Artists Repertory Theatre
May 26, 2006; closes July 2, 2006
A warm, gratifying play. Conflict somewhat packaged, structure a bit cut-to erratic, but unique shifting POV strung together multifaceted moments of honest this-is-who-we’ve-become — well executed by qualified cast, especially Ted Schulz, Jay Randall, Eben Hoffer in spot-on supporting roles. Stylish yet functional set by Jeff Seats, lighting by Jeff Forbes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Loved Faust. Us.(2.0), Bug, City Of Gold, Afterschool Girlfight Kill Kill, Assassins. Some other very good stuff this year, but these shows stood out.
oops. That was supposed to be under another post.
I'll be out to see this show soon. I've heard good things.
micheal m. amazing.
Felt like the humor was completely dependent on fashion/entertainment in-jokes. Not much convincing character interplay as much as clever inter-professing. Audience around me was eating it up, though. Any one else feel like the script was lazy and catering?
Very funny stuff. Sharp, high speed, with good performances all around.
I have never laughed so hard hearing one teenager ask another:
"So, do you get like f***ed in the ass and stuff?"
But you laughed less hard the last time you heard it?
I found this show a total exercise in frustration. Several extraordinary performances in service of a crap script. Painfully jokey and equally painfully overwritten. It felt much much longer than its running time.
Michael Mendelson was fantastic, and I hope to see much more of him. The two youngest cast members were really impressive, and the other three men were very strong. The only weak acting link was Susannah Mars, but to criticize her is really to say she was the only one who didn't rise above the sitcom/after-school special quality of the script.
I'm actually a fan of Richard Kramer's TV writing, but this piece desperately needed some dramaturgy. . .
What do you mean by the "show could use some dramaturgy?" Do you mean workshopping and criticism or something more scholarly? If the later, how would that help the script? You might be able to help me understand the term "dramaturgy" better than I do now.
.... I liked this show as light, spring fare. The typical ART spring show seems designed to mollify 'middle-brow' expectations and make recently cutting-edge social issues palatable to the mainstream just as those issus are becoming acceptable to the mainstream. This means doing not-very-daring, but entertaining, stuff, with which I have no problem. I had fun.
As you've noticed, "dramaturgy" is a term that seems to define itself differently from one theatre (or production) to the next. In this case, I meant nothing fancier than to suggest that someone needed to give this script a cold, clear-eyed reading and persuade the writer to cut about 20 minutes of gratuitous jokes and cute-for-the-sake-of-cuteness language.
That said, it's wonderful that you enjoyed the show, and I don't mean to sour anyone's enjoyment with my lack thereof. And you're quite right that it probably does serve to make a certain kind of experience "palatable" to the general ART audience.
At the end of the day, I can be annoyed, disappointed, or frustrated, but I'm glad when people see live theatre and even more so when they enjoy it, as the audience I saw this show with clearly did!
I saw it's closing. I wasn't the only one NOT laughing.
Awful script, underdeveloped characters; Chock Full of stereotypes! Please don't waste our good actors (or MY entertainment $$s)on a crap script like this.
Post a Comment