Twilight Repertory TheatreApril 9 - 26, 2009
Review by peanutduck
The most vitriolic of lovers, well wrought by Beth Thompson and, particularly, John Duncan as ineffectual, impotent George. Production held back by unanswered central question: Why do guests endure abuse? Never felt the terror necessary to accelerate action as fun and games spiral out of control; unneeded pauses negate tension.
13 comments:
odd foto choice.
i don't believe george ever smiles in the entire show.
maybe this is a new slant?
saw a preview of the show. enormous mediocrity on display. the one who plays the female lead is both overwrought and physically unpleasant to imagine up there in the bright lights.
Yeah, did you see the same show? Laughter and tears, chaos and catharsis: Fabulous with both fury and fun. By the way...The lead lady playing Martha is beautiful and brilliant. I believe the Oregonian review quoted her as "surely one of the hottest actresses in town”.
Cherry-picking from the Oregonian, are we? It actually said "her performance is uneven, as if she's still searching for her character's essence." It really is a mediocre, community theatre show.
Max: are you the Max in the show? If so, should you be questioning what people saw?
The actual quote from the Oregonian:
Although Thompson, smoldering in a red dress, is surely one of the hottest actresses in town, her performance is uneven, as if she's still searching for her character's essence.
This is Max Blonde from the show, and no, that was not me that was above. I will read, I will not comment.
www.myspace.com/maxblonde
I thought the woman playing Martha was amazing. I have been very active in theater for over 20 years and she has so much talent. She captured the true spirit of Martha. Screw the Oregonian.
I saw the play too. George was excellent and at ease but the Oregonian was exactly right and the lady who played Martha threw the whole play off.
They should have picked another actress with more experience and talent. too much of a lightweight for such a role.
I liked the staging but who was the director?
i thought the other two actors were pretty funny and worked well. over all I did enjoy the work in Portland. Thanks!
who listens to critics these days, anyway? they have to critesize because they can't do what the others can. you as an audience should make up your own damn mind, not someone else tell you what you should think.
Beth, you are beautiful, a sensational actor and HOT. you've pulled it together great, you were Martha!
John, you played along very well.
Tiffany, you are witty and funny as usual and performed well.
Max, you are Max and it's always fun to see you on the stage.
as far as for the director goes, many kudos to you Aime. You have pulled it off as you have imagined in what direction this play should go.
3 hours of play? i would like to see you critics make it even to the second act!
So what exactly does "critesize" mean?
It's like pint-size, which is apparently how thick anonymous 11:27's skin is.
Kind of a "don't make fun of my friends' show" post.
11:27, critics don't tell people what to think, they simply have a very public forum to voice their opinions. Sucks when they are negative, but I'd bet you're oh so happy when they are positive.
And the "those that can't" argument is bull$#it; most reputable critics have a very keen grasp of what it takes to produce the art of which they review.
Finally, when you type a word and it becomes underlined in red, that means you spelled it wrong.
Quite well done. Thompson and Duncan are very strong, even making you forget her extreme youth relative to Martha. Max Blonde is also smart and terrific as Nick. The actress playing Honey is way off the mark--she doesn't seem to be familiar with the ideas of "repression" or "ill at ease"--but a weak Honey is not fatal to this show. Overall, a worthy mounting of this still-fascinating classic!
Post a Comment