I thought the show was a lot better than the review and the last comment allude to. The last guy either lives under a rock, or refuses to believe that his donkey kong utopia no longer exists. People no longer play with Stretch Armstrong and pretend their parents don't have sex. Don't come to the show with that mentality. Open your eyes to someone elses reality, and take it for what it's worth. The show was excellent, the actors completely committed, and the set wonderfully designed.
Some guy with a stick up his ass who can't get past semantics. Could you ask for a better endorsement? I'm even more excited to see this Sunday!
I cannot BELIEVE that they used the title to this article the way they did! You should have come up with a better way to bring attention to what you were talking about instead of using this poor title to this broadway show!!! I am disgusted with the fact that nothing is censored anymore. Nothing. It never used to be this way and the country as a whole was a heck of a lot more proper. Now we desensitize people to manners and no one seems to care about the fact that kids are rude and aggressive. Remember when video games were simple? Like Donkey Kong and Mario brothers? They didn't have prostitutes and murder. They didn't swear on TV. It's sick. I can't stand this country anymore.
Many thanks for the kind words regarding my sound design and original music for "Parlour Song".... I had a great time working with Quantum and your comments are much appreciated!
I support and share Mr. Hoovers impression of the show, have nothing against local performers, and have attended City Theater shows for years. This was lousy, trite, not funny and we left at intermission.
Not every show or performance is "wonderful" and the audience seemed placated by the over-acting of Spike. Fine, we'll try the next one, as we are subscription supporters.
"I know people bitch my reviews are too personal” - dude did you graduate from grammar school? Does this clause even have an active predicate? Should you proofread your vitriol before sending it out, considering you work in a communication profession?
“I’m surprised one of them didn’t calve” - So you are insinuating that they are acting on stage is indicative of cows giving birth? If so:
A. You had better be walking around town in full-plate armor because such language is usually grounds for a Guten Tag to the dome.
B. How can comparing anyone to a bovine be considered a decent civilized thing to print in a “serious” critique. Regardless of what you personally thought of the play (or ANY play), comparing a human being's actions to mammalian birth in any profession shows that individual's tenuous-at-best grasp of reality and is grounds for termination. Your termination…See Yah!
“While Chekhov is also famous for promoting stage naturalism, there's not a more theatrically stylized playwright than Durang. Yet both strains are present in VSMS, often at the same time, and it's exhausting.” - It’s exhausting? Are you aware of the concept of duality? Life is full of dualities. In fact, I am pretty sure life is so complex that people resort to the arts often-times as an escape from the confusion of reality. Maybe you have me there…except that people long for an expression that comments on life’s experiences in a manner that both relates to AND simplifies life’s complex truths. So for a playwright to add oh-horror-of-horrors TWO seemingly conflicting theatrical modes at the same time while blending comedy and tragedy (ooo another duality) together is grounds for applause in my book. Ahh alas poor me, I am a layman, for what do I know…oh wait, other people at the top of their profession enjoyed this show also? In fact they seemed to enjoy it so much as to afford it the highest honor of the American Stage? You are right, sir, you are alone in the dark.
"I saw the show, on the same night as Mr. Hoover in fact, and found it to be funny, surprising, and even heartfelt at times. His trivial denouncement of this work as a Chekhovian sobfest shows his underlying animosity for anything recognized by those "oblivious" Tony voters (who happen to be some of my friends and far more successful than Mr. Hoover could ever hope to be). What bothered me the most, however, is his utter disregard for those portraying the characters he was so "over" by the end of the play. McKenna, Ruoti, and Bouvy were tasked with a considerable amount of exposition and executed it in a style fitting of a farse. Any less and the comedy would have been lost. How dare you say they pushed so hard to land a scene. After all of these years I would have thought you had a little more respect for regional artists. As Academic said, I have no idea why the readers of CP put up with your rants. This isn't a place to vent your frustrations and comment on something you had already made your mind up about before you even sat down."
Whoa dude... Just saw this show tonight!! Are you for real ???? You clearly need to book another session with your shrink to help you self examine your reach for your 'bovine' metaphor ....says more about YOU than anything else. You just shat where you ate.... And there is no future in that....
I've yet to see this show, but I already know this much: I have no idea why CP continues to employ this critic. It's not so much that his reviews are often mean-spirited (or, as he puts it "personal"). It's that they're ignorant. As his dismissive -- and reductive -- comment about Chekhov clearly indicates, he lacks any understanding of theatre history or appreciation of dramatic literature. He also shows no comprehension -- or respect -- for the profession. When he -- apparently with a huge chip on his shoulder -- pits his opinion against that of the "Tony people" (his again dismissive categorization of working theatre professionals and producers), he reveals his obvious insecurities and, IMHO, inadequacy as a legitimate critic.
What time is the performance on Saturday, October 26th?
I forgot to mention something about this review (copied in below). I feel, as a member of the audience, that the comment about Scott Sambucco as the emcee is unwarranted.
As you know, this was my first time seeing a stage production of Cabaret; however, I had seen many excerpts of Joel Gray in the role and was glad both Scotts did not immitate Gray's portrayal. The Scotts chose a different interpretation.
Sambucco did not appear sinister, making the audience want to run and hide. I saw him as being sarcastic. I did see a progression of his character as the story grew darker, from sarcastic to sardonic to, yes, sinister at the end. And that's as it should be. The "tomorrow" for Germany was a full-blown implementation of the Nazi regime.
Sambucco's portrayal in the "welcoming" to the Kit Kat Klub, a place of refuge, showed an ironic sarcasm coming from the misery German citizens, and those choosing to live in Germany, suffered in the throes of the country's defeat in World War I. It was that suffering that helped in ultimately leading to the Nazi takeover.
If Sambucco's performance came across as totally sinister, then in dramatic rhetoric, I would say the Scotts were doing a fine job at foreshadowing the inevitable. Every one of us in the audience knew what was about to happen once the lights went down for the last time on the Kit Kat Klub, a place where Germans and visitors to Berlin could find joy and an albeit fading light in the dark.
Scott and Val, if you think my comments are perhaps worthy of a letter to the editor of the Pittsburgh City Paper, please send me their email address and I'll be glad to edit this and send it on.
Thanks again for forwarding the review!
It was interminable...
I wanted to wait to comment on Scarcity until I actually saw it, which i did this evening. The show is beautifully crafted and acted. I want to commend everyone involved with this show. I really thought it would be hard to swallow. And there are some very intense moments. But the real-ness of these characters that were portrayed so thoughtfully by each and every actor in the show is worth it's weight in gold.
I also looked around the audience and saw so many people leaning forward, chin in hand, focused on what was being unveiled before us. We all may not have been exposed to this type of family but we all are familiar with it. The mother looking for a better life for her children no matter what the price or sacrifice, the strong bond between a brother and sister caught in a life not of their making. this family is relatable.
So what i was anticipating as being a night of watching an awful, awful reality based drama, ended up being a night of witnessing struggle, and what we all, in dire circumstance do to survive.
Do yourself a favor, it will be worth your time, and the two hours will fly by before you know it!
I think it's actually 1 hour 45 minutes, not 145 minutes.
I thoroughly enjoyed the show. I didn't know what to expect from a Greek tragedy play but was overwhelmed emotionally by the story line and the emotion shown by Joseph Ryan Yow as Oedipus. I cried during the show twice in feeling his pain of what happened to his character.
The Throughline Threatre Company is a very talented group and I wouldn't miss any of their shows. It gives me a chance to see what I've missed / not paid attention to. The set was perfect, great sound system, and the costumes gorgeous. The Grey Box Theatre has been very easy to get to with parking and food nearby from small local businesses.
I will continue to support this young group with their efforts by attending and with my money!
Ted! I wish I would have known you were going to see this, I would have tagged along. We need to see a show together someday!
I haven't seen the production, but I can tell you this much: the reviewer might want to consult a history text. No, we don't have Aristotle to thank for the lack of onstage "action" in Greek tragedy. For one thing, Aristotle lived and wrote his treatise on drama nearly 100 years after Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides lived and wrote their plays. Aristotle's Poetics contains his analysis of what they'd created, and his judgments about what was successful. It's later critics and artists, beginning in the Neoclassical period, who've taken them to be prescriptive. More relevant, perhaps, to this production: the Greeks (i.e. Athenians) believed poetic descriptions of violence to be more effective than violent actions for generating powerful emotions among spectators. Whether that remains true today is a legitimate question.
Great show. I wasn't familiar with Thoreau but found it to be very entertaining. Great job Throughline Theatre!
Is there something wrong with putting things onto film? Does that make them less worthy? Or is it just the lack of dancing that robs films like Star Trek of all creativity? Then again, it's not like films have lighting design, sets, costumes, makeup, writers, actors.... oh, wait.
I suppose I understand your dismay at the lack of visible human talent in a SFX-laden film such as Star Trek versus the attention-grabbing tap dancing ensemble of 42nd street. Somehow "recreating" choreography seems about as creative to me as designing explosions and spaceships. "Geeks writing computer code don't count?" Sorry your definition of "creative" doesn't include anything besides tap-dancing. Can you just review the show and not take digs at anything you don't deem worthy of being compared with musical theater?
Next time you direct a show at the Public, do it without the light boards programmed by those "geeks" and see how you feel then.
There's no denying that the dancing of 42nd Street is captivating, and as a live production, it is more enchanting than movie special effects. But there are tactful (and less ignorant) ways you could have said so, without claiming the entire film industry is devoid of creativity.
Pittsburgh City Paper
Website powered by Foundation
National Advertising by VMG Advertising