It's funny - I made a little comment about the Cy Coleman revue in NY on the Broadway World board - some folks were being a little critical that it's literally one song after another with not one word of patter or any historical context. I chimed in that I was and am always surprised when something isn't that well received that no work is done on it. A poster immediately challenged me to post ONE negative review from a major critic, because, according to the poster, the show received unanimous raves, from the LA Times on down.
First off, the poster doing the challenging joined the board - today. Second off - their posting name - can'thumthetunes. Third off, don't challenge if you're going to be disingenuous and bend the truth - because a simple Google search led me to the LA Times review which was hardly a rave - it was a decent review, lukewarm, and one of his main problems was the lack of patter and historical context. And since I've heard that from every person I've talked to who's seen the show, well, if enough people say the same exact thing it's worth looking at, at least. I don't think anyone's asking for endless chatter, but a few set-ups would probably do wonders. I printed the review, welcomed the poster to the board, and asked whether it was David Zippel or Billy Stritch - certainly it's someone involved in the show from its inception. But his followup post would have led you to believe it was some disinterested party - but no, I'm afraid not. I'm afraid whoever it is (and I suspect it's either Zippel or Stritch) gave themselves away by somehow knowing about every review the show received.
I made one additional post, a very nice one, and wished them well. These people should stay off these boards.
