How Do You Solve A Problem Like Carrie Underwood?

9 things that went wrong, 6 things that went right, and 4 people who should've played Maria instead

  • Share
  • Read Later
NBC / Getty Images

Carrie Underwood as Maria

Updated: 11:20am, Dec. 6.

An imposing Austrian manly-man falls for the nanny even though he is attached to a hot and accomplished brunette, and Twitter explodes over it. No, it’s not the Arnold Schwarzenegger – Maria Shriver – Mildred Baena love triangle, it’s NBC’s live staged version of The Sound of Music. The show wasn’t half as good as the 1965 Julie Andrews original, but it was so cringe-worthy that it was at least fun to watch.

Here’s what you missed if you flipped over to Scandal instead:

9 Things That Went Wrong (The Dog Bites, The Bee Stings):

1) When Carrie Underwood stepped out on the (wooded, not grassy) hills and started singing, I wished the hills were alive with the sound of hungry mountain lions. Why wasn’t she Julie Andrews? Is being Julie Andrews so much to ask for? No chic pixie cut either. Heidi braids.

2) After the glorious Audra McDonald as Mother Superior fires Maria from being a nun, Maria gets upset and they start singing “My Favorite Things.” It didn’t bother me that they repurposed this song here because Audra got to sing it (see “Things That Went Right.”) But Underwood just looked like she was twisting her face into a joyful expression over raindrops on roses. She looked like an emoticon for being constipated, if such a thing existed.

(Update: I hear you all. The comparisons here are between the NBC version and the 1965 Julie Andrews movie, not the original stage version. I know that some of the differences, especially the different song order, are consistent with the original show, but that’s not the version that’s tattooed on my heart.) 

3) Cut to Vampire Von Trapp in his Vampire von Mansion (played by Stephen Moyer of True Blood.) Moyer’s accent was sometimes German and sometimes English, which was weird because Underwood’s accent was always Southern.

4) They  sang “Do-Re-Mi” inside (except one part where they awkwardly splashed in their backyard fountain), which made me miss the long movie montage where they went on a carriage ride and a train and threw around tomatoes.

5) Rolf and Liesl had the worst date ever, because Rolf wore knee socks and what appeared to be brown jorts and spent the whole time telling Liesl how old she is. They didn’t even get to do that romantic gazebo dance because there wasn’t any gazebo. It wasn’t even raining. But for some reason Liesl still had feelings for him because she’s 16 and he had a hip bike.

6) Maria and the children  sang “Lonely Goatherd” in the bedroom thunderstorm scene instead of “Favorite Things,” but there is no elaborate puppet show with terrifying wooden dolls. In the Julie Andrews version, Maria proves that she is not only a great nanny but also a theatrical genius when she dazzled the Captain with her deft manipulation of dozens of creepy goatherd puppets. In this version, she just told a boring story to a bunch of kids who had the world’s lamest pillow fight (no hitting, they just waved pillows over their heads). Also, Underwood already lost her voice by this part.

7) Vampire von Trapp told Maria he wants her to wear a dress that was “lovely, soft and white,” which sounded particularly blood-suckingly gross. Later on, they kissed and the chemistry is nil.

8) Maria wore a Kate Middleton knockoff to marry the Captain, because even Austrian nuns love the royal wedding. But other times she dressed like Hillary Clinton, circa 1994.

9) At no point in the entire show did Rolf ever wear big boy pants. Even after he became a Nazi.

6 Things That Went Right (Raindrops on Roses, Whiskers on Kittens) 

1) As usual, Audra McDonald stole the show as Mother Superior. She schooled everyone in how musical theater is supposed to be done. Her “Favorite Things” duet was basically a lesson in how to perform a song: she looked as if she singing through a memory, feeling her way through the music. She had more nuance in one line than Underwood had in her whole performance. That made sense, considering McDonald has a record 5 Tonys to her name (Full disclosure: I once worked as an intern with McDonald, and she was lovely).

2) Laura Benanti brought a level of complexity to the Baroness that I’d never seen before, plus she rocked some seriously great outfits (pink top, red pants, anyone?) Her songs were by far the best in the show, but that may have something to do with the fact that they were cut from the 1965 movie.

3) Christian Borle nailed Uncle Max. Like all the other musical-theater veterans in this cast, he was funnier than his co-stars and he knew how to act through music. His song about the coming Anschluss, “No Way to Stop It,” was a major highlight — mostly because he performed it with Benanti and Moyer while Underwood was changing her clothes. He was also the only character who had any genuine reaction to the political situation in Austria; watching him try to talk to Maria about the Nazis was like watching David Axelrod try to explain voting rights to a vacuum cleaner.

4) Stephen Moyer was actually pretty good at singing “Edelweiss” when he wasn’t sucking blood.

5) Ariane Rinehart made a decent Liesl and Michael Campayno was a good Rolf; it wasn’t his fault we were all mesmerized by his constantly visible knees.

6) The kids were pretty cute.

4 People Who Would Have Made a Better Maria Than Carrie Underwood:

1) Kelli O’Hara: Broadway star of South Pacific, The Pajama Game.

2) Sutton Foster: starred in recently cancelled Bunheads on ABC, and was in Broadway’s Anything Goes.

3) Megan Hilty: Star of NBC’s recently cancelled Smash, she has the voice and the acting chops.

4) Morgan Freeman, who once played God.

425 comments
AlbertGiesbrecht
AlbertGiesbrecht

People Who Would Have Made a Better Maria Than Carrie Underwood:

1) Kelli O’Hara: Broadway star of South Pacific, The Pajama Game.

2) Sutton Foster: starred in recently cancelled Bunheads on ABC, and was in Broadway’s Anything Goes.

3) Megan Hilty: Star of NBC’s recently cancelled Smash, she has the voice and the acting chops.

Never heard of them. Carrie Underwood I have heard about.

IlluminatiWonder
IlluminatiWonder

WELCOME TO THE GREAT TEMPLE OF ILLUMINATI WORLDRICHS. Are you a business.

Man, politician, musical, student and you want to be rich, powerful and be.
famous in life. You can achieve your dreams by being a member of the.
illuminati. With this all your dreams and heart desire can be fully.
accomplish, if you really want to be a member of the great illuminati then contac=illuminatiblessing666@gmail.com or call +2348 117 644 295.

AeNeuman
AeNeuman

Carrie under bite is simply an awful singer.

she should stick to the karaoke TV singing shows.

onthespot
onthespot

Simply put, Carrie does not have the acting nor the singing chops for this type of stuff.  She has very poor sining technique for this type of singing.  Powerful singing through your nose and throat is not the same as proper breathing technique!  Her performances made me cringe, almost to the point of wanting to turn it off.  My least favorite was the Lonely Goatherder Song....she could barely catch her breath....could hear her try to breathe loudly many times and struggle just to keep up...that is not how a trained singer sings.  Breathing technique is key.  Powerful singing through your nose and throat won't cut it here.  This is what separates great country and pop/rock singers from the rest.  Same problem with such greats as Michael Bolton's attempt at opera or Barbara Streisand even, who would really not ever stand up against real Broadway or opera singers technically, despite her greatness otherwise. 

onthespot
onthespot

Good points and very respectful responses. I think Carrie was very brave and was right to take this on and give it a shot. But, she also realized it was too much to think that she would ever live up to the role as others have. That said, the reality is your comment about Carrie being the "name" that generated viewers is EXACTLY why there are what seem to be "snooty" responses. Same thing in music in general. For example....the Beatles.....not an extremely impressive musical group (technically speaking), but did that matter? I imagine you DO REALIZE that the REAL NAMES in this show are the actual Broadway veterans who have awards in these areas who were in this production, as opposed to the far less (muscially) challenging country music genre of Carrie's background?

RoseMaybud
RoseMaybud

I am a Native New Yorker who grew up going to Broadway shows, and I have performed in many musical theatre productions myself, so I am very picky when it comes to any musical.

Carrie was not a good choice for the role; she simply is not a good actress, and her singing voice is not classically trained. This role calls for the best, and anyone who thinks she was "awesome" is simply unfamiliar with the high standards and qualifications for lead actors in Broadway musicals. Simply put, had she tried out for the role, she would never had made it through the audition process.  The only awesome talent were the actresses who portrayed the nuns, as their voices are classically trained ,and they were excellent.

mrscorgi
mrscorgi

I agree with Bill Keating from the comments below. As a former New Yorker who attended lots of Broadway shows because my English teachers chose to inspire us and including the fact that I still fly to New York to see musicals once or twice a year, I thought the Sound of Music Live Experience was wonderful. Most of America cannot afford $200 theatre tickets so the producers brought the musical to the masses. Forgive the masses for their lack of cultural taste but on the NBC or similar website, Underwood received 270,000 plus likes liking her performance. I'm not a statistician but that's a pretty big random sample extrapolated out to the 22 million who viewed it live on the first night. I also understand that 270,000 likes may not stand up against "cultured critics or would be satirists like yourself, but there were enough other critics who did like it. Snarking on twitter and Facebook or You tube is now a common occurrence. As for me, I will take a page out of Underwood's response and say a prayer for all of us to be more generous in spirit and kindness than we have proven we can be on this topic or deriding Obama for the latest political issue or pick the issue. In the end, be open to the fact that while there were people who didn't like it, there were many who did. You certainly are entitled to your opinion, as am I but please don't pontificate as if you and a few others have the final judgement on what's entertaining or not. That right-- thank goodness-- does belong to the masses.

jonhai
jonhai

Sierra Boggess would be perfect as Maria, not Morgan Freeman ;). Check her out in utube sing SOM tunes. 

BillKeating
BillKeating

When did this country become inhabited by so many mean-spirited people? I guess we need another Great Depression for people to return to treating other people kindly again.

Carrie Underwood did fine in this production. Just to appear in this role on live TV required more courage than this Charlotte Alter person will ever display. Without a name star, there would have been no live production on NBC, and the endless parade of crime and medical series would have monotonously continued.

Ms. Underwood was in no way as bad in the role as such media types as this Alter person like to picture her so that they can write articles such as the above full of what they think passes as wit. Carrie will benefit from the experience and improve at her new craft. And the great ratings success will mean more live theater on television taking the place occupied by the rotting corpses of detective shows.

notLostInSpace
notLostInSpace

 The whole thing comes down to whether you like mediocrity or not.  Face it, most of TV is banal mediocrity.  Same people that thought Ronnie Raygun was a great President probably liked TSOM.  I applaud the effort and the intent perhaps, but thought that it could have been done far better.  I suppose it made money which is probably all the network wanted.  Art and profit usually are not coexistent.  


Find the NFL is the same way; good coaches, good execution has been replaced by video John Maddenesque games where no lead is safe, no situation beyond hope.  4th and 26, no problem.  Five lead changes in final two minutes with miracle play after miracle play, no problem.  Entertaining yes, but not good football.

U-hsenLi
U-hsenLi

wow, seems like you are blaming on carrie underwood when most of the problems relies on the director (stages choices, song selection, scenery)

and you keep forgetting this is the broadway version where they only have limited stage and props.

lauri8331lauri
lauri8331lauri

If the same folks are still on Broadway (Ms. Ohara) doing South Pacific, don't go.  It's torture.  The only one that was truly good was the Frenchman.  He got picked up by the Met after one season. The island mom was the only other good actor.  My daughter was sitting with me and the two children did not do anything on stage. Nothing. No acting, no movement, no talk, no emotion. Worse 200.00 I ever spent. 

lauri8331lauri
lauri8331lauri

lol...I watched the show...Miss Underwood has a beautiful voice and is an amazing musician..but maybe she bit off a  bit more than she could chew on taking on the acting role...for the first acting job...3 hours on live TV.  No one remembers the play,,,they just remember Julie Andrews...no one could take  that on. No one could take Christopher Plummer on as Capt Von Trapp and the Mother Superior and the Baroness. Eleanor Parker passed away a few days after the show....no connection I hope. The rest were all talented, with varying degrees, but the lack of emotion, kind of deadpan added just a boringness to it.  However, the article, I know its not polite to point out all the negatives, Ms. Alter, the article was hysterical.  I tried not to laugh..but you were spot on.

chasrhodes2000
chasrhodes2000

Audra McDonald schooled everyone on what performing is all about. The rest seemed like high schoolers!

AmyMeyer
AmyMeyer

I liked it, I liked it a lot.   Sometimes... people get overly critical when they are jealous.  Jus' sayin'....


disant4
disant4

Even if Carrie had no acting experience before SOM, she did have 10 months to prepare for the role. Her acting really should have been much better than it was, even if it was live. 10 months is pretty long.

pdbhdk
pdbhdk

I think the production was good for what it was. NOTHING could fill Julie Andrew's shoes. Also, since more people are familiar with the movie, the differences in the Broadway version may seem "wrong", so to speak. It's kind of like books that are made into a movie. I thought Carrie Underwood did fine. The children were adorable and amazing singers.She's not blond, but I wonder how Anne Hathaway would have done as Maria. People are being extremely harsh on Carrie Underwood. She has a besutiful voice.

I didn't hear any southern accent from Carrie. I didn't hear much of an accent from any of the actors.

GarnetRed
GarnetRed

i was able to  tolerate Carrie but when the mother superior started shrilling  I turned it off.. wasn't sure if her eyes were going to pop out or her head explode.. either way I didn't want to witness it.. or hear it for that matter.

valentine.godoflove
valentine.godoflove

IN CAPS ....FOR THE ELDERLY......DEFEND THE WEAK ....KNIGHT TEMPLARS....


WELL......THE CRITICS WERE ON CARRIE UNDERWOOD LIKE FLIES TO A HEAP OF ELEPHANT DUNG..........


MAYBE.....SHE DID NOT SOUND BRITISH ENOUGH......


VALENTINE, COMEDIAN...LOL....

DonParsons
DonParsons

That was a disgusting critique. But, I am sure my wife would agree with you.

mhess
mhess

Charlotte: I love your writing.

Morgan Freeman! I nearly wet my pants.

Thanks for the much-needed laugh.

Milquetoast
Milquetoast

@brown.aaro:

Broadway is live, but repeated like a worn out prayer.
Broadway is Vaudeville, whereas Hollywood is iconic.
Like comparing Coney Island to Disneyland.
It only goes so far and comes up short doing so.
Can't wait to see "Gravity", like "Spiderman", with wires!

jannykmak
jannykmak

I loved the casting of Carrie Underwood. I wanted to hear her SING Maria; I knew her acting skills would be limited. Watching a live TV production also intrigued me. I did NOT tune in to watch The Sound of Music all over again. I've seen it too many times. Keep it in perspective, folks.

Milquetoast
Milquetoast

Yeah, you're all missing the point.

This Broadway version suffered by compare because
BROADWAY SUFFERS BY COMPARE.

Don't load this up on Carrie Underwood, this product was ill advised.
If NBC/UNIVERSAL was serious about this they would have done it
out of Universal City, instead of a shack on Long Island.

Still, the result would have been the same.
New York overstepped itself. It thought it would have something to
replay for tourism over and over during the holidays and .. it failed.
 
It happens.

Listen, even the far superior Los Angeles production had to go to Salzburg ..
something New York can never never do .. and that's its limitation.

Only tourists do Broadway.

(The above article on Audra McDonald proves my point.
America only knows her from Private Practice and Sesame Street.)

brown.aaro
brown.aaro

This is a really bad article... I mean half the things that "went wrong" is ordering of the songs and where the scene in which they were performed, which BECAUSE this was based of the BROADWAY PRODUCTION not the movie, those are all things that went right. The other half of them have to do with Seth Moyer being in True Blood, which shouldn't have anything to do with this. And then in the things that "went right," sure these were things that were good about it, but it still all pointed back to how it was bad. The author very clearly went into this with their opinion already made up that they were going to hate it. You can't compare the broadway version and the movie version and say all the things that are different are the things that went wrong. This article is comically bad and so biased, why Time ever let this on their site is beyond me.

ltramposch
ltramposch

Wow you really liked SMASH shocking since it also cast a former American Idol contestant who you probably didn't like. All due props to Megan Hilty's talent, but after seeing her as Bombshell's Marilyn so recently could you really picture her as Maria? Of course since you also mentioned Morgan Freeman, I suppose that could have been tongue in cheek. Who did the Von Trapp decendants see as Maria? Ann Hathaway. Well we know she can pull off the Julie hair (Le Mis) she definitely can act and sing though she is no professional in the singing department but please tell me what other role has she has played that makes one see her as Maria, nerdy Mia Thermopolis or Catwoman? Well she did costar with Julie Andrews in the Princess Diaries and the real Maria was a brunette after all, Sutton Foster, I get that, she's married to Christian Borle whom you love, enough said. Speaking of vampires, wasn't Kelli O'hara in Dracula, The Musical?  No offense is intended toward any of these talented performers. I betting you think my comment is silly, I admit it, I'm just trying to show how your review came off to others.

CriticsBLowe
CriticsBLowe

I think they did a great job! I was actually surprised how much I liked the show considering I was never a big fan of the original Julie Andrews version. Most of the songs were very well done. I don't know why you would want a remake exactly like the original -- part of the reason it is different is because you can't do the same things you could do in a movie (such as montages and train rides). The only thing I would change is that a few of the costumes were corny, but I can live with them. The directors chose the right cast, including Carrie!

hjt1@pitt.edu
hjt1@pitt.edu

this was a completely biased opinion you can tell the person writing this article just did not want to see anyone but Julie Andrews playing Maria--but guess what--THAT'S WHY THEY CALL IT A REMAKE!! Carrie may not have had the best acting skills--but she portrayed Maria's singing beautifully and in a more modern way. No, it is not the old version of the movie but it is a nice fresh twist. People need to reevaluate their own abilities and then talk... I would like to see the writer of this charlottealter get up there on stage and have the courage Carrie did to perform that live. And honestly, how childish to say who could have played a better role as Maria--I mean--Morgan Freeman? Come on. Grow up and write a critique that has factual points--not just your own opinions. 

wwill8287
wwill8287

Additionally, I would much prefer to see Carrie Underwood and/or Julie Andrews as Times Person of the Year, in preference to Miley Cyrus. Goodness!

wwill8287
wwill8287

Loved Carrie Underwood's performance in SOM, but then it's one of my all-time favorites. No, she is not Julie Andrew, also an all-time favorite. SOM is a beautiful story, movie and televised stage production, regardless. I will pray for the haters, too.

sbarboza
sbarboza

Wow, your review is completely useless since you are basing your critique on comparing this with the movie. This was based on the Broadway production, which came BEFORE the movie. That's why there were things "added" or "changed" that wasn't familiar to you. In the Broadway production, Maria and Mother Abbess do since "My Favorite Things" together. In the Broadway production, Maria teaches them "Do Re Mi" after meeting the children. Liesl and Rolf don't dance in a gazebo. Maria does sing "The Lonely Goatherd" in her bedroom to try to distract the children during the storm. Seriously, what an irrevelant article because this is based on the Broadway show NOT the movie.


ShirleyMiller
ShirleyMiller

First of all I thought Carrie sang beautifully.  And for you to say the things you did - let me ask you one thing - you perform this as a live performance with no acting experience ever in your life and see how people like you get graded so harshly.  Too bad you think you are so--- perfect that everything you do and say is wonderful - it's not!!!!  Better take a good look in the mirror beter judging others.

scottbeamer
scottbeamer

Many have said this already, but I just wanted to chime in as well.


First of all, I didn't watch the show.  For whatever reason, I just wasn't excited about Carrie Underwood as Maria.


I don't really know much of her, but I just don't like it when non-musical-theatre stars get cast in roles originally performed by those with musical theater experience.


OK, with that out of the way, your hating on this production because it followed the original stage version and not the movie version that is "tattooed in your heart" is just plain lame.


I for one am glad that millions were introduced the original stage version's songs/staging even if Underwood sucked.  They got an education.


This criticism is just beyond stupid.

Jayq222
Jayq222

Sure a real broadway performer would have turned in a better showing, but without Carrie Underwood, divide the ratings by  half or more.  

Greenwichdragonlady
Greenwichdragonlady

After reading this rediculous "review", I recollected why I cancelled my subscription to the print TIME magazine years ago.  The snarky comments are not serious journalism - they woud be appropriate for a high school newspaper, one with very low standards.  This was a fine production unworthy of most of the criticism.

BillKeating
BillKeating

@lauri8331lauri You embarrass yourself. South Pacific ran for two years and every principal won the Tony award (except for Matthew Morrison, who probably didn't care since he left to do "GLEE"). The New York Times somewhat crusty chief theater critic, Ben Brantley, wrote, "I know we're not supposed to expect perfection in this imperfect world, but I'm darned if I can find one serious flaw in this production." And the final performance was aired on "Live From Lincoln Center" hosted by Alan Alda.

RoseMaybud
RoseMaybud

@lauri8331lauri

I don't know where you heard Eleanor Parker died a few days after the show, as she died in 2013 at the age of 91.

lauri8331lauri
lauri8331lauri

I actually thought Ms. Alter's article was a parody on the show. I didn't think that is what she actually thought. Morgan Freeman...any show, commericial.. he is great..

ltramposch
ltramposch

I heartily disagree, yes there are differences, theatre is live, its intimate and it showcases true talent. Without all the cgi, locations etc. these people are so good they have the audience suspending disbelief in the first 5 minutes. It is magical. Yes tourists do go to the theatre, many travel to a location just because of the show that's being performed. Broadway theatres may be small and intimate but the houses are filled every day for years and years. The difference between that and a one shot live television program is sponsors and the type of people they hope to attract, people with short attention spans who can flip channels on a dime and who need to know the performers before they will tune in at all. Let's see who Ms. Underwood attracted, Fans of the biggest music reality show on TV, country music lovers of who there are many, men who watch Sunday Night football. People wait months, sometimes years to get tickets to a favorite Broadway show, that's how booked they are, its rather more like Vegas than Hollywood in that regard. You are right about that fact that for such an endeavor to draw a Television audience, television viewers need to know the star of the production. And who is defending the production? Those very people, while the people who are the harshest critics knew who Audra McDonald was in the first place.

brown.aaro
brown.aaro

@Milquetoast your comments are as ridiculous as this article. I mean are you seriously comparing Broadway to Hollywood as if they are the same thing? Their is a simple fact makes all the difference, BROADWAY is LIVE, Hollywood or movies are not. Movies get as many takes as they want at scenes, Broadway does not. You can't compare your "far superior Los Angeles production" to this one the way you or this article did. In movie, such as the Sound of Music film you can go anywhere in the world to make movies, productions that are LIVE such as this one, all of the sets have to be in one place. You have to be able to move from one set to the next quickly, going to the Mountains near Salzburg to a house in the suburbs would take to long. Part of live theatre is the 'willing suspension of disbelief' obviously something you lack. Your right movies, and according to you Hollywood because that apparently the only place movies and tv shows come from, will always be superior in terms of spectacle, but Broadway is far superior in entertainment because its live.

notLostInSpace
notLostInSpace

@wwill8287   Cyrus and Underwear, oops,  are comparable to a new very outspoken Pope?  My point above about mediocrity reigning supreme is reinforced.

ltramposch
ltramposch

Seriously I believe you knew you were comparing apples to oranges when you began. You loved the iconic movie and doubtfully would not have loved the play regardless of who was in it because it was not identical to the movie. Many of your complaints are production related. For instance Carrie's hair, sure the first thing that happens when a woman enters a convent, they give up their worldly possessions and their hair, but then as awesome as Audra was, the odds of there being a black mother superior in Austria as that time was next to nil. Let's face it you are nitpicking and you know it. So you were distracted by a man in lederhosen, yeah they do wear these in German countries (not every day but most people have them) but did you mention that "Rolf" is a student at CMU a university that also produced Christian Borle whom you loved, as well Josh Groban and a whole slew of fantastic actors and singers. As for the movie which I also loved, did you forget to point out that while Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer spoke with Brittish accents, the children were as American as can be. Part of enjoying theatre is suspending disbelief and immersing yourself in the story. Incidently neither the movie nor the broadway musical resemble the real story of the Von Trapps. Maria was not brought in as a governess to all the children but was a tutor for a daughter recovering from Scarlet Fever. Captain Von Trapp was not the strict stern father portrayed in these mediums but was very much engaged with his children and loved singing with them. Maria's marriage to Georg did not begin as a love match, she loved the children but didn't grow to love him until later. They married quite a few years before the Nazi's annexed Austria and had two children together by then. They knew they didn't want to become part of the Third Reich and planned a singing tour that kept them out of the country. That's right, they didn't climb the Alps, the took a train and were never in danger of being apprehended. Maria was quite mercurial and often had unexpected fits of temper which were accepted by the family because she was so sweet afterwards. Okay the current members of the Von Trapp family didn't not exactly see Carrie in the role of Maria either but then the real Maria herself felt that the fabulous Jule Andrews was far too tame to play her as well.

cinemabon
cinemabon

@ShirleyMiller First of all, she had to write an honest review and from what I can tell, it was universal through the country from New York to LA, from Chicago to Miami - no one liked it. They thought Underwood was wooden and she probably was. To attack the messenger says something about the attacker. This is a stage play. When the "actress" isn't singing, she's supposed to act. Unfortunately, no one involved in the production had the guts to say, "You know what Carrie, this isn't going to work." That would have been honesty.

notLostInSpace
notLostInSpace

@Jayq222  So what is better, half the ratings watching a great show or the full ratings watching not such a great show.  Art and profits don't co-exist.  Have to make a choice.  This is why tv is so banal and so mediocre.

notLostInSpace
notLostInSpace

@Greenwichdragonlady it is called a review.....and it was shared by a lot of other reviewers that don't live in Ark or La.   Further, it was meant to be humor.  Do you get so easily offended by say,  Ron Burgundy movies?  

ltramposch
ltramposch

cinemabon, with all due respect, I write book reviews and I am not one that believes reviews should never be critical however there are ways to write a negative review that garner credibility for the reviewer and those that look like the author just wanted people to see how "clever" they are. A review does not and should not take into account the feeling of the performers being reviewed, nor their fans, however upon reading this review my first reaction wasn't, oh they were just being honest. I agree that Ms. Underwood's acting was not the best, but my first reaction to reading this article was that is was all about how the play differed from the movie and I got the feeling the reviewer wouldn't have liked it no matter who was in it for that reason, so just just jumped on the let's beat up Carrie Underwood bandwagon. I have seen any number of live performances in the city where I live which is not NYC. Travelling productions rarely have the amazing sets and equippment you get on broadway and the stars are seldom the Broadway greats but more likely tv or screen stars that will get people in the seats. They aren't the best singers but the rest of the ensemble tend to make up for it. I have seen more shows featuring Soap Opera stars than Broadway stars. Sure the theatre going crowd would still have tuned in to watch and most likely the die hard fans of shows like GLEE. They love musical theatre anyway. But don't  you wonder how many viewers were folks who watch American Idol? I guarantee Megan Hilty, as awesome as she is, wasn't what drew viewers to was SMASH when it was on. People knew Katheryn McPhee. How many people that tuned in were country music fans? How much do you want to bet there were even some men who tuned in because they've seen her sing the Sunday Night Football theme? Yeah they probably weren't as critical as we hard core live theatre fans, either and I bet they might actually go see another play sometime. Heck I've read tons of books and not liked the movies as much because they left stuff out, change some scenes and the actors didn't look like the character's I pictured in my head. If I started a critique of the movie with I liked the book better, then you pretty much know what you are going to get with what follows that statement. Critique what you saw as its own work, if you didn't like it fine but to have a title that complains about the lead character and then just talks about how the play wasn't the movie is not a credible way to write a review.