Diana: il musical

A lyrically bankrupt torture scene lasting two hours cleverly edited to feel like four.

The only saving grace is the use of the word "sod" five times (an underrated insult) and Barbara Cartland's introduction of James Hewitt, the majesty of which is a sight to behold.

Once my dog ate a large section of cooked turkey giblets string included and when he did a poo the string ran through the middle of it holding section of poo together in one long line. That's what this is like in terms of its musical strength. It's one bit of poo strung together by very poor string-like dialogue.

This doesn't know what it is or what it's trying to be is the take-home feeling I had. The cast aren't bad as in their vocals and performances (characters aside) are pretty sharp and don't miss but they're lost in the tack. I feel bad for the cast to be honest they must have known this was a big chance to take and it was gonna be loved or loathed. Maybe it will do well or at least better as a live stage show complete with audience but I can recall and sing at least one line from every song having just watched it the once so that's how mediocre and run of the mill generic, predictable and generally naff and unremarkable the songs are.

Stage, costumes, lighting etc - really well done. Just not enough to carry the rest unfortunately.

What do you say that hasn't been said by others? This is truely so bad that it's good. Terrible music, woeful choreography and predictable AF!

I mean what do you do differently? I guess write terrible lyrics? Seems like this musical really likes to have a crowd on stage. Maybe this was a nod to the fact that there were always people around Diana? I doubt they were that clever judging by the book was written! I didn't walk away with any excitement or was wowed by any melody or lyric. The forceful comedy relief the really pushing the sexy jock narrative. I don't feel anything for Diana and if I didn't know the story or the well documented tragedy I doubt I would have felt anything.

Good things Hmmmm the actor's voices are great. Look watch this but know it's bad.

I gave it a one because zero stars is not an option. A jaw dropping event. Hysterical, stupid, but ultimately, just damned depressing. Is this really where musical theater has gone? Into the hands of rank amateurs? It had to be written by the fifteen year old nephew of one of the producers who based his knowledge of the story on tabloid headlines. Not tabloid stories, just the headlines! If this opened during the Golden Age of Rodgers and Hammerstein, Lerner and Loewe, Jule Styne and Frank Loesser, it would have closed at intermission. Today it will run five years and stupid theatergoers will jump to their feet screaming with delight at the curtain call. Like I said a depressing example of NYC theater today. Rotten music, second grade version of events, inane lyrics, embarrassing performances, ugly design and inept direction and choreography Did I mention I find it insulting, demoralizing, and sad. Oh and that it's hateful in every respect.

I honestly dont undestand all the bad reviews on this one, definetely overhated.

It does have some cringy lines and weak dialogue but its overall a more than decent musical. Theres no song in partiuclar that drove me crazy but the choreography, script and production are good.

It is an almost sung-through musical, so keep that in mind in case you expected some scattered songs throught.

Regarding veracity, i have no idea tbh. I couldnt care less about the royal family of the UK so it might have not been 100% historically accurate and i probably woulndt have noticed. For my basic knowledge, it covered it all but i couldnt testify to it being perfect in that area.

Overall an entertaining musical that doesnt particularly bring anything new to the table but its more than an acceptable addition.

If you are not a fan of musicals, this wont be the one that makes you like them, so maybe just skip it.

If you usually enjoy musicals, give it a chance!!