Hasn't exactly been the greatest week of theatre for me...
Tonight was "Drunken City," which basically amounted to a what felt like a 90 minute episode of some lousy sitcom. It's about three female friends who go and get drunk in the city (hence the title) in the name of a bachelorette party. The playwright (Adam Bock) throws in a metaphor about the city being alive (the stage would tilt back and forth when things would go wrong, and I'm assuming that that had something to do with the living breathing city) and then the metaphor was continued with something about a pet dragon - the city and dragon stuff was all spouted by the Asian character (dragon? Asian girl? ooh yeah), and there's even a random song about the dragon at the end. The play actually starts out on what I thought was a fun note, but I guess you could say when the stage tilted the second or third time, my interest began to lose balance and I became increasingly bored. At least this was better than Bock's last "play," "The Receptionist," then again I think watching a puppy chase his tail for an hour would have been more entertaining than that waste of time (that is assuming that the puppy finally catches his tail at the end of that play, otherwise I suppose it would have been equally pointless...).
Last night was the surprisingly entertaining Australian comic/pianist Tim Minchin. He wasn't necessarily the funniest act I've ever seen, but he's an awfully talented composer and pianist, and even if I didn't necessarily find all of his songs hilarious, I found I was entertained enough just watching and listening while not paying attention to the lyrics. And I did find most of the show funny, even if not every joke struck my fancy. You can look him up easily enough on Youtube to see if he strikes your comic fancy, but I have to say he was a highlight of this less than exciting week.
Then, Sunday and Friday were parts one and two of my "Why it's a mistake to see Roundabout shows early in their runs (even on comps) when one already has tickets to see them later in their run with one's subscription." I had already seen, and not particularly cared for "Crimes of the Heart" and "The 39 Steps," but I already had tickets to see them this weekend with my subscription, so I was forced to give both a second chance. The first time I saw "Crimes," one of the actresses was out (I think it was Sarah Paulson), so at least I got to see her this time. Didn't really care for it the first time, didn't really care for it the second. My parents confirmed that they too remember enjoying the production of the play we saw all those years ago at the Airport Playhouse, and that none of us could fathom why because the play was so dull in this production. My mother said she thought there was more humor in that production. I dunno - maybe it's a lousy production, maybe the play is just really dated - but why this show won the Pulitzer for drama is far beyond me.
I didn't dislike "The 39 Steps" quite as much the second time, though I chalk that up to sitting in the first row orchestra this time, which usually helps. I still didn't find the show at all funny, but the movie wasn't so fresh in my mind this time, so the story was entertaining enough to watch. And when a dummy fell off the stage and hit me near the end of the show, well... at least that was a totally random and unique amusement.
Saturday was the Met's cursed production of "Tristan und Isolde." I had seen the La Scala production of the opera at Symphony Space a month or two ago, and I have to say there's no comparison to seeing it live. Opera at the movies is all well and good, but it just can't compare to the thrill of being in the same room with the orchestra and those voices. Yes it's very very long, and very very slow, but the music was beautiful enough to at least keep me awake for the whole five hours, even if my mind did wander. As for the performances, Deborah Voigt as Isolde was excellent (as usual) and Robert Dean Smith (I think that was his name) was a fine Tristan, even if his voice was at times totally drowned out by the lovely Voigt, or the orchestra. I don't think I need to see another production of the opera for another few years at least, but I'm definitely glad I went.
Thursday was a play called "Betrayed," that got excellent reviews from the critics, and was highly recommended by one of my uncles. That uncle is now on my list of people to never ever listen to show recommendations from ever again. It was agony to sit through. It was written by a journalist, and it was about the Iraqis who work for the Americans over there, and how poorly they're treated. There were I think two scenes that were well done and quite moving. But other than that, I was in pain. I think this is just a case of the playwright assuming the audience will inherently care about what happens because it's an important subject, so good craft need not apply. No denying the importance of the topic, but I don't need to sit there for close to two hours (no intermission) in a cramped seat, in a theatre with no air conditioning, and listen to these rather two-dimensional characters suffer. If I wanted to experience dry journalism, I would have read the article. If I'm going to invest two hours or more, I want well crafted, interesting drama. I felt similarly about "The Conscientious Objector" a few weeks ago - in that play the author assumed I cared about the relationship between President Johnson and Martin Luther King Jr during the Vietnam War. I was bored stiff (spent most of the first act staring at the abstract painting of an American flag on the back wall and looking for random pictures - one section, for example, looked like an evil bunny) and left that one at intermission.
Wednesday, was another political play (I usually try to avoid plays about politics because they do usually bore me, this was just an unhappy coincidence) - the second preview of "Something You Did." I went with two other people, and we all agreed it wasn't as bad as we were expecting (not sure if that's a compliment or not). While "Betrayed" was say 90% dry political rhetoric, this was only maybe 60%. The one scene wonder Adriane Lenox, who won a Tony for her ten minutes on stage in "Doubt," once again has exactly one scene to perform, and once again is makes a huge impact, being the highlight of the evening. This time instead of playing the mother of the unseen source of controversy (in "Doubt," that being a boy who may or may not have been molested by the priest), this time she's the daughter (of a man who was killed, and whose death may or may not have been the fault of an imprisoned political activist). Joanna Gleason gets the main role in the play - a woman who helped plant a bomb that killed a man, and who's been in prison for 30 years, and who is now up for parole. It may have been that it was only the second preview and she hadn't found the character yet, but I found her really rather unconvincing - I was never able to forget that I was watching Joanna Gleason playing a role - she just didn't lose herself in the part, and her character really didn't interest me until a somewhat moving monologue near the end. There are some other characters, two of which seem to be there just to recite dull political arguments. The play isn't awful, but it's not great either. Certainly not the worst play I saw that week, but I can't really say I liked it all that much. I guess it's a solid "okay."
And now I'm caught up and I can go turn my brain to mush by watching "Big Brother." Wee....
