| Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | actor103 11:47 am EDT 08/08/14 |
| In reply to: | Of course not... - ryhog 11:18 am EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| Why is their enthusiasm blinding? Maybe their enthusiasm is authentic and the feel that this could be cool show to have in on Bway with some non-profit security to soften the cost and thus amount of financial risk. I can't believe that their are commercial producers who think this is going to be a box office bonanza for American audiences. Though maybe there are. i think that the more realistic belief is that they see this as an exciting show that would be different and unique for Bway and they can do it in such a way that they can possibly get their money back and maybe make a little change. Sorry, sort of repeated myself. At any rate, they are enthusiastic about the show being on Broadway and they are therefore blind??? Nice and constructive thinking? Geez. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 01:24 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
| In reply to: | Blinded? - actor103 11:47 am EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| Unfortunately, the current state of many non-profits put them far from being able to offer security. It has become rare for a non-profit to produce a sizable musical without either co-producing with another theatre or taking in commercial funding - the non-profits often are the ones who need the security to know that they can afford to do a large show. The non-profits are a safe place to try out a show that a producer thinks will be able to move to Broadway, but not a show that they feel has zero financial prospects. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 12:33 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
| In reply to: | Blinded? - actor103 11:47 am EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| the blindness relates to the assessment of what BB wrote as a rave, not to their assessment of the show. It is always possible some producer will bring it to Bway because they think it should be seen there but that sort of producer is not generally focused on whether Ben gave it a rave or not. But yes, enthusiasm does create blind spots sometimes. And there are those who would counsel that avoiding that phenomenon is essential to smart producing. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | actor103 01:11 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Blinded? - ryhog 12:33 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| So, putting producers aside for a moment as well as the the fact you seem to now be chasing your tail, those who want to see The Visit come to Broadway (whoever that may be) is blinded by their enthusiasm? In some scenarios enthusiasm creates blind spots. Yeah, ok. so? just sounds and reads like garden variety snark to me. But hey, if that's your dance, go to it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 01:27 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Blinded? - actor103 01:11 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| as I said, the blindness comment related to the assessment of Brantley's review, nothing more. I think it would be great if someone with money and enthusiasm brought the show in. But that's a separate issue from the blindness. If someone brings it in because they are blinded by enthusiasm, then that's not great. Sorry if it seems like snark to you. It absolutely isn't. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | actor103 02:09 am EDT 08/09/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Blinded? - ryhog 01:27 pm EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| Ok, understood. But who here has called the review a rave. I think it's a mixed review but A mixed review that elicits in me, excitement. I can't find where people are calling it a rave. Several people seem to think it reads as a positive endorsement as something to see, for whatever reasons ( maybe the star, maybe the production). For others, it does not read that way. Just not seeing where the blind enthusiasm to a rave enters into this. You were originally responding to someone who thought this a lousy review and then ( what sounded to me like some disingenuous nonsense) hoping they were wrong. Disingenuous, because I find it hard to believe that anyone without some agenda truly thinks this would qualify as a "lousy" review. But, you are referring to reactions to Brantley as a rave. that's fine. Maybe I missed a thread or something. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 11:04 am EDT 08/09/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Blinded? - actor103 02:09 am EDT 08/09/14 |
|
| |
| You are correct no one called it an overall rave, so let's pretend I wrote "positive endorsement of the show" wherever I said "rave." So what I am saying is there is, among some, a blindness to the thrust of the review, however it is labelled. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| "Disingenuous?" ... "Agenda?" ... | |
| Posted by: | flaguy 07:31 am EDT 08/09/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Blinded? - actor103 02:09 am EDT 08/09/14 |
|
| |
| As I said before, it's a "kind" review, focusing on the STAR performance. Other than that, I don't think it's a very good review. And, believe it or not, I was hoping it would get a RAVE from him. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "Disingenuous?" ... "Agenda?" ... | |
| Posted by: | actor103 09:29 am EDT 08/09/14 |
| In reply to: | "Disingenuous?" ... "Agenda?" ... - flaguy 07:31 am EDT 08/09/14 |
|
| |
| No you don't. You simply do not say that. In your heading you say that what you think the review is, is lousy. Then, in your post you describe the CRITIC as being kind in describing what you thinks is a LOUSY review. Fine. You had a choice... and you made a choice ...and you chose a word...and the word you chose... was LOUSY. Then you start this "Hope I am wrong" ...."hoping for a RAVE" stuff? So, " believe it or not" ? ...Ok, I don't believe it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Well, SOMEBODY has an "agenda" around here, that's for sure." (nm). | |
| Posted by: | flaguy 09:32 am EDT 08/09/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "Disingenuous?" ... "Agenda?" ... - actor103 09:29 am EDT 08/09/14 |
|
| |
| :P | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Well, SOMEBODY has an "agenda" around here, that's for sure." (nm). | |
| Posted by: | actor103 11:33 am EDT 08/09/14 |
| In reply to: | Well, SOMEBODY has an "agenda" around here, that's for sure." (nm). - flaguy 09:32 am EDT 08/09/14 |
|
| |
| Yes. most certainly I do. That two faced, tap dancing, "oh my goodness I just I didn't say that" hooey. I don't care who are what it is in regards to. I am sorry, That kind of stuff is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Whatever... Now, moving right along.... | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Blinded? | |
| Posted by: | actor103 11:48 am EDT 08/08/14 |
| In reply to: | Blinded? - actor103 11:47 am EDT 08/08/14 |
|
| |
| Many typos. My bad. | |
| 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: 0.112876 seconds.