THIS AIN'T NO DISCO thread- Page 7

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 7/26/18 at 11:28pm

scripps said: "This popped up in my Facebook feed earlier tonight ...

Pull quotes! B-roll footage! Relive the magic!

... no thanks needed, enjoy.

Wow, this looks worse than I could have ever imagined. 

 

[springwillcome]

Posted: 7/29/18 at 12:55pm

I saw the matinee yesterday - bought tickets a while back as I am a fan of krystina alabado and stephen trask. I have mixed feelings, but I think as I've sat thinking about it they've grown more positive. I think the show definitely had....a LOT going on....I almost want to see it again just so I can process it better, not necessarily because I liked it. I didn't mind the music - some of the songs I would absolutely love to hear again. I thought the performances were incredible, particularly peter laprade, will connolly, and chilina kennedy. I did really enjoy all of the character's stories - especially chad's - but it just had so much going on. But I did find myself invested in the character's throughout the show, so I'm not sure what exactly I would cut from it. and while it left something to be desired I also thought the ending was realistic and nice - for example, when Chad walked out wearing a college t-shirt, that was a simple but really nice addition. Certain parts were also uncomfortable, and not in the good way - I don't think blatantly showing self harm was necessary at all, and it could've been handled better. Overall, the show has grown on me, and it has certainly left me thinking about it for a while, so it definitely accomplished something. I've also been reading up a bit on andy warhol and studio 54 since I got home and it's an interesting piece of history I admit to not knowing much about, so if nothing else, it's thought-provoking and certainly unique, and definitely entertaining - I don't think it deserved reviews as brutal as it's been getting, but I'm also fairly easy to please. 

Updated On: 7/29/18 at 12:55 PM

[deClina_daWest]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 4:48pm

newintown said: ""It baffles me that the show could go through at least two workshops that I know of, and no one pointed out the problems? Or, even worse, the creators chose not to address the problem? Rick Elice couldn't have come up with a better book?"

This is far from unusual; the audiences at most workshops today consist primarily, it seems, of a blend of sycophants and hangers-on with no better insight than the creative team. And those who might know better perhaps withhold judgement in an attempt to avoid hurting feelings."

There's a way around this in readings and workshops. It's called "Roses and Thorns" -- I read about it online but can't find the original article now.

At the end of a reading, you hand out index cards and mini-golf pencils to the audience and the cast, and ask them to write three "Roses" on the front--what they liked about the show-- and three "Thorns" -- what they thought needed work.

Since the comments are anonymous and they are giving complements as well as criticism, they are very free and frank with their thoughts. This avoids the sycophant/politeness/fear factor. Letting the cast do it too is critical. 

I have deployed this technique at two readings this year and the feedback has been like gold--confirmation of issues I had suspected, and left field suggestions of great insight that I never would have come up with on my own. On the other hand, I've been to very lavishly produced readings where no audience feedback was requested. Of course an audience at a reading is going to applaud like mad -- they are friends with the cast! It doesn't mean they liked the material!

[theatregoer3]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 6:08am

Finally saw this last night. This was so terrible it was almost offensive. Wow. Maybe one of the worst shows I’ve ever seen. How did this happen?

[newintown]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 7:54am

theatregoer3 wrote "This was so terrible it was almost offensive. Wow. Maybe one of the worst shows I’ve ever seen. How did this happen?"

Two reasons: Hedwig and Jersey Boys.

[Theater3232]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 10:36am

Why was it so terrible?  (I find it really telling that the Atlantic is *not* extending this show by an extra week or two.)

[haterobics]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 12:27pm

Theater3232 said: "Why was it so terrible?"

Read the previous 7 pages of this thread?

[Robbie2]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 1:17pm

This ain't extending or moving...

[scripps]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 4:22pm

Weirdly enough when I logged onto Facebook, the Atlantic Theater Company was posting cast portrait session pics that were taken yesterday in their story stream. Who is paying for this?

[theatregoer3]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 4:45pm

Here's a scene that came out of nowhere. Lights up:

Coat Check Girl A: Hey Misch?

Coat Check Girl B: Yeah Tiff?

Coat Check Girl A: I want you to call me Cameron from no on.

Coat Check Girl B: Why?

Coat Check Girl A: Because I think I'm a man. Is that okay?

Coat Check Girl B: Oh I always knew, Cameron.

Then they sing a song about how much they love each other and kiss at the end.

We have NO idea who these people are nor do we give a **** about them. It was SO awful.

And don't get me started on the random monologue about getting raped and impregnated by the stepdad. They handled these issues so poorly that it was like a slap in the face every time they would open their mouths.

[SuddenlySeymour3]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 4:56pm

While the book for this show could have been written by a computer in a couple of hours, I do think it's worth seeing the show for 1) the music and 2) two stand-out performance by members of the dance ensemble: Tony D'Alelio and Ian Paget.  

Sometimes, certain dancers are so on-point (so to speak) they're just completely mesmerizing. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/3/18 at 11:22pm

I think you just found them attractive because the choreography is awful. 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/4/18 at 5:17pm

I have NO idea what the creative team was going for with this one, but good god almighty, this is a disaster of a show.  Everything about this show is strikingly bad - especially the writing. The cast does their best with some extremely lousy material, but it isn’t enough to salvage this mess. There is no way in hell this will transfer to Broadway, so if you’re interested, see this now before it closes in a couple weeks, but I don’t recommend wasting your time.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 8/4/18 at 6:32pm

I was certain Tony D'Alelio was Andy Mientus for the entire first act.

[Wee Thomas2]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 6:52am

Saw this Saturday night.  We went in with very limited expectations, based on this thread and the reviews.  When they scanned our tix the usher said "Oh, you're VIPs".  We figured it was because we were subscribers or because we were in the front row. No. We'll get to that. We were surprised that there were no characters developed enough to care for, except maybe Sammy.

 

We get that this was a search for family and belonging.  We thought the music and costumes were good, but the choregraphy and story were not.  I mean, how can you discus the Studio 54 era and have so many gay characters and not mention AIDS?  Other than not wanting to make Rent Redux?

 

Anyway.  Turns out seats A109 and 110 are the equivalent of A101 in Spamalot.  There's a small opening in the middle of the front of the (very low) stage that the cast uses to access the front aisle.  And 109 and 110 are right in front of that opening. Rubell made fun of my outfit (rightfully so, it was 90 degrees and very humid and I looked like crap) and Binky sang to me and caressed my face.  I always had a thing for Carole King, so that was nice.

 

Our low expectations were exceeded.  Not by much, but we were glad we didn't walk in expecting Hedwig 2!

[macnyc]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 7:30am

As far as not mentioning AIDS: This Ain't No Disco takes place in 1979/1980. I'm not an AIDS historian, but I believe in those years AIDS pretty much didn't even have a name in the U.S. It was just a collection of strange illnesses that seemed to be occurring in gay men. So by setting the show in 1979/1980, the creators could capture the last of the "carefree" era of free love and having sex without consequences. 

[haterobics]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 8:01am

macnyc said: "So by setting the show in 1979/1980, the creators could capture the last of the "carefree" era of free love and having sex without consequences."

A smart decision, especially when you consider how poorly they handle so many other things in the book/show, heh.

[Lot666]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 8:03am

macnyc said: "As far as not mentioning AIDS: This Ain't No Disco takes place in 1979/1980. I'm not an AIDS historian, but I believe in those years AIDS prettymuch didn't even have a name in the U.S. It was just a collection of strange illnesses that seemed to be occurring in gay men. So by setting the show in 1979/1980, the creators could capture the last of the "carefree" era of free love and having sex without consequences."

The heyday of Studio 54 was the period from 1977-1979 (before Rubell and Schrager went to jail for tax evasion in early 1980), and AIDS was still unheard of at that time. The first AIDS cases were not reported in the United States until June 1981.

[Wee Thomas2]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 8:44am

That makes sense, I was not aware of that dating and I guess ignoring AIDS makes some sense, but I still think it could have been referred to somehow.

Doesn't make it a better show either way.

[theatregoer3]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 9:44am

To the person who pointed out the dancers, they did their best, but that was truly the worst choreography I’ve seen in recent memory. It felt like the choreographer gathered some gay junior high kids, gave them Red Bull, put on some loud music, and told them to just fee the beat and dance it out. It was embarrassing to watch and I felt bad for them because some of the dancers did have talent.

[brettarnett]

Posted: 8/6/18 at 3:50pm

Such a strange show, especially when the most interesting characters Binky & Rubell are tertiary characters at best. I did think some of the songs were extremely catchy, but man was that book cringy.

[kidmanboy]

Posted: 8/7/18 at 1:46pm

I thought this show had a myriad of problems, mostly stemming from a lack of direction (the show sometimes flowed to quickly, sometimes had awkward pauses and transitions, and it seemed like cast members were all in different shows).  I did find a few of the songs quite brilliant and, with a better book and director, I'm convinced there was a great show in there somewhere - unfortunately it'll never see the light of day.

All of that said, opinion is a funny thing.  I found Rubell and Blinky's portrayls to be hot messes.  Blinky's, fortunately, was an enjoyable hot mess.  I cringed ever time Rubell came on stage and would have cut him or re-written his character entirely.  I'm rather shocked that so many seemed taken by the character as presented in this production.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 8/7/18 at 2:27pm

A new play about Studio 54 will open on the fringe scene in Manchester, UK next year.