BROADWAY REVIEWS

39 Steps, The

All My Sons

August: Osage County
Avenue Q

Billy Elliot
Chicago

Equus
Gypsy
In the Heights
Jersey Boys
Lion King, The
Little Mermaid, The

Mamma Mia!

Mary Poppins
Monty Python's Spamalot
Pal Joey

Phantom of the Opera, The

Seagull, The

Shrek

South Pacific

Speed-the-Plow

Spring Awakening

Wicked

OFF-BROADWAY REVIEWS

Altar Boyz

Blue Man Group

Celebrity Autobiography

Cripple of Inishmann

Forbidden Broadway

Fuerzabruta

Garden of Earthly Delights

Perfect Crime

Road Show

Saturn Returns

Streamers

Stomp

Show	NY Times	AMNY	USA Today	Variety	Daily News

Synopsis: A wizard and a muggle in the parallel universe of Harry Potter, Daniel Radcliffe and Richard Griffiths reunite in Peter Shaffer's classic play about the effort to heal a troubled young man. Click here to buy tickets.

Did YOU Like It?

Click here to post your own review!

Reviews

NEW YORK TIMES REVIEW:

"The young wizard has chosen wisely. Making his Broadway debut in Thea Sharrock’s oddly arid revival of Peter Shaffer’s “Equus,” which opened Thursday night at the Broadhurst Theater, the 19-year-old film star Daniel Radcliffe steps into a mothball-preserved, off-the-rack part and wears it like a tailor’s delight — that is, a natural fit that allows room to stretch. Would that the production around him, first presented in London, showed off Mr. Shaffer’s 1973 psychodrama as flatteringly as it does its stage-virgin star."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS REVIEW:

"Let's get right to it - Daniel Radcliffe, the marquee man-boy and the reason "Equus" has trotted back to Broadway."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

VARIETY REVIEW:

"Stunt casting in theater can do a disservice to playwrights, with famous faces often monopolizing attention while devaluing the merits of the work itself. But in his impressive debut in a major stage role, as the disturbed adolescent in "Equus," Daniel Radcliffe significantly helps overcome the fact that Peter Shaffer's 1975 Tony winner doesn't entirely hold up."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

AMNY REVIEW:

"Does Mr. Radcliffe have what it takes to play Broadway? Absolutely."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

USA TODAY REVIEW:

"The good and bad news about the new Broadway revival of Equus with Daniel Radcliffe is that the actor is aging a lot more gracefully than the play."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

NY1 REVIEW:

"When my mother took me to see the original production of “Equus,” it stayed with me for years. I was much too young to judge its merits, but I see now why the play had such an impact. It really is a mesmerizing work that reaches deep into the psyche.."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

NEWSDAY REVIEW:

"Well, he's the real thing. He may be Harry Potter to the rest of the world. But for almost three hours on Broadway last night, Daniel Radcliffe, 19, quietly transfigured himself from adorable boy wizard to horrifically unstable teen stable boy - and, in the process, bravely established himself as a smart, intense, wildly serious stage talent."

Click here to read the full Equus review.

User Reviews:
Average Audience Review:

Click here to post your own review
	Musings of a Professional Crazed Fan Reviewed by: maliatkb8   2008-10-22 we rushed to the Broadhurst Theatre to see EQUUS, and OMG was it thrilling! When the light's went down, and the eiry music started to play, my cousin grabbed my hand as we waiting for Daniel to appear. And, when he did, it was as if the earth shifted. Seriously, it was a monumental experience! I was on the edge of my seat from the beginning of the play to the end. It was thrilling, striking, and utterly disturbing. Not for one minute did I think of Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter, but instead a highly psychotic boy with a violent fascination. He is so brave to take on that role. Richard Griffiths was just as good, and I expect he'll get a Tony nomination. Daniel is the draw, but Richard carries the show. And, because I know everyone's curious, the nude scene wasn't bad at all. As expected, it came at the absolute climax of the production, during a scene that had me crying and left me shaken. Honestly, I didn't think much of it. But the play was very sexual, and a bit too much for my mother.
	My feelings for EQUUS are very mixed. Reviewed by: Jamie   2008-10-19 I have always had MAJOR problems with the play itself which is the trick in reviewing revivals. The material is basically a non-factor, at least in its technicalities. But this production just seems to highlight the plays weaknesses as opposed to highlight its strengths. There are moments where the emotions and tensions really work together but they aren't very frequent. The opening scenes are beautifully stark and well-acted and involving and the sequence before the end of the first act is also memorable. But everything else is kind of just underwhelming. The direction, by Thea Sharrock, is obviously "there" but a bit dormant and never really takes the ideas that it introduces to the extents it could. I apologize if my thoughts on EQUUS are a little disjointed but that is just how I felt about the show itself. It was very disjointed. I really loved Richard Griffiths' performance and I have to say I wasn't bowled over by Daniel Radcliffe. Maybe it was because I had heard he was so spectacular and he's just ... not. He's fine, sure, and he's really giving the role his all but he's a bit unengaging to watch, at least for me. I also particularly liked Anna Camp and Kate Mulgrew. The artistic aspects of the show (the lighting and sets and costumes) are exceedingly beautiful. My feelings for EQUUS are very mixed. I keep bouncing back and forth between enjoying it and finding it somewhat pretentious. So, for now, that's where I'll stay. In the middleground.
	Good/Bad Reviewed by: Adam   2008-10-19 I saw it yesterday afternoon with my partner and thought the Radcliffe was excellent, worth the price of admission on his own. I had serious problems with Kate Mulgrew, who was so mannered in comparison to everyone else that I thought she walked from another play. And while I thought his performance overall was good (if underplayed), Richard Griffiths had projection and enunciation issues, as did Carolyn McCormick as Alan's mom, which in turns left some of their dialogue a bit garbled. Even so, the show itself is very much worth seeing. in fact, my partner is debating a return visit.
	Amazing Reviewed by: Johny   2008-10-19 I just wanted to say that I saw Equus yesterday and it was Amazing. It was my first play I usually only see Musicals and I Loved it. I think I'm gonna see it again.
	See This Show! Reviewed by: Brad Germuga   2008-10-17 There were some excellent performance, and I loved the whole ritualistic/ancient feel to it provided by the staging and the set. Daniel Radcliffe's physicality was breathtaking, and Richard Griffiths gave the perfect amount of understatement to his lines. That being said, as fully admitted by the author, the play does not really hold up. It is a fascinating story, but it just doesn't feel true, and it is not as shocking as I'm sure it once was. Peter Schafer is brilliant. I had read the script before seeing it so I knew what to expect, but was still blown away by it. The staging of the show was intense and really enhanced the plot, especially the way the horses were portrayed. The big controversial naked scene at the end of the show was shocking, but appropriate to the intensity that built up to that point. I had a stage seat, which I had heard negative things about. I recommend getting a stage seat on the first row, as you can lean over the edge (the seats are 10 feet above the stage) and get an awesome aerial view of the show. SEE THIS SHOW!!