How I rate theatre shows
Star ratings are good way to get a clear first impression of the theatre shows that I see. They provide a visual representation of my views of a show, and give an indication as to the direction that my review will take. However, star ratings also lose a lot of nuance that a full written review can provide. A lot of this nuance is down to expectations and standards. I will generally hold West End and RSC productions to higher standards than regional or touring productions. A lot of this comes down to the cost of the tickets – audiences should get their money’s worth, and therefore have higher expectations for West End shows where theatre tickets are often more expensive. Other aspects such as advertising campaigns is also taken into account – how much is the show promising, and does it deliver?
As such, it is difficult to compare between shows, as different factors will influence that show’s star rating. If you wish to compare, using the Broken Legs Collections function is likely to be the easiest way to do this, but I would encourage users to digest the entire review and not make judgements based solely on star ratings. I would also remind readers that these reviews are simply my opinions – and that other reviewers may have different opinions. Star ratings, and indeed my entire reviews, are designed to reflect the production as a whole – they are never a reflection of the abilities of individual performers, and I do not comment on actors in isolation.
I currently do not provide star ratings for amateur productions. Amateur theatre is a whole different kettle of fish to professional theatre – this blog aims to celebrate amateur theatre, rather than critique it.
If anyone has any issues or questions about my star rating system, please feel free to leave a comment or contact me via the Broken Legs social media channels.
Broken Legs Blog 