‘Spider-Man’ Early Reviews Set Off a Storm

In a rare departure from custom, most of the nation’s leading theater critics filed their long-anticipated reviews of Broadway’s “Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark” for publication on Tuesday, even though that musical had not yet opened. They drew a sharp protest from the production about the fairness of assessing a show while its creative team is still at work.

The reviews by the 12 critics — including those of The New York Times and the region’s three major tabloids as well as of The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post — were largely negative, in some cases emphatically so. Taken together, the notices yielded a consensus that the musical is hamstrung, in the words of the Chicago Tribune critic Chris Jones, by “an incoherent story” that is hurt more than helped by music, flying sequences and sets that neither live up to the creators’ estimable pedigrees nor to the show’s $65 million price tag.

Directed by Julie Taymor, a Tony Award winner for “The Lion King,” the show has been doing strong box office business since previews began, on Nov. 28; whether the negative reviews make any difference for a brand-name, mass-market entertainment like “Spider-Man” may not be clear for some time.

On Monday the show will report its first week of ticket sales since the reviews; that will be one sign, but sheer curiosity about the new show, its flying sequences (with their headline-grabbing accidents), and music and lyrics by U2’s Bono and the Edge is so great that the grosses are expected to be strong. The effect of negative reviews will probably not be evident until the intrigue wears off, which may not be until the fall or after.

The most direct result of Tuesday’s reviews was a denunciation from the show’s spokesman, Rick Miramontez, who said that the critics’ evaluations were moot because the creative team was still making adjustments.

“This pile-on by the critics is a huge disappointment,” Mr. Miramontez said. “Changes are still being made, and any review that runs before the show is frozen is totally invalid.”

Ben Brantley, The Times’s chief theater critic, was one of the most negative, saying the musical may “rank among the worst” in Broadway history. The closest to a mixed, positive-leaning notice was from New York magazine’s critic Scott Brown, who described the show as “unpredictably entertaining” and said that “even in the depths of ‘Spider-Man’s’ certifiably insane second act, I was riveted.” USA Today also published an article that conveyed praise for the creative team’s ambitions.

Most of the critics wrote that they had decided to follow the musical’s latest opening-night date (before it was moved to March 15) because it had been running for an unusually long 10 weeks of previews with paying theatergoers, who deserved independent appraisals. Five more weeks of previews, which the musical is on track to have, would most likely set a record for the most previews of a Broadway musical. The Times and other major publications almost never review a Broadway production before the opening.

Asked if the early reviews set a precedent, several Broadway producers and theater owners said on Tuesday that the show was an exception, given its long preview period and high cost. (Most musicals have three or four weeks of previews and cost an average of $10 million or so.) Jordan Roth of Jujamcyn Theaters, which owns 5 of the 40 Broadway theaters, said he was more interested in the extent to which amateur critics were changing the editors’ and professional critics’ decisions. He said he was watching “how the forces that they felt necessitated these pre-opening reviews — that so many people had already cast judgment on blogs, Facebook, Twitter and other coverage — will ultimately affect the dynamics of criticism in our culture.”

Like much else about the show, the reviews, too, took on a viral life of their own; by midmorning on Tuesday, a comic minute-long video based on the reviews had already appeared on YouTube. Some critics, including Peter Marks of The Washington Post, said in interviews on Tuesday that they did not plan to publish follow-up reviews of the musical once it opens. The Los Angeles Times critic, Charles McNulty, said he planned to check back in the spring, though he doubted that the March 15 opening date would hold. Broadway shows must open officially by April 28 to be eligible for Tony Awards.

The critics from The New York Post, The Daily News, New York magazine and Time Out New York said in interviews that they would return for the official opening. Jonathan Landman, the culture editor of The Times, said the newspaper would keep its options open.

Given the onslaught of reviews on Tuesday, several of the theater critics denied or shrugged off the notion that there had been some formal collusion to publish in concert or damage the show.

Some critics said that once they heard rumors that Mr. Brantley of The Times was attending a preview and was likely to file a review, they decided to follow suit. Mr. McNulty said he did not consult with other critics and was “a bit surprised” by all the reviews on Tuesday. Mr. Marks of The Washington Post and Jeremy Gerard, theater critic for Bloomberg, said they knew that some other critics were going and planning to file reviews, but that they were not part of any grand plan. Mr. Landman of The Times said he had not had any conversations with journalists at any other publication or Web sites about reviewing the show.