Absinthe

I just posted my own review of Absinthe. If the review doesn't make it clear, I thought it was outstanding. The best show I've seen in Vegas in years. Please have a look. I welcome comments of others who have seen it.

Mike Weatherford was very positive in his review as well.

In general, I would say that in America we associate titillating stage shows with low quality. This show is much more common in Europe where high quality adult-themed shows are more accepted.

Absinthe drinking was memorialized in Baz Luhrman's movie, Moulin Rouge. Absinthe was the cocaine of the 19th century.

Absinthe makes the tart grow fonder.

The English would take tea at 4:00pm but the French would take Absinthe at 5:00pm. Best of both worlds ofcourse was to do both.

Had I known what the show was about, or read your review, prior to my Vegas visit last month, I probably would have made an effort to see it.

Instead, I walked past posters for the show several times, wondering what "Absinthe" meant, and thinking the guy in the poster had a face only a mother could love.


Also, seeing the tag line "If you only see one show in your entire life, make it Absinthe" does NOT entice me to see the show.

Here's a photo of the chair act you talked about. Quite different than the striaght line chair acts I've seen before. Yeah, I'd want to check out the show.


I don't know where you draw the line with copyrights etc., but I'd include this banner image and photo in your review. Note that I merely linked directly to the images on their server. Quite frankly, I think this would fall under the "Fair Use" rule.


I noticed one typo in your review:

Quote:

Yet another memorable bit was when too audience members...

That should be two.

Also, the website lists different prices:

Quote:

Performances April 24 Onward
$89 plus tax - RESERVED SEATING; including stylized seating clusters around the perimeter of the tent
$119 plus tax - VIP RESERVED SEATING; 2nd and 3rd rowseating with complimentary split of Moet champagne
$169 plus tax - VVIP ; 1st rowcushioned seat with complimentary split of Moet champagne

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Also, seeing the tag line "If you only see one show in your entire life, make it Absinthe" does NOT entice me to see the show.

I think they were trying to be cheesy with that tag line. I've always wanted to see a tagline that says, "If you see only one show in your entire life, then you don't get out enough."

Quote:

I don't know where you draw the line with copyrights etc., but I'd include this banner image and photo in your review. Note that I merely linked directly to the images on their server. Quite frankly, I think this would fall under the "Fair Use" rule.

In the forum I would let that slide, but in the official review I like to be above board. I don't know much about what constitutes "fair use."

Quote:

Also, the website lists different prices:

Those prices were BEFORE taxes and fees.

Quote: Wizard

I don't know much about what constitutes "fair use."

You should ask a lawyer, but I'm fairly sure that using it in a journalistic manner such as your review is acceptable. Note that would also be the case even if it were a bad review.


The most obvious example of a company that goes out of it's way to protect it's trademark is the NFL. In January and early February, there is a lot of talk about the SuperBowl, but there is also a lot of talk of "The Big Game."

When you hear "The Big Game," it's always some company, trying to profit off the game, without paying the NFL. For example, the electronics store that will sell and install a big screen TV in time for the big game.

When you hear "SuperBowl," it's either in some journalistic manner including sports radio, or an ad for one of the 'official' sponsors.

Whenever, I hear a story about sexy circus acts or acrobats, I always think of the Seinfeld's the gymnast episode. (season 6, episode 6 - November 3, 1994)

Quote: DJTeddyBear

The most obvious example of a company that goes out of it's way to protect it's trademark is the NFL.

That's not entirely without reason.

The term "Super Bowl" is common place now. It does mean the championship game for the NFL, but carries the connotations of extravagance and pageantry associated with the game. So it isn't just the game, but the events surrounding it. If I were to say "This isn't just a poker game. it is the Suepr Bowl of poker," most people would know what I mean.

So if the words "Super Bowl" could be used more generically, the NFL would lose control over it. You could advertise anything as being realted to it in any way without constraints. Say you put an ad in your store advertising "Super Bowl TV!" or "Super Bowl snacks!"

But I digress...

Quote: Nareed

The term "Super Bowl" is common place now. It does mean the championship game for the NFL, but carries the connotations of extravagance and pageantry associated with the game. So it isn't just the game, but the events surrounding it. If I were to say "This isn't just a poker game. it is the Suepr Bowl of poker," most people would know what I mean.

So if the words "Super Bowl" could be used more generically, the NFL would lose control over it. You could advertise anything as being realted to it in any way without constraints. Say you put an ad in your store advertising "Super Bowl TV!" or "Super Bowl snacks!"

Except that the NFL has taken extreme measures to ensure this does not happen. They don't want the words "Super Bowl" to become like Xerox, Kleenex or any of the other brands that are now the generic use of the word. I imagine if the Super Bowl of Poker still existed, it would be called something else, or it would be sponsored by the NFL.

One of my favorite commercials I heard was in Kansas City; I can't remember who it was for. However, they were talking about making their commercial legal by listening in on a conversation between two friends. They were talking about the Final Four but every time they got to the word Four, it was replaced by a voice over going "2 + 2." They come to the word Super Bowl, and some sultry female voice clearly says "Superb" in place of Super. I'm not doing it justice unfortunately, but every time I hear Final Four, I always think Final 2 + 2.

Quote: Tiltpoul

Except that the NFL has taken extreme measures to ensure this does not happen. They don't want the words "Super Bowl" to become like Xerox, Kleenex or any of the other brands that are now the generic use of the word.

Perhaps they are extreme, but I can see their point.

Do you recall the coture label "Pierre Cardin"? It was sort of big in the 70s and 80s. In Mexico the licensee started producing all sorts of things with the Pierre Cardin name on them, including distinctly third-rate underwear, and the brand came to be associated not with fine coture but with shoddy goods. Now and then someone tries to revive it, but people still react badly to it.

I'm not saying the same would happen in the case of the Super Bowl, but that I understand the impulse to defend the reputation and prestige of a brand.

Quote:

I imagine if the Super Bowl of Poker still existed, it would be called something else, or it would be sponsored by the NFL.

Isn't there a world series of poker?

But I have to smile at the idea of a poker tournament sponsored by the NFL. I can imagine lots of twists, like a 32-card deck, or maybe 32 suits ;)

Using the photo is fine. In fact, I would expect them to provide you with a photo since you are doing a journalistic review.

You could also note that it is easy to find 2-for-1 coupons for the show. I picked some up out of a rack at Caesars Palace and was going to offer them to you in case you didn't get the comp, but I forgot about them when we went to see "Caveman" instead.

Quote: teddys

You could also note that it is easy to find 2-for-1 coupons for the show. I picked some up out of a rack at Caesars Palace and was going to offer them to you in case you didn't get the comp, but I forgot about them when we went to see "Caveman" instead.

Let me confirm that easy availablity of those before I comment on it.

A bit off topic, but one thing annoying about 2 for 1 coupons is when you have an odd number of people in your party, as we did (three). I think they should say 50% for any party size of two or more.

Quote: Nareed

Isn't there a world series of poker?

Yes, but the MLB doesn't own the rights to the wording World Series. They run the "World Series of Baseball," so there can still be the World Series of Poker, Blackjack, etc.

Quote: Nareed

But I have to smile at the idea of a poker tournament sponsored by the NFL. I can imagine lots of twists, like a 32-card deck, or maybe 32 suits ;)

BTW, the Super Bowl of Poker was Amarillo Slim's answer to the WSOP. It was actually a much larger and more prestigious tournament the few times it was run.

Quote: Wizard

A bit off topic, but one thing annoying about 2 for 1 coupons is when you have an odd number of people in your party, as we did (three). I think they should say 50% for any party size of two or more.

<raises hand> Habitual solo traveler here! For me 2 for 1 coupons are worse than useless.

Sounds like a fun show. I've never seen any shows in Vegas in six trips as an adult; maybe next time I'll check this one out.

Also, a couple small typos:

Quote:

you should get the hint when they give ubiquitous announcement about prohibiting pictures and videos.

Missing a "the" or "their" in there.

Quote:

If you have any appreciate of the human form,

Appreciation?

Quote: Nareed

Isn't there a world series of poker?

The first world series was in 1903, while the first Super Bowl was in 1967. They didn't know enough about protecting brand names in 1903. I'm sure by the time they tried to protect the phrase "world series", the courts wouldn't permit it since it was part of the vernacular.