#1
Posted: 6/21/17 at 2:58pm
#3
Posted: 6/28/17 at 4:32pm
Just got an email about this play, wondering if anyone has seen it as well...
#4
Posted: 7/6/17 at 3:00pm
an extension has just been announced but no one has seen it?! LOL
#5
Posted: 7/6/17 at 3:03pm
The theater looks to have about 40 seats/show, so makes sense that you'd get less response than to shows with 1000+ people/show.
#6
Posted: 7/6/17 at 3:06pm
Or go here?
https://www.show-score.com/off-broadway-shows/afterglow
Updated On: 7/6/17 at 03:06 PM
#7
Posted: 7/6/17 at 3:09pm
Haterobics, I was just about to post the same link. Have any big publications reviewed it?
#8
Posted: 7/6/17 at 3:17pm
bandit964 said: "Haterobics, I was just about to post the same link. Have any big publications reviewed it?"
Nope, some gay blogs/sites.
#9
Posted: 8/8/17 at 9:44pm
Anyone more recent updates on this one, looks like it was just extended once again into mid-September.
#11
Posted: 8/9/17 at 12:09am
I saw this show about a week ago and found it mostly boring, the play has a lot of nudity in the very beginning but not really for the rest of the show (I don't think there was any after intermission). There is a bed in the middle of the space that pulls apart and transforms into a working shower. As mentioned above, It is a really tiny space and you feel very close to the performance so if you get uncomfortable with nudity this is not the show for you. The evening felt quite long and there was one scene on top of a roof that felt endless. It isn't one of the worst shows I have seen lately so if you can get a ticket then sure go ahead but don't go in with high expectations.
#12
==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
Posted: 8/9/17 at 8:31am
Luscious said: "I'm seeing it Friday night. I'll let you know."
Please do share your thoughts after. I've read several relatively obscure reviews and they weren't particularly flattering, but I often disagree with critics.
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
#13
Posted: 8/9/17 at 8:48am
Endless. Idiotic. Some of the most clichéd writing and acting I've seen in years. The naked guys look OK naked, but, contrary to the marketing, only about 1% of the show is nude. We found the simulated semi-sex (really nothing more than some naked crotch-to-crotch smooching) to be ridiculous and unintentionally slightly comic (as most simulated stage sex is).
The actors are all three lily-white, slim, and relatively smooth. None of them behave or talk like an actual human being (probably more the fault of the writer who is also the director, and, I suspect, possessing much more in the way of family funds than talent or ability). They all mistake long pauses, exaggerated facial expressions, and gesticulation for acting (all three, according to bios, seem to have much more musical theatre experience than straight plays). The entire affair is solemn, plodding, humorless, and with a surprisingly bourgeois/suburban attitude towards polyandry.
It's strictly Davenport fare - that is to say, it feels like an amateur showcase funded by the artists' families (which it may be - the producer is one "Midnight Theatricals," an anonymous organization that seems to have sprung up just to mount this thing.
Updated On: 8/24/17 at 08:48 AM
#14
Posted: 9/9/17 at 7:52am
My boyfriend and I saw this last night. Yes, the acting is bad. Sometimes terrible. Yes, the writing can get very cliché. However we walked away really enjoying it.
It was a relatable story for both of us. We’re in a somewhat similar situation in our lives and it was surreal to watch it play out on stage. It lead to a three hour post-show discussion between the two of us that became quite heated.
We didn’t go in for the nudity, but rather the subject matter, so that may be why we enjoyed it more than others.
#15
Posted: 9/9/17 at 9:31am
A fair amount of dick and ass, and lots of talk about relationships, none of it very revealing, and an omnipresent shower, used to little purpose dramatically. Reminded me of the early 70s, when there was a spate of gay-related plays off-Broadway, where the main event was getting some guy's pants off (best, or worst example was AND PUPPY DOGS TAILS with porn star Casey Donovan).
The highlight (?) arrived late in act two when one one of the actors, in the throes of anger (not sexual passion, which is sadly missing) smashed a box against the theatre wall, and broke a lightbulb, whose pieces went flying into the audience. A lawsuit waiting to happen...
#16
Posted: 9/9/17 at 11:11am
The ads now say it's a one-act, 90-minute play. I guess some revision has happened?
#19
Posted: 10/11/17 at 9:38pm
Alfie6 said: "I saw this show about a week ago and found it mostly boring, the play has a lot of nudity in the very beginning but not really for the rest of the show (I don't think there was any after intermission). There is a bed in the middle of the space that pulls apart and transforms into a working shower. As mentioned above,It is a really tiny space and you feel very close to the performance so if you get uncomfortable with nudity this is not the show for you.The evening felt quite long and there was one scene on top of a roof that felt endless. It isn't one of the worst shows I have seen lately so if you can get a ticket then sure go ahead but don't go in with high expectations."
I didn't think there was an intermission?
#20
Posted: 10/11/17 at 9:51pm
It looks like they made a bunch of changes since I went:
I just found this online, source is http://www.theasy.com/Reviews/2017/A/afterglow.php
(Afterglow plays at The Loft at the Davenport Theatre, 354 West 45th Street, through November 19, 2017. Running time was originally 2 hours 15 minutes, with one intermission. Running time is now 90 minutes, no intermission. Performances are Mondays through Wednesdays at 7:30; Thursdays and Fridays at 8; Saturdays at 2 and 8. Tickets are $66.50; $86.50 premium, and are available on telecharge.com. For more information visit afterglowtheplay.com.)
#21
Posted: 10/12/17 at 11:32am
Clearly they cut a lot, and yet it still feels ludicrously long, static, artificial, phony, unimaginative, and dumb.
Good thing the boys were somewhat attractive and kept taking their clothes off.
#22
Posted: 10/12/17 at 11:49am
This play has become somewhat of a joke in my social circle. I haven't heard anything positive about it as a piece of theatre.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#23
Posted: 10/12/17 at 2:24pm
It's a terrific joke, and a harmless one. But it's hilarious what some people will do just to see some male genitalia.
#24
==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
Posted: 10/12/17 at 2:40pm
It's certainly not a great show, but I didn't think it dreadful either. My primary complaint was that the actor playing the interloper lacked the magnetism necessary to believe he could endanger the relationship of the other two. The story would've been more plausible to me if he had played the one left behind.
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
#25
Posted: 10/12/17 at 3:10pm
According to a fellow industry friend, it just "keeps extending." Erm, no pun intended, but if it really is as bad as you all say, the dude-bits may very well be what's filling the seats...
https://newplayexchange.org/users/99643/amanda-delalla
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $70
Tickets From $106
Tickets From $65