A few hours after 1,760 invitees gave a prolonged standing ovation to Bombay Dreams, the reviews started coming out, mostly slamming the musical, though Daily News gave it an unhesitant welcome, and Newsday a guarded one.
"Like its sources, Bombay Dreams strives for nothing more than unabashed entertainment," Howard Kissel wrote in Daily News. "It succeeds."
The New York Times, calling the show bland, added: "...None of this is painful to watch. Sometimes it is rather pleasant. But it is never, ever compelling."
The producers of the show had not expected glorious reviews, remembering how the show had received mixed reviews in London, but the savagery of some of the reviews, especially in The Washington Post and USA Today, which gave it one out of four stars, may give them some nightmares. Broadway audiences pay more attention to reviews than moviegoers pay to films. A Broadway musical costs $100 for the orchestra seats (unless you buy the tickets for half price on a given day), ten times the admission price for a film.
| |||||||||||
Though many recent shows, including Wicked, have survived bad reviews, and Andrew Lloyd Webber's own shows, the phenomenally popular Cats and The Phantom Of The Opera, were torched by major critics, Broadway insiders say it will be very difficult for Bombay Dreams to surmount the negative reviews given the show's unfamiliar terrain. And explicit warnings by such publications as New York Post and Star Ledger that the show won't appeal to Americans could hurt it.
In London too, reviewers had raved about A R Rahman's score. Despite mixed reviews, the show went on to earn a profit, not spectacular but decent, after a year. The show is being shut in June to be replaced by the American version, which got rid of many of the original show's subplots. But if the Broadway show sinks, the fate of the to-be-retooled show is anyone's guess.
A sample of utterly negative reviews:
'How do you say "mind-numbing bunk" in Hindi?' asked the USA Today reviewer. 'After attending a certain preview performance last weekend, I'd like to propose a new English-language synonym: Bombay Dreams.'
But the principal actors of the show who made their Broadway debut were praised. 'Under the direction of Steven Pimlott, with choreography by Anthony Van Laast and Farah Khan, the ensemble members work earnestly and tirelessly,' Ben Brantley wrote in The New York Times.
'The lean, limber Mr Narayan, the lovely Ms Nagarajan and the seriously sincere Mr Ganesan share the virtue of being peppy without being pushy,' Brantley continued. 'Mr Narayan has a pleasant, slightly strained voice that can't quite do justice to the wavering, melancholy notes of the show's best ballad, The Journey Home.'
Several newspapers praised the performances of Manu Narayan, Anisha Nagarajan and Sriram Ganesan with The New York Times giving a rave for Ayesha Dharker. 'The show's real star, however, is Ms DharkerÂ…' The Times wrote. 'Ms Dharker's Rani exudes the deep superficiality that makes good send-ups of ego-driven stars so satisfying.'
In the influential trade publication Variety, Charles Isherwood wrote: 'In the central role of Akaash, the lean, lively Narayan is a bit slick and ingratiating in the early scenes, but eventually settles down to give an appealing performance.' It also called Nagarajan 'pert and spirited'. It wrote that 'Ganesan gives a spirited, crowd-pleasing turn as the martyred eunuch Sweetie.'
To Newsday, Narayan made 'for an agreeable, fresh-faced hero'. It added that 'Nagarajan brings soft-edged beauty to the role of the young director'. It also found 'Dharker has sexy, strident fun as a heartless diva, while Madhur Jaffrey radiates simple warmth as Akaash's grandmother.'
Sriram Ganesan, who plays a very complex character of the hijra who is still in love with childhood friend Akaash, Newsday said, 'is a brave, predictably expendable hijra without overstepping into easy drag-queen mannerisms.'
While most reviews cribbed about the show's plot, which they found contrived and overblown despite three-time Tony winner Thomas Meehan reworking the London original with writer Meera Syal, A R Rahman's score came for high praise from most critics.
Even Star Ledger, which roasted the show, admitted: 'Creating an effusive fusion score of East-West music, superstar Indian composer A R Rahman provides big, insinuating melodies and hypnotic rhythms, decorated with native instruments and spiced by onstage drummers flanking the stage.'
The lead in Newsday celebrated Rahman's score: 'Whatever else may be said about Bombay Dreams, it can't be denied that its music follows you home.' The review singled out Shakalaka Baby as just a sample from the catchy score.
In Variety, Rahman received some of the best praise for his score. 'The promise of the musical's wordless opening moments, in which soft, shimmering chords gradually build to a stirring climax, is borne out by Rahman's continually enticing score,' the magazine declared. 'The composer provides richly rhythmic, jangling tunes for the splashy dance numbers and can also write honourably in contemporary Western idioms.'
But not everybody seems to be a Rahman fan. New York Post, which gave the show one and a half stars, called the score 'occasionally soupily romantic' and 'often monotonous'. The headline for the review: Dreams is a sari affair.
Photographs: Paresh Gandhi
Click here for More Features
