Copperfield (musical)

In his review in The New York Times, Frank Rich said,

This is the kind of musical that sends you out of the theater humming every score other than the one you've just heard . . . of course, derivativeness is nothing new in Broadway musicals that aspire to be pure commercial entertainments. The real problem with Copperfield is that its authors are not good mimics. From the music to the scenery to the cast, everything about this show looks tacky in comparison to its prototypes. And when the writers actually attempt to come up with fresh ideas - well, look out! The show's book manages to miss the human comedy, the tears and even the point of Dickens's novel. This is no longer the story of a boy's hard-won growth to emotional manhood, but a clunky, often incoherently told melodrama in which all the villains literally wear black . . . the title character seems an almost peripheral figure in the proceedings. He's played by two decent singers - one boy, one man - who are nothing if not chips off the same block. The block is made of wood . . . Some of the music is mildly tuneful, after its many fashions, but the lyrics are, at best, unintentionally funny . . . Rob Iscove's choreography departs from the show's norm, in that it seems to have been culled from flops rather than hits . . . it could be argued that Copperfield might be entertaining for young children, whose innocent minds aren't sullied by memories of the superior shows that this one dimly recalls. But it's hard to imagine what parent - short of an evil Dickensian one - would take the family to the ANTA when Annie, Barnum and The Pirates of Penzance are in town."^[2]

• Copperfield at the Internet Broadway Database