Thursday, March 30, 2006

Hit Me in the Stomach

Imago Theatre
March 30, 2006; closes April 8, 2006

Music to scenery, costumes to characters, all illustrated to me trashy trailer-park edition of The Sims come to life and left unattended, running on a slower-than-recommended processor: fun at first, then tedious, ultimately futile. Stylistically stunted delivery supposedly meaningful, seemed more a past-prime comedy sketch gimmick, indulgent where once provocative.

9 comments:

Trish Egan & Harold Phillips said...

I haven't seen it, as my show (http://www.nwctc.org/oppenheimer.html)is running at the same time as Imago's. Trashy trailer park version of The Sims made me laugh out loud, though.

Follow Spot said...

For a more lengthy description of creator Carol Triffle’s work, check Trib’s Person of the Week: http://portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=34485

She's pretty much achieved exactly what’s described — but I have to respectfully disagree with the notion that "delivering lines without inflection actually deepens the characters." And that applies to motionless movement as well.

Anonymous said...

elitist auteurs thumbing their noses at the larger community they inhabit. passionless, cold, technical. deadly.

Anonymous said...

I must admit, I've never understood the raves about Imago's shows. After seeing world-class movement theatre that uses similar prop and set gimmicks - like the shows of Pilobolus, Momix, even Cirque - Imago's "best" work (Frogz?) seems amateurish.

Anonymous said...

Wish I had read this blog before I went to see this show tonight. Self-indulgent, overblown skit, turned into interminable, tedious evening. Even the applause was made obligatory, never mind having to sit through the entire thing because it was performed without intermission. I guess they must have known that most of us would not have returned, given an escape route.

Anonymous said...

I guess Bob Hicks is a novice, or maybe he saw a completely different show. Or better yet, maybe a few of you missed the BOAT. My take? Uneven script, some damn fine acting, and some BOLD choices that sometimes did and sometimes did not work. Bold is the key word- and the word BOLD beats BORING in my BOOK any day.

Anonymous said...

Just because Mr. Hicks laughs doesn't mean it's funny -- or even bold, for that matter. What if Mr. Hicks had hated it? Would that have changed your personal opinion? I hope not, because adding your voice to Mr. Followspot's blog is what matters -- not pointing to some journalist to validate your own feelings.

Now, having dispensed Mr. Hicks ... Anonymous 9:13 -- Wou did you think was bold about this work and what about that boldness appealed to you? And what about this performance would you qualify as "fine acting"?

Can you elaborate?

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps I should qualify. I think Mr. Hicks got the point because he does not seem to have a personal bias against Imago. For example, I cannot for the life of me understand how one blogger could get "elitist auters" from the show "Hit Me in the Stomach." Thumbing their noses at the larger community?! I am sorry, but a show about pocket pizzas and fart jokes clearly does not communicate elitist auters to me...we were obviously not at the same production and must not inhabit the same "larger community". Likewise, another blogger has decided to review Frogz instead of Hit Me in the Stomach. And in so doing, misguidedly compares Frogz to Cirque or other world-based movement companies. Frogz is a minimilist mask show and in no way is even in the same genre as the big budget, slick, (obviously skillful) companies to which the blogger compared the show to...but it serves its purpose in a specific niche and is some of the most creative work I have ever seen. Now, I do appreciate your interest in a more in-depth discourse regarding my reaction to Stomach. As far as the acting- I saw the show twice. (I frequent Imago as they seem to do work that resonates with my sensibilities...) The acting was a style that clearly was not realism, but was more in the realm of clown and reached, in my opinion, a depth that I rarely see. My complaint is that I could see the direction a bit much, particularly with the two men- as I had a sense that they had more to offer if some different choices had been made stylistically- but there were fine moments of real honestly (particularly with the female)- and I watched intensely. Overall, a show that had small moments that meant much but left something to be desired as a whole. I felt that the performances were bold- as it is tricky to navigate the waters of a clown state, and it was bold for the actors to embrace a style that left them fairly naked to the scrutiny which comes when acting is bad, whether intentional or not. As for the criticism of the "elitist auters", I often get a sense that Imago is critiqued based on some false image projection. To me, they are a group of artists trying to carve out a life doing what they know best. Nothing more, nothing less. And they seem to be nice enough people who have always been kind to me and my children.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for elaborating, Anonymous! Lots of stuff to think about in what you said.