Have Las Vegas reviewers seen too many magic shows to be objective when writing their reviews?
After many readers discussed the bias that entertainment reviewers bring to Las Vegas magic shows (Readers Respond to "Is the World Against Steve Wyrick?"), reader Levantino was kind enough to come up with a "check list" for professional reviewers.
"...it is the showmanship not the 'tricks' that sell the show," says Levantino in his response. "Reviewers can make or break an act and because they are exposed to many 'same-old same-old' acts they often lose sight of what their role is - that of reviewing in an OBJECTIVE manner.."
Here's Levantino's "check list" so reviewers may evaluate and score all shows in a qualitative unbiased manner - with one point awarded for a 'yes' and zero points awarded for a 'no':
1. Is the act original?
2. Is the show engaging?
3. Is the audience enjoying what they are experiencing?
4. Is the presenter always 'politically correct' (i.e. no insults or crudeness)?
5. Does the show continually hold the audience attention (i.e. no 'flat' spots)?
6. Is there lots of audience participation?
7. Is the performance highly polished?
8. Does the audience gasp at the 'wow moments'?
9. Does the audience regularly burst into 'unprompted' spontaneous applause?
10.Does the audience talk positively about the show as they leave the venue?
11.Does the show give 'value for money'?
"If all of the above is achieved then reviewers should SAY SO!" says Levantino.
Levantino, thank you for your insightful and thought-provoking response.