Something Rotten

[edjames]

This new musical comedy by a new (to Broadway) creative team, Karey Kirkpatrick (book, music and lyrics), Wayne Kirkpatrick (music/lyrics) and John O'Farrell, is in previews at the St. James and opens April 22.

Set in 1595, Elizabethan England, two struggling playwrights, Nick and Nigel Bottom, are desperate to write a hit play that will rival their nemesis, William Shakespeare.

I won't reveal much more of the plot and let you go and enjoy this hysterically funny and entertaining production.

The cast is excellent. Brian D'Arcy James, plays Nick Bottom. Christian Borle plays a rockstar Shakespeare. He struts around the stage in very tight leather pants and a prominent codpiece. His handsome entourage is similarly attired.

Gay innuendo and double entendres fly fast and furious in this fast paced farce. The musical numbers are a lot of fun. The middle of the first act tune "A Musical" is cleverly written and is a showstopper. People stood and cheered at the end. The Act One finale tune is "Bottom's Gonna be On Top" and, well, you can just guess the outcome! Another number in the second act "It's Eggs" is a similar standout.

I think this will be a top Tony contender. A terrific show.

 

ED

[edjames]

I'll admit to being a bit surprised that this show hasn't gotten more attention from the thread.

 

More importantly is my utter and complete disgust for that sham of a critic at the NYT who thinks he is above having a good time at the theater.

The stick is shoved so far up his ass it's taller than the Freedom Tower!

 

His review is totally wrong!

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/23/theater/review-something-rotten-an-over-the-top-take-on-shakespeare.html?ref=arts&_r=0

 

However Elizabeth Vincentelli at the NYPost was correct when she called it a "blockbuster," "something special" and "Broadway's next big hit."

 

http://nypost.com/2015/04/23/something-rotten-deserves-to-be-broadways-new-big-fat-hit/

[bostonman]

That "sham of a critic" recently gave glowing reviews to Fun Home, The King And I, and On The 20th Century, among others. He's clearly not above having a good time at the theatre (no matter what the tone of the material is).

 

I think it's unfair to brand a critic's opinion as "wrong" or "right" (they can get FACTS wrong - like the local critic who actually seemed to review an earlier incarnation of a show I did last year, instead of the one she supposedly attended) - simply because your own opinion doesn't match up.

 

He didn't like a show you liked. Big whoop. I do have a feeling the show may have a decent run anyways. But so, probably, will Finding Neverland and Doctor Zhivago, two shows which were pretty much universally panned. The critics just don't matter as much as we like to think they do.

 

There's an online critic on a renowned theatre chat board who tends to get crucified with the "what a lousy critic - he hates everything" posts when he writes bad reviews. The problem is, those reactionary posters don't seem to know or care that he also writes many good reviews. It's a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that "their" beloved show got a bad review, and it's silly and immature.

 

You can disagree with Mr. Brantley's assessment of the show. But it is indeed wrong to brand him as a sham, simply because his opinion isn't yours.

 

If a critic gives a bad review to a show I've been working on, I'm disappointed, but I move on. In the case of the critic I mentioned who seemed to be reviewing the wrong script last year - that to me is simply bad writing, and I don't read her reviews at all anymore. SHE got it wrong. Brantley only wrote about what he himself experienced.

[edjames]

yeah, yeah...stick and stones...

 

Ms. Brantley has been called far worse.

 

We're all entitled to our opinion. God know worse commentary has been flung amongst these threads by others far more cruel and bitter.

 

The backlash to his Something Rotten review is all over town. Michael Reidel, NYPost, while agreeing with Ben, had this to say in his column today:

 

As for the newly opened “Something Rotten!,” insiders were surprised at the vitriol hurled at it by Ben Brantley in the Times. I happen to agree with him. I find musicals in which guys wear giant codpieces and mug as if they were graduates of The Charles Nelson Reilly Academy of Dramatic Arts insufferable.

BTW...have you seen the show?

[bostonman]

I have not seen it - I'm ensconced in a few projects in Boston right now that make travel pretty impossible. I am interested in seeing Something Rotten and forming my own opinion, and am hoping to get to NYC sometime this summer (and as I said, I don't doubt it will still be running).

 

I have no idea what Mr. Riedel is like in his private life. Though I'm sure many of his quips in the Post (and it is the Post for god's sake, not a literary mag) come from some true feelings, I also believe that he is hired specifically to stir the pot and make sophomoric, salacious statements. That's his job. He clearly relishes the opportunity to make "another brilliant zinger" even in his TV-host persona with PBS' Theatre Talk, but he's much more snarky in his Post persona - and I'm sure that's on purpose. He's writing to entertain, pure and simple. For all we know, he actually liked Something Rotten, but he knows it would be more fun to write that he doesn't. Brantley, on the other hand, like any true critic, really has the responsibility to write about what he sees. And I do think that's easier said than done.

[edjames]

Hey! Guess what? We actually agree that Mr. Reidel can push the buttons with his commentary. Snarky is a good word.

Well, do let me know when you'll be in NYC and perhaps we can meet up for a post-theater cocktail....first cocktail is on me.

 

Ed

[+ beethoven]

I got tickets for "Something Rotten" the day before it opened. I'm seeing it in late May -- I hope! I'm afraid that it may not last that long, but the full page ad in yesterday's NY Times indicates that the producers intend to hang in there. I hope that word of mouth and some favorable reviews will let the show survive. I had read about it here, and I'm sure that it's a hoot. Ben Brantley has been the Times' critic for a long time, and he tends to go overboard in what he likes, and I think that now he's gone a bit overboard in the other direction. He's usually reliable, but not always. Chac'un a son gout, right?

[RyanDean]

beethoven - you'll be fine.

I've not yet seen it but, based on everything I'm hearing from insidery friends who have, I suspect SR will run for a good long while.

[RyanDean]

And this social media ad strategy cracks me up: