24 Hour Plays: my (very long) review

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 3:14pm

Monday night was the 24 Hour Plays 2006, an annual benefit for Working Playground. This was my second time going.

The performers who appeared (since I know that's what most people want to know), in order, were:
Michael Ealy, Amy Ryan, Liev Schreiber, Pablo Schreiber, Lynn Whitfield, Jennifer Aniston, Rosie Perez, David Cross, Sam Rockwell, John Hawkes, Matthew Lillard, Erika Christensen, Rachel Dratch, Julianna Margulies, Nia Vardalos, Kieran Culkin, Anna Paquin, Fisher Stevens, Aasif Mandvi, Gaby Hoffman, Wallace Shawn, John Linnell (of They Might Be Giants), Catherine Tate, Elizabeth Berkley-Lauren (She was credited as Elizabeth Berkley last year. Did she get married? Does anyone know?)

I decided to go to the theater after work yesterday to see if there were any tickets available. It was completely sold out, but as I was asking, this woman (who turned out to be the co-chair of Working Playground) overheard me and said that someone in her group just cancelled and would I like the ticket? She said that it was $300, but when I made a face, she said I could have it for $200 since it was last-minute. I thought about it for, um, three seconds and said yes. I can't really afford it right now, but it's for a really good cause and the show was going to be a lot of fun. So I won't get furniture for a while.

Anyway! On to the show.

First two go were two high school students who had won a Working Playground contest to write a short piece around the theme of "I am the future." Megan Villacorta's piece was entitled "Building Sandcastles" and Marcus Wright's was "The Future I Will Wander Through." I'm not really going to review them, because they're only students and it was clear they were nervous. But they did a great job. Both of the pieces, although very different, were both extremely powerful and evoked some strong images. Megan's was straight prose, while Marcus's was more like a performance art piece, or slam poetry.

Like last year, They Might Be Giants kicked off the show. If anyone who was there last year remembers the song they sang ("Hour one...What have you got?...Hour two...Me neither...") it was the same song. They clearly have a lot of fun doing this production every year. They also performed between each piece while the PAs rearranged the set.

Play #1: The Sunday Times, by Terrence McNally
Directed by Miguel Arteta
Logan: Michael Ealy
Susan: Amy Ryan
Richard: Liev Schreiber
Peter: Pablo Schreiber

The play opens with four people lounging around, reading the Sunday New York Times. The people are revealed to be Richard, his wife Susan, her brother Peter, and Peter's husband Logan. Logan announces that there are no homosexual or interracial wedding announcements in the paper this week. (It should be noted that Peter is white and Logan is black.) Susan declares that the United States is f***ed, no matter who is in the White House. Her declaration leads to a conversation among the group about society and whether it's getting better, whether it's enough, whether they should even bother trying. Richard informs us that Susan's hospital did not receive a research grant they needed to try and find a cure for cancer. Susan goes off, ranting that no one cares about anyone else anymore. This inspires Logan and Peter to recount a story of when they visited New York City, where they felt safe enough to walk hand-in-hand. A gang of kids approached them. Tough-looking street kids, mostly black, carrying baseball bats and golf clubs. Peter and Logan simply held each other's hand harder. The kids passed right by, not giving them a second look. Susan concedes that some parts of society are improving, but it still isn't enough to make a difference. Then Richard shares a dream in which he was a woman. A tall, gorgeous, voluptuous woman. Suddenly, he started giving birth, over and over. Babies just kept popping out. He says the pain was incredible. He thought he was going to split in two. But the pain was nothing compared to the elation of bringing new life into the world and with it, new hope. This story brings the conversation to a close as they all reflect on the meaning of his dream.

I felt like Pablo Schreiber and Michael Ealy shone in this play. I don't know if either one is actually gay in reality, but I don't care. They made an adorable couple and they were very believable. There was a point while they were talking and holding hands and Michael just started stroking Pablo's fingers with his thumb. No one acknowledged it, it wasn't a big deal. It felt totally natural, like these were two people who were truly in love and completely comfortable.

Leiv Schreiber was a little hard to understand in the beginning of the scene because his back was to us, but as the scene progressed I thought he did a wonderful job playing the supportive husband who is absolutely devoted to his wife, as insufferable as she may be. Also, the way he delivered his lines, he seemed like the kind of man who normally doesn't open up and is generally a step behind in any sort of political conversation, and that felt totally right for the character. All in all, I loved his performance.

As for Amy, I feel like she let herself be upstaged by the men. For most of the scene, she was on the opposite side of the stage, facing all of them, and it felt like she was fighting for focus, although she was supposed to be the main character in the scene. I also didn't feel like there was a whole lot of depth to her character. I don't know if that's her fault or the writer's, but I didn't see the loving, intimate, maternal side to her. I couldn't see why Richard loved her. I know it's only a ten-minute piece and that doesn't leave a lot of room for character development, but I didn't like Susan, and I should have.

This was a strong piece to start the night with. I like how it tied into the students' theme of the future, but it was a little heavy. I don't think it set the right tone for the rest of the night, but it definitely made a statement.

Play #2: Three Girls and Bob, by Adam Bock
Directed by Elinor Renfield
Rosemarie: Lynn Whitfield
Helena: Jennifer Aniston
Lucy: Rosie Perez
Bob: David Cross

This play begins with the three women entering a hotel lobby, discussing the intimacy seminar they just attended. Basically, they thought it was pretty pointless. One of them (I don't remember which) points out that the speaker refused to meet anyone after the talk. Helena says that if she wants to learn about intimacy, she wants to learn about it from a man. Get his point of view. The girls formulate the theory that men are intimidated because they are beautiful, smart, and powerful, and maybe men are scared by all three. Just then, Bob walks into the lobby. The girls stop and watch this delightfully awkward, cute-in-a-geeky-way man. They introduce themselves and get to know a little about Bob. He seems nice, so Rosemarie decides to ask him to settle their debate. She presents Bob with three choices: rich and powerful (herself), smart (Helena), and beautiful (Lucy). She bluntly asks him which one he'd choose. Taken aback by the question, he stammers for a few minutes. While he chokes on his tongue, the girls realize what a stupid question that is and that they shouldn't be competing for a man's affection. As they are walking out the door, Bob yells, "Wait, I want the smart one!" Helena smiles and says, "It's too late, Bob. But thanks." They continue leaving. Bob shouts, "No, the beautiful one! The rich one!"

This piece was a lot of fun. I'm not sure if there was much of a point, but I definitely enjoyed watching it. I had a hard time believing that Jennifer Aniston was not the pretty one, but Rosie Perez played Lucy perfectly, so I guess it's okay. Jen was pretty funny ("I can do a Rubik's cube in under a minute."). Unfortunately, I can't look at her without thinking of Rachel Greene, and it didn't help that the character was very Rachel-y. However, it was wonderful seeing Jen do what she does best, and she seemed very confident, especially considering it was her Broadway debut. Rosie was, as always, an absolute delight to watch. Incredibly cute and funny. Lynn could have easily been upstaged by the other two women, but she held her own. Especially seeing as the play explicitly painted these three women into narrow characters, it would have been very easy to play them that way, but none of them did. Each woman was a full, interesting, multi-faceted character. I could totally see these women sitting in a coffee shop in New York City chatting about life.

David Cross did an admirable job as well. In contrast with the first play, where Amy Ryan was the only woman on stage and was outshined by her male costars, David Cross was very fun and interesting to watch. Even though he was the secondary character to the women, he was not lacking any depth. His mannerisms and little tics helped to create a real person and not simply a plot vehicle.

Play #3: Jack On Film, by Adam Rapp
Directed by Ian Morgan
Man A: Sam Rockwell
Man B: John Hawkes
Man C: Matthew Lillard
Woman: Erika Christensen

I’ll be honest, I didn’t quite get what was happening in this play, but I’ll try to describe it. It opens with Man A and Man B alone in some kind of waiting room. In an attempt to make small talk, we discover that both men are named Jack and each of them was offered a sum of money to show up at this place by a man who kept his face covered. Both encounters happened in a parking lot. However, Man A was offered $4500 while Man B was only offered $1000. Man B was told that they were specifically looking for three men who look alike. We also find out that Man B is an out-of-work actor trying to care for his daughter, who has lupus. His wife left a few months ago. When he asks Man A what he does, he simply says that he is a cocaine addict. He is making notes on some sort of script, but he refuses to let Man B see it. During the conversation, they hear a scream come from offstage. Man B is scared, but Man A remains calm. A minute letter, Man C runs on stage in a T-shirt and underwear, carrying his clothes. He looks somewhat confused or maybe a little scared. He announces that “she” is ready to see Jack. Man A and Man B look at each other. Man A tells Man B to go first. He hesitates, then agrees. When he leaves, Man C gets dressed, making conversation in the meanwhile. He reveals that he was approached by the same man in a parking lot and offered $500. He also mentions that he and Man B look uncannily similar. The whole time, Man A sits quietly with his script. Finally, Man C asks what he does. Man A gives the same answer: he is a cocaine addict. Man C notices a jump rope he is carrying and jokingly asks what he is going to do with it. Man A calmly and matter-of-factly states that, as soon as Man C leaves, he is going to use the jump rope to strangle Man B. Man C tries to get him to admit that he is joking, but Man C looks deadly serious. Terrified, Man C runs out of the room. There is a scream offstage. Then, the Woman enters in a silk bathrobe. She sits on the couch and Man A sits beside her. She tells him that Man B is currently tied up and terrified. Man C asks if the camera is still rolling. The Woman confirms it. Man C stands and exits in the direction of Man B.

Even though I didn’t fully know what was going on, I thought each actor did very well in his or her role. I fully believed that these people were in this situation and would act this way. Sam Rockwell was absolutely terrifying in his coldness and his silence. I don’t know many actors who could be that scary by simply reading a piece of paper. John Hawkes was very convincing as a man who did not want to be here and knew that he was probably doing something illegal, but needed the money for his sick daughter. I felt very sorry for him. Erika Christensen, although she only had a few lines, came across as a formidable presence. The way she carried himself and the half-smile she wore the whole time made her into someone I would not want to encounter. Again, how many women can be that intimidating wearing nothing but a slinky robe?

Matthew Lillard played Matthew Lillard. You know what I mean. He was goofy, awkward, and happy-go-lucky. It’s what he does best and he did it spectacularly. Also, and this is a bit off-topic, but he is tall. He does not seem that tall in the movies.

From what I know about Adam Rapp’s writing (which is only one other play that I caught a reading of a couple years ago, but still), this followed the same pattern. Unwilling people participating in a strange sexual and/or violent scenario because they have no choice, at least until it is too late. Although the plot was not clear, he definitely succeeded in evoking a feeling. It was definitely a good choice to schedule this play immediately before intermission. I think everyone in the audience needed a few minutes to shake off the creepiness.

Play #4: The First Tree in Antarctica, by Julia Cho
Directed by Andrew McCarthy
Sylvie: Rachel Dratch
Adrienne: Julianna Margulies
Mary: Nia Vardalos
Shawn: Kieran Culkin

The play is almost entirely told as a monologue by Sylvie, with periodic interjections from other characters. On the stage, Sylvie stands downstage center, facing the audience. Adrienne is at a table to the right with a glass of wine. Shawn is in pajamas, curled up on the couch to the left, with Mary standing behind him. Everyone is in the dark except for Sylvie, who begins to tell us about her dream. She has a recurring dream about exploring Antarctica and she doesn’t know why. She isn’t particularly fascinated by Antarctica and isn’t even sure how to spell it, or where it is on the globe. She asks her sister Adrienne, who simply offers, “Maybe you need to turn up the heat in your bedroom.” Not satisfied by that answer, Sylvie goes out on her own, looking for further answers. She discovers hundreds of interesting tidbits about the continent, some of which she recites for the audience, but nothing providing a reason for her dreams.

At the same time, Mary hands Shawn a telephone and tells him to call “her.” She waits expectantly, but Shawn is unable to. Mary consoles him, saying that he just found the number and maybe it’s too soon.

Back to Sylvie, she has found a support group called “Dreams of Antarctica.” She attends a meeting, hoping for an answer, but it turns out that the group is for people who dream of actually visiting Antarctica. Julianna Margulies does double duty as the emcee of the group as she recites the greeting. Halfway through, Julianna paused and started cracking up. I don’t know if she blanked on the lines, although she was reading directly from the script, or if something just caused her to laugh. But either way, it was absolutely adorable. She turned to the back of the stage to regain her composure, holding up a finger to signal to us that she’d continue in just a second. During the pause, the other actors on stage started to laugh. Finally, Julianna turned back around and finished reading the line. Although she was almost laughing too hard to get it out, the last thing she read was the price of an Antarctica expedition, which is a few hundred thousand dollars. Sylvie tells us, “And that’s what I left the group.”

Back to Mary and Shawn, Mary tells Shawn that she’ll leave the room so he can call. He agrees. She pretends to leave, but really just hangs back while Shawn dials. He gestures for her to leave. Finally, she does. After a pause, Sylvie turns to face Shawn and “answers.” They share a couple awkward greetings, then he asks, “Why did you do it?” After some stammers, she says, “Because I was 16. That’s the only thing I can say.” With that, he sadly thanks her and hangs up. Mary returns and consoles Shawn.

Turning back to the audience, Sylvie reveals to us that Shawn is the son she gave birth to as a teenager and gave up because she wasn’t ready for the responsibility. She said she was taken by surprise when he called, but if he called again, she’d tell him a story about Antarctica. Global warming is slowly melting all the ice, causing Antarctica to shrink. Scientists say that, within our lifetime, trees may start to appear on Antarctica. While that seems like a good thing because trees bring life, a single tree would disrupt the whole ecosystem. Shawn was the tree to her Antarctica, and, as wonderful as he was, she was unable to deal with her life being disrupted.

This was definitely my favorite play of the evening. It was very funny, but it dealt with a serious topic and was very touching. Rachel Dratch was absolutely wonderful. She brought all the humor out of the play that she could, while still managing to convey the sadness of the situation. I felt like I knew all about Sylvie, even more than was explicitly stated, and I felt very sorry for her, but at the same time, I could laugh with her about the absurdity of it all.

Julianna Margulies was great. When she lost the line, she was very funny. She was one of the few people that evening who acknowledged the casual and silly nature of creating a new piece of art in less than 24 hours. And somehow, even though she spent the rest of the play laughing in the corner, she managed not to steal attention from the rest of the actors, and none of the sadness was lost.

Kieran Culkin was very sincere and completely believable. Even the way he sat on the couch conveyed aspects of the character. His lines were delivered perfectly.

My one complaint for this play was that Nia Vardalos was underused. She is a great actress, as well as hysterically funny, and she had about four lines, total. She was very funny with her lines and provided a lighthearted counterpart to Kieran’s sulkiness, I just wish I could have seen more from her.

Play #5: The Blizzard, by David Ives
Directed by Bennett Miller
Jenny: Anna Paquin
Neil: Fisher Stevens
Salim: Aasif Mandvi
Natasha: Gaby Hoffman

The play opens with Jenny and Neil in their new winter cabin. It is the middle of a blizzard outside and they are waiting for their friends Dave (I think) and Sandy, who are coming up for dinner. The blizzard has caused the TV, radio, and phone to all go out. Jenny says that she is tired of doing the same thing every time they are together and vows to do something different this time. Neil agrees. Just then, there is a knock on the door. Neil and Jenny jump up to greet their friends, but instead are greeted by Salim and Natasha, who breeze in and hug Neil and Jenny as if they have known them all their lives. Neil and Jenny are rightly confused, but Salim assures them that they are friends of Dave and Sandy, who were unable to go and sent these two in their place. Neil and Jenny aren’t quite buying it. While Salim is super-friendly and talking the whole time, Natasha simply stretches out in the living room and watches, contributing occasionally. Neil attempts to kick them out, but finally relents because of the blizzard. Jenny is scared, but Salim convinces Neil to take him on a tour of the grounds. They go out, leaving Jenny alone with Natasha. Natasha makes conversation, telling Jenny things that are almost directly quoted from Jenny when she was alone with Neil. This only frightens Jenny more and she screams for Neil, but there is no answer. Natasha shushes her and kisses her head, assuring her that there is nothing to worry about.

This play was also pretty creepy and left the audience wondering. It wasn’t my favorite, but I liked it. I liked how there were stronger and stronger hints that something wasn’t right. More than any, I felt that this was the most developed play. There was a clear beginning, middle, and end. All the parts were played beautifully. I felt Anna Paquin looked a little too young to play a married woman, but maybe that’s just because I know her best as Rogue, from the X-Men movies. Either way, she did a very good job. I completely believed that she was in a situation that terrified her, but she was too scared to do anything about it. I also felt that she was extremely disappointed in her husband when he did not try harder to kick out the unwelcome guests. My complaint with her is with her wardrobe. She was wearing a very thin, backless summer shirt. I had a hard time believing she wasn’t freezing on the stage, let alone in a cabin in the middle of nowhere during a blizzard.

Fisher Stevens was good. Not spectacular. There’s nothing especially good to say about his performance, but nothing bad, either. He set out to play a role and he did it. I wish I had more to say about him, but I don’t.

Aasif Mandvi and Gaby Hoffman were wonderfully creepy. Aasif was just so eager and friendly that it was off-putting, like something just wasn’t right. And the way Gaby just watched everything with a little smile, plus the way she made herself right at home in a stranger’s house, made her very creepy. I knew the second she was left alone with Jenny that Jenny was in danger, even though I didn’t know why.

Play #6: Toccata and Fugue, by Tina Howe
Directed by Josie Rourke
Sir Humphrey Wagg-Thornton: Wallace Shawn
Toto: John Linnell
Charlotte: Catherine Tate
Concetta: Elizabeth Berkley-Lauren

The play opens with Toto playing his accordion. Sir Humphrey interrupts from the couch and orders him to play something more depressing. Toto does not respond, but obeys. We learn that Sir Humphrey was once a world-class organ player, but he has not played since an incident at a concert in Mexico City, during which he froze and could not continue. Since that moment and the death of his wife, he has been living in this sort of halfway house, refusing to touch an organ. Sir Humphrey’s daughter Charlotte bursts in. Sir Humphrey dismisses Toto. Charlotte begs her father to be nicer to Toto. She says that it’s hard being a mute accordion player who was estranged from his twin sister since birth. Then she changes the subject and announces that she is in love. Sir Humphrey asks who the lucky man is. Charlotte avoids the question, instead, gesturing and trying to provide clues. Finally, frustrated with her father’s lack of understanding, she blurts that she is in love with a woman, and it is none other than Concetta, Toto’s long-estranged sister. Concetta runs in and immediately begins fawning over Sir Humphrey. She tells him that she is a big fan and was at the infamous Mexico City concert. It turns out that she was the little girl who squealed, thus distracting Sir Humphrey so much that he could not continue. Sir Humphrey remembers. Concetta tells him that the only reason she made that noise is because she loved his playing so much, and she would be very unhappy if he were to never play again. Through her and Charlotte’s begging, Sir Humphrey finally agrees to play again. Charlotte and Concetta sit together on the couch with Toto behind them and they all listen as Sir Humphrey plays.

This play was a whole lot of silliness. It was a little hard to understand because of the goofy accents of the characters, but once I got the hang of it, it was easy. I liked how the playwright incorporated one of the members of the event’s band, and it was nice to hear John Linnell play the accordion without hearing his voice over it. When you hear the silly They Might Be Giants songs, you’re usually laughing too hard to listen to the playing, but he is actually good.

Wallace Shawn was funny. He was the main reason I wanted tickets and it was worth it. He carried the scene and, unlike the other actors, his affected accent seemed natural and not a burden. Apparently, he can also play the organ. Who knew?

Catherine Tate was funny, but she seemed to be struggling the most with her accent. She had the character down pat, but every time she said a word that was affected by the accent, there was a slight emphasis as if it was intentional and meant to get laughs. By contrast, Wallace Shawn spoke as if his accent was completely natural and unintentional, and his lines actually got laughs.

This was the second time Elizabeth Berkley was the last actor to come onstage. Her part was very funny, but she also seemed to be a bit limited by her accent. She went for the stereotypical, Speedy Gonzalez-type Mexican accent, which is funny, but a bit overdone, not to mention insensitive. I could also see her behind the window, waiting for her entrance, with a script in her hand. It was a little distracting. However, when she wasn’t speaking, her facial expressions and movements were absolutely hysterical.

I had a hard time believing that Elizabeth Berkley and Catherine Tate were in love. In contrast to the gay couple in the first scene, every time they touched each other seemed unnatural, like they were specifically to touch at that moment in this way. They could easily have introduced Concetta as nothing other than Toto’s long-lost sister and the play would not have lost anything.

I have one more critique, and that’s about the event itself. Last year, there was a much more laid-back atmosphere. The actors, crew, and audience were all there to benefit a wonderful charity, and that was reflected in the way the actors reacted to fans. Everyone came out to the lobby last year and spent a long time chatting, signing autographs, and taking pictures for everyone who asked. They were very friendly. I remember being there for almost an hour after the show ended. This year, however, the lobby doors were closed after everyone left the theater and the actors were shuffled out the back exit into cars waiting to take them to the afterparty. The ones who were caught by fans, for the most part, refused to sign anything or take pictures. There was much more an attitude of “I did this show, it was just a normal job, now no one bother me,” and I think part of that was due to the way it was run. First of all, no student rush? Since when did donating to charity become an activity that only the super-rich can partake in? Students want to contribute, too. Let them. I think the lack of anyone there under the age of 35 helped create a more stuffy atmosphere than last year. I just wish everyone would keep in mind that everyone who was there had one thing in mind—the charity.

Updated On: 10/25/06 at 03:14 PM

[mabel]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 3:49pm

Thanks for your very detailed review, Yero! I went last year with student rush, and had a lot of fun...though I do think that was the only year (at least in the years I was at school in New York) that they offered student rush. I definitely agree with you that I don't think it would kill them to set aside a few (even if they're rear/side) seats for even $50 for students. It's a great organization, that's sole purpose is to help expose young people to theatre and to encourage their participation in the arts. It would be great if they were more accomodating to students, allowing them to contribute what they can...But, it's not surprising that they don't. It is for charity, after all, and if they can sell out at $200-300 a ticket, why would they bother taking $25-50??

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 3:51pm

I know, I just wish I didn't have to choose between a couch and a ticket to a benefit. Plus, as I said, I think the lack of student rush helped contribute to the more hostile atmosphere. But I completely understand that they want to make as much money as they possibly can. It just sucks for all of us poor students.

Updated On: 10/25/06 at 03:51 PM

[mabel]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 4:03pm

Oh, I totally agree. And it's a shame that the actors were whisked away and/or seemed hostile towards fans. Pretty much everyone was lovely last year (someone working the event gave me a free poster at intermission that I got signed by a bunch of people), and the year before, I happened to be walking by when they were all leaving and I snagged a Playbill and had Sam Rockwell sign it (noticed lots of other people just milling about outside the theatre chatting as well). It always did seem like a pretty relaxed/low key event.

Anyway, back to rush...I at least like the fact that they'll theoretically sell student tix if they aren't sold out. At least that's something. If they can sell out at $300 a pop, super, more power to ya (though, not the best for poor college students). But at least they seem to be willing to give students a break, rather than leave seats empty, had that not been the case (most likely, had Aniston not been attached).

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 4:47pm

I just realized--you did rush last year? So did I. There were only about four of us in line. Which one were you?

I was the first one in line. Pink hair.

[mabel]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 7:02pm

Hmmm...I think I remember you. I think I was 3rd or 4th in line (after Emcee, I believe). Hi!

Updated On: 10/25/06 at 07:02 PM

[peeps2]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 10:28pm

Hi,

First of all, thanks for this review. Even as a producer, I don't get cheap tickets, so it's great to have this to send to my friends and family who couldn't make it.

Second, sorry there was no student rush.

In past years, we had big magazine/retail sponsors underwriting the cost of the production from day 1 and we could count on a little leeway in that regard. This time, the early production costs were fronted by *the charity themselves* and some producer credit cards (The 24 Hour Company has very little money itself). So we were depending on ticket sales for everything. So, even more than the normal "it's a benefit" reasons, this year, we just couldn't risk it.

When we can make student tix available in the future, I promise, we will.

"This year, however, the lobby doors were closed after everyone left the theater and the actors were shuffled out the back exit into cars waiting to take them to the afterparty. The ones who were caught by fans, for the most part, refused to sign anything or take pictures."

Fair observation, but I think it was due to the fact that we had a person or two involved who tend to attract some really crappy paparazzi attention. That tends to bug everyone out (me included). So, blame the tabs, not the actors. They are good eggs. Not only do they not have to do the show at all, but what other benefit asks them to work so hard and risk public embarrassment?

'There was much more an attitude of “I did this show, it was just a normal job, now no one bother me,”'....

Nah. While you are entitled to your opinion (especially as a repeat supporter) I can assure you that the feeling backstage was all the elated, loopy exhaustion that the cast has every year. It may have seemed that way to you because they were thinking, "OK, the hordes of paparazzi are going be on us any second now."

I think I saw Mabel waiting by the door after the show (I was the one who said, "Sorry, everyone's gone"). Anyway, it was someone who looked familiar.

To those you came to see the show, I'm humbled that you shelled out so much dough to see our little off-off-Broadway project writ large. I'm glad those of you who posted had a good time.

To those who came to try for student rush or see some folks outside, sorry it didn't work out. Maybe next year.

To the paparazzi and the guy who on other other thread who said that it sounded like a scam (without bothering to check our track record): kiss my ass.

peeps2.

P.S. Come see our "normal" non-celeb show sometimes. 15 bucks. And cheap beer. http://www.24hourplays.com (except it look like our RSS feed is down. Gotta fix that now).

Our website

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 10:59pm

I totally understand the reasons for the lack of student rush, it just sucks for us. I don't want you to think I was blaming the company or anything. Just the circumstances.

I also understand about paparazzi, and they suck. But when I approached a certain star (I won't say who) and asked very politely for an autograph, we were still in the theater and I was literally the only person in the room who did not work for the production. It would have taken about eight seconds for this person to stop and sign something for me. I mean, they were on their way to an afterparty. Would it really kill them to be a few seconds late? I'm not a paparazzo.

I'm just using this example as a contrast to last year. Again, I understand all the reasoning behind why it was the way it was, it's just irritating that it has to be that way.

I still had a great time at the show, and I appreciate all the hard work everyone put in. I stage manage, and it's hard enough pulling a show together in six weeks, I can't imagine doing it in 24 hours, so you have my respect for that.

Thanks again, and I can't wait for next year!

(Also, I was outside the theater, too, and I remember you saying they were all gone. Hi!)

[peeps2]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 11:39pm

Hey,

I didn't think you were blaming anyone. I just wanted you to know it wasn;t something we did lightly.

I'm very excited that last year's student rushers are shelling out the big bucks to come back the next year. It'll make it an easier sell for the beneficaries to swallow when I try to reinstate it next year. I agree about the atmosphere rush seats bring. But, is 35 really /that/ old?

In London, Starbucks buys a few rows and give the seats to students. I'd love to see something like that happen (even cheaper that $20).

But more to the point, not that anyone would think you were a paparazzo (especially since you were inside), but that the atmosphere of knowing that the paparazzi level was so much higher might have had folks more on edge in general and less willing to interact. Human nature, I guess. Remember, the Vince Vaughn lie/cameraphone pic started at our London show's cast party. Only cast, crew and ticketholders were in there, too.

Anyway, if you see me next year, just grab me, and if I have half a sec, I'll get you someone's autograph (1).

Like I said, thanks for coming and reviewing!

Peeps2
the site is fixed now, but no updates yet

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 10/25/06 at 11:44pm

Man, I wish you had told me that earlier! I wanted Jennifer Aniston to sign a card for one of my friends who is getting married and loves Friends.

Ah, well.

I didn't mean that 35 was old. But it's a very different attitude from 20, especially in this city.

[HughE2030]

Posted: 10/26/06 at 8:15am

I wasn't at the Stage Door when the event ended, I was at the after party "red carpet" at that point. I don't understand why why Jennifer Anniston didn't go out the front door so it wasn't as crazy at the Stage Door as you described. Of course the fans want autographs, its a time honored tradition to get signatures of the actors on your playbill, especially when you pay $250 a ticket. I think it was great that JA did the play, but it's surprising they didn't have an exit strategy similar to the one when she arrived, she came in a cab and went through the front door while the paparazzi were cooling their heels at the stage door.
On the otherhand at the After Party most celebrities did pose for the paparazzi before they went into the party. So it must have been the insane stage door that caused them to not want to sign or pose for photos. It did get crazy when JA showed up, and when she left, most of the paparazzi left too. You have to feel sorry for her, but you also have to realize the public caused this frenzy because they buy the magazines that these paparazzi submit their photos to.
Thanks for your review, it was really great.

Confessions of A Celebrity Stalker

Updated On: 10/26/06 at 08:15 AM

[mabel]

Posted: 10/26/06 at 9:10am

Just a quickie to say thanks to peeps for listening to our thoughts/concerns. It's nice to know that whether or not something like having student rush is a feasible option, at least people on the production team are out there taking our thoughts into consideration.

And it's totally understandable re: the paparazzi and being forced to handle the actors' exits accordingly. I wasn't there this year, but it's a shame that their presense threw a wrench into the relaxed post-show atmosphere that appeared to be the general vibe in years past.

Anyway, thanks again, and hopefully I'll see you next year!

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 10/26/06 at 11:46am

Thanks for the detailed review, Yero! I was another one who went last year, but tickets were too expensive this year. (justifiably of course). I wonder if any of the shows may get turned into a production like one of the shows last year did.

That sucks about the atmosphere, though. I agree it was such a wonderful one last year. I got to talk with a lot of the actors. Granted, quite a bit of those actors are known for being extremely fan-friendly. Not that these weren't, but...they might have gotten more easily jarred by the paparazzi.

But everyone was great last year. I even met and got a picture with Hayden. I actually love most events at that theatre, because of the fact that the stage door is rarely used and everyone just leaves through the lobby, which provides a great place for interaction, free of barricades and such.

Anyway, sad I couldn't make it this year, but thanks for the review! And thanks for the wonderful event, peeps!

[stella985]

Posted: 10/26/06 at 12:30pm

Hi, I just thought that I'd add my two cents to all of this since I was also at the event and afterparty.

I enjoyed the event and I have to admit a major highlight was seeing Jennifer Aniston. The only thing that I found slightly disappointing was that at events like this I think it's fun to see more of the personalities of the actors rather than the characters they were playing, but this year everyone acted very professional (odd thing to complain about right?) with the one exception of Julianna Margulies having that laughing fit, which for me was one of the highlights.

As for the kind of tight atmosphere I think that there was probably no choice. The paparazzi were rather scary and I feel sorry for anyone who has to deal with that on a regular basis. Plus, I think there's a point where it just becomes a no win situation. If JA had decided to let everyone who wanted to get an autograph or a picture at the party there would have been chaos and it would have put all the people who were organizing the event, the people who owned the venues, and the security people in very awkward positions.

At the party my friend and I were basically just there to see the actors and we got to see most of them walking in with one notable exception (who was also the person we wanted to meet the most). So that was disappointing. However, when we went to get some food and were standing right by the VIP area we saw her sitting inside and she noticed us giggling (my friend and I are both students) and she waved and said "hi" to us, but we were to shocked to say anything. Plus, I know some people who were involved in the event and they all also said that there's just this chaos with that comes with that type of fame that is just overwhelming to deal with, even if the person at the center of it is very nice and grounded (which they all said JA was).