Friday, October 17, 2003
ugh.
it should have been enough warning that the show was named after a communicable disease.
some of the worst theatre gets accomplished in the name of edgy-ness. edginess? as if being shocked (by depravity, by volume, by number of swears, by boob-juggling, which happened tonight) were the same as the catharsis of genuine surprise. this play was also occasionally harrassing to audience members, under the guise of being genre-bustingly "interactive." insulting people who paid you money to hear what you had to say may be legal, but it's really a sucky thing to do, at least when it's absent of innovation or an interesting vehicle.
maybe nearing thirty is softening me, but oh, i'd love to see some shaw with crisp accents and pretty clothes and quick actors and smart, smart words. i've seen ] four shows, i think, since i came to new york a month ago--broadway, off, and fringe, and except for half of one of them, they have been uniformly bad.
maybe i should just watch more law and order.
some of the worst theatre gets accomplished in the name of edgy-ness. edginess? as if being shocked (by depravity, by volume, by number of swears, by boob-juggling, which happened tonight) were the same as the catharsis of genuine surprise. this play was also occasionally harrassing to audience members, under the guise of being genre-bustingly "interactive." insulting people who paid you money to hear what you had to say may be legal, but it's really a sucky thing to do, at least when it's absent of innovation or an interesting vehicle.
maybe nearing thirty is softening me, but oh, i'd love to see some shaw with crisp accents and pretty clothes and quick actors and smart, smart words. i've seen ] four shows, i think, since i came to new york a month ago--broadway, off, and fringe, and except for half of one of them, they have been uniformly bad.
maybe i should just watch more law and order.
