHarveyBoy 03:11 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - Zelgo 11:49 am EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| People say that a bad title can't kill a show, but in this case I think it hurts a lot. The word "Gentleman" probably scares some people away and the joke of "Love and Murder" gets lost. At this point I would suggest they change things around and call it "Love and Murder: a Gentleman's Guide" although giving it a wholly different title a year ago would have been better. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Gentleman's Guide | |
| Posted by: | Zelgo 05:04 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Gentleman's Guide - TheHarveyBoy 03:11 pm EDT 04/03/14 |
|
| |
| You're completely right. The title isn't doing it any favors. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 1.303402 seconds.