Some Broadway producers reportedly were “worried,” “outraged,” or “howling” over the publication by Newsday, a Tribune Co. newspaper in New York, of an unflattering review by Chicago Tribune theater critic Michael Phillips of “Movin’ Out,” a New York-bound musical playing in Chicago. “Despicable,” hissed Barry Weissler, a Broadway producer not connected with this particular show.
Publication of the review supposedly breached a convention, century-old but seldom discussed, that New York newspapers would not publish out-of-town reviews of plays and musicals headed for Broadway. Such self-censorship rings odd, particularly in the hometown of “All the News That’s Fit to Print,” and is generally reserved for cases of national security, bad taste or unwarranted breaches of personal privacy.
What makes out-of-town reviews not fit for print in New York, the argument goes, is that plays and musicals are not really finished products until they officially open on Broadway. Critiquing a New York-bound play still in Chicago or Philadelphia is like reviewing a handwritten draft of a novel before it’s proofed, edited and typeset between hard covers.
But what’s really driving the complaints is that a bad, or even tepid, out-of-town review can create “negative buzz” that will affect box-office sales and chances of success on Broadway. Never mind that Chicago critics have been right on the money with their raves for “The Producers” and their ho-hums for “Sweet Smell of Success,” the latter a so-so show that did so-so here and on Broadway. Some producers and publicists have threatened to stop launching shows in Chicago, until the news media start behaving.
This Broadway petulance is offensive to theatergoers everywhere. Plays are launched here not because of the kindness of producers but because–in the opinion of no less an authority than The New York Times–Chicago is by far the best theater venue outside of Broadway. It’s a big city, with big-city audiences, a vast pool of acting talent, and many theaters with first-rate crews.
Chicago benefits by these tryouts but so do the producers, who get time to work out kinks. Producers yearning for universal applause would be better off in Los Angeles or Houston, where the fact that the leading lady didn’t forget her lines or fall into the orchestra pit is often reason enough to provoke a standing ovation.
An even more self-serving fantasy is the notion that New York is its own separate media bubble, where theatergoers dutifully await the verdict from local papers before heading for the box office. “Movin’ Out” got lukewarm reviews from the Chicago Sun-Times and the Tribune, but also from the New York Post’s Michael Reidel. He said “any reader with half a brain,” could tell from a piece he wrote from Chicago that he though the musical was in trouble. More recently the Internet, with sites like Broadway.com, offers theater aficionados a buffet of news, gossip and local reviews of shows headed for Broadway.
And is a performance not “real,” or merely a work in progress, until it opens on Broadway? That one would be a hard sell to Chicago theatergoers paying a top price of $75.50 for “Movin’ Out,” plus up to $15 more for “convenience fees,” “facility charges,” city taxes and ticket handling. If you are willing to pay that for a show-in-the-rough, we’ll introduce you to a playwright who hasn’t fleshed out all the characters, the climax or the denouement, but is hawking the latest work in paperback for $28 a pop.
Information, criticism and discussion will never harm the theater or its audiences. A show is born on opening night when the curtain goes up, whether in Chicago or Seattle. If it’s any good at all, it will continue to evolve and respond to critics and audiences until it closes. Anything less than such artistic and journalistic freedom doesn’t do justice to theatergoers or the theater.
