HOME ALL THAT CHAT ATC WEST COAST SHOPPIN' RUSH BOARD FAQS

LOGIN REGISTER SEARCH THREADED MODE

not logged in

Threaded Order | Chronological Order

Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway?

Posted by: pecansforall 11:30 pm EST 11/17/14
In reply to: NEW - SIDE SHOW - Talkin' Broadway's Review - T.B._Admin. 08:00 pm EST 11/17/14

He's more of an IT guy.

Matthew Murray got his humble start leading a technology-sensitive life in elementary school, where he struggled to satisfy his ravenous hunger for computers, computer games, and writing book reports in Integer BASIC. He earned his B.A. in Dramatic Writing at Western Washington University, where he also minored in Web design and German. He has been building computers for himself and others for over 15 years, and spent several years working in IT and helpdesk capacities before escaping into the far more exciting world of journalism. Currently PCMag.com's lead analyst for components and DIY, Matthew has fulfilled a number of other positions at the company, including an editor on the Consumer Electronics and Software teams, and for a year the Managing Editor of ExtremeTech.com.

Before coming to PCMag, Matthew served as senior editor at Computer Shopper, where he covered desktops, software, components, and system building; as senior editor at Stage Directions, a monthly technical theater trade publication; and as associate editor at TheaterMania.com, where he contributed to and helped edit The TheaterMania Guide to Musical Theater Cast Recordings (Back Stage Books, 2004). Matthew is also the chief New York theater critic for TalkinBroadway.com, one of the best known and most popular Web sites covering the New York theater scene; and an editor, columnist, and critic for BroadwayStars.com, New York's foremost theater news aggregator. He also appears regularly as an expert and pundit on the Broadway Radio "This Week on Broadway" podcast, and is a member of the Theatre World Awards board for honoring outstanding stage debuts.



reply to this message |

re: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway?

Posted by: Sam890 06:06 am EST 11/18/14
In reply to: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway? - pecansforall 11:30 pm EST 11/17/14

Good luck to him - he's gone far on very little talent or ability. I find his reviews smug, ill-informed and the rantings of a person bitter about his own irrelevance. To me he demonstrates great difficulty understanding anything outside of his very narrow world view and states his limited opinion as fact - and that is why I stopped reading his 'reviews'. I suggest you do the same - there are many many alternatives


reply to this message |

re: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway?

Posted by: Chromolume 09:34 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway? - Sam890 06:06 am EST 11/18/14

Oh, I'm sorry. Once you read any of the reviews by one Carl Rossi in Boston, you will think of Murray as a pro with a vary fair outlook.

Just for giggles - linked below is Rossi's "review" of the Boston premiere production of Side Show, back in 2003 (and yes, I was musical director). Whatever one may have thought of the production, was this idiot's rambling screed really necessary?


And as a bonus - here's his diatribe on a local Bat Boy, which was not only a wonderful production, but probably the most successful production for the theatre that mounted it (I seem to recall that not only did the run get extended, but they brought the production back that summer).

http://www.theatermirror.com/bbstcr.htm

Now, what was that about smug, ill-informed, and ranting? ;-)

Link Side Show "review"

reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway?

Posted by: SShow 10:26 am EST 11/19/14
In reply to: re: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway? - Chromolume 09:34 pm EST 11/18/14

OMG, I came to Boston to see this production and I remember this review. I may even still have it at home somewhere.


reply to this message | reply to first message

This may help...

Posted by: garyd 12:22 am EST 11/18/14
In reply to: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway? - pecansforall 11:30 pm EST 11/17/14

Probably not but here it is anyway. He reviews theatre and with some credible bonafides. If you do not find he generally reflects your views, don't read him.


reply to this message | reply to first message

I meant to attach a link...

Posted by: garyd 12:49 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: This may help... - garyd 12:22 am EST 11/18/14

but of course I didn't. Here it is.

Link http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2014/08/critical-i-matthew-murray-talkinbroadway-com/

reply to this message | reply to first message

or take him with a grain of salt.

Posted by: jero 09:34 am EST 11/18/14
In reply to: This may help... - garyd 12:22 am EST 11/18/14

I use him to help me remember some points I might have forgotten.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway?

Posted by: Circlevet 11:57 pm EST 11/17/14
In reply to: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway? - pecansforall 11:30 pm EST 11/17/14

He's one of the better and most astute New York critics. I agree with him far more often than not.


reply to this message | reply to first message

Come on

Posted by: Ann 11:42 pm EST 11/17/14
In reply to: Just who is this Matthew Murray anyway? - pecansforall 11:30 pm EST 11/17/14

You've been around here for at least 10 years. You can't be shocked he has a day job (which, as an editor, is not just being "an IT guy"). We have published (guessing at the number) 2,000+ reviews he has written, over more than 12 years. He's an experienced reviewer.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on

Posted by: broadwaybacker 11:58 pm EST 11/17/14
In reply to: Come on - Ann 11:42 pm EST 11/17/14

His bitter review seemed unduly cruel to me and felt very personal. Maybe Bill Russell didn't buy him a drink at an ATC party (not that I know whether or not Murray has ever attended one.)


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on

Posted by: enoch10 01:42 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on - broadwaybacker 11:58 pm EST 11/17/14

let me get this right: you feel justified in making a personal attack on someone for doing their job in a way you feel comes off as a personal attack?


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on yourself

Posted by: broadwaybacker 03:46 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on - enoch10 01:42 pm EST 11/18/14

Unlike other posters who DID attack Murray personally by questioning his bona fides as a critic, I did no such thing. Perhaps you should read what I wrote again. We've all read many pans, but to me what Murray wrote felt (that's subjective) unduly cruel and personal. That's my opinion, which I'm just as entitled to have as he is.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on yourself

Posted by: enoch10 08:59 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on yourself - broadwaybacker 03:46 pm EST 11/18/14

>> Perhaps you should read what I wrote again.

you mean this part:

>> Maybe Bill Russell didn't buy him a drink at an ATC party


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on yourself

Posted by: MikeR 04:48 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on yourself - broadwaybacker 03:46 pm EST 11/18/14

You questioned his motivations, suggesting that he wrote a negative review because he was personally slighted by Bill Russell. That may not be questioning his bona fides as a critic, but it's still a personal attack.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on yourself

Posted by: Ann 05:10 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on yourself - MikeR 04:48 pm EST 11/18/14

I do think that was obviously a joke, and he was trying to lighten things up a bit.


reply to this message | reply to first message

Forget the "obviously"

Posted by: Ann 05:11 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on yourself - Ann 05:10 pm EST 11/18/14

I read it as a joke.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Forget the "obviously"

Posted by: broadwaybacker 12:49 pm EST 11/19/14
In reply to: Forget the "obviously" - Ann 05:11 pm EST 11/18/14

Well I thought it was obvious when I added that I didn't even know if Murray ever went to an ATC party. :)

At least you (and several others) got it.

PS--Has he?


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on

Posted by: garyd 12:40 am EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on - broadwaybacker 11:58 pm EST 11/17/14

He did not like this incarnation of the work. He stated his opinion and backed it up with credible and detailed rationale. You may not agree and I may not agree but I do not see evidence of a personal vendetta or bitterness.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on

Posted by: MikeR 01:41 am EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on - garyd 12:40 am EST 11/18/14

Exactly! He spelled out every single thing he didn't like about the show. His evaluation isn't coming from nowhere, it's all clearly supported. And people react like he killed their children. Maybe he didn't buy them drinks at an ATC party.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Come on

Posted by: garyd 12:40 pm EST 11/18/14
In reply to: re: Come on - MikeR 01:41 am EST 11/18/14

And here I thought drinks were included at ATC parties. :)


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 | Sound Advice Upcoming Releases CDs/Books/DVDs, etc. | 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: 0.172546 seconds.