Dada Woof Papa Hot previews

starts tonight.... Anyone going?

I was there tonight and really loved it. Parnell's text was very strong and the cast was uniformly wonderfully, but the evening was owned by John Benjamin Hickey, who took a break from running Chum Hum to give an absolutely SUPERB performance that rivaled his work in The Normal Heart. Hickey's character is selfish, angry, narcissistic, judgmental and hypocritical, but he's also vulnerable, funny, intelligent and striving to be a good husband and father. Rather than turning me against the character, the negative traits only caused him to be all too human and relatable, holding up a mirror to the audience, daring them to gaze into their own reflection in much the same way Ben and Phyllis function in Follies. Maybe that's the trick with writing a potentially "unlivable" character- make him or her so real that to hate them would be to hate yourself.

Tammy Blanchard only appeared in one short scene, basically amounting to an extended cameo, but she made a big splash and her sparring with Hickey (and his underlying hostility toward her) was very exciting. John Pankow offered excellent support as Hickey's best friend with a troubled marriage and bumpy career.

Patrick Breen is Next-Falling it with Hickey as his husband. This time the struggles aren't an age gap and religious differences, but how much gay couples may want to give in to a hetero-normative lifestyle now that marriage is legal, etc. Hickey says, "I don't feel gay anymore" at one point and his struggle to combine his gay identity in the 80's with what is expected of him now is very interesting. There's also good discussion about false horizons and unfulfilled desires as we age. They made for a believable couple and I would totally watch a tv show following their lives.

The set by John Lee Beatty makes for a perfect use of the space and Ellis' direction is top notch.

I reallg like the title, but I hope it doesn't turn people off from seeing the play. Anyone could relate to the characters and situations, but I think it will especially resonate with gay audiences.

My friend and I have been making fun of the title for weeks, saying it's the worst title since If There Is I Haven't Found It Yet. Now that I've seen the play I like the title, or at least understand that it captures a couple different aspects of the piece. Still, I don't think it will do ticket sales any favors.

It's not that she won't enjoy it, but I think the themes will be more deeply felt by adults. Still, I'm not a parent and I was able to relate and have empathy for their child-rearing struggles.

What is the running time?

SmoothLover said: "I have to say that the title does not intrigue me."

Now THAT'S weird.

I saw the second preview and thought the show was in really great shape. I would like to start by saying a couple things though. First, I cannot stand the title. I understood the significance of it before seeing the show but I found it embarrassing to say when my friends asked me what I had seen earlier in the night. The other is that I dislike children so I couldn't completely empathize with all aspects of the show.

All of that being said, I really enjoyed the evening. All of the actors are great with a special call out to John Benjamin Hickey who I have always had a huge crush on. I like Patrick Breen but I feel like he's usually doing a schtick with slouched shoulders and a deadpan delivery. As Whizzer said, Tammy Blanchard is really only in one scene and I'm not sure why an actress of her caliber was needed for the role. I would have actually loved to see someone like Jeanine Serralles in her place.

I thought the writing was very realistic and while I couldn't completely see myself in the characters they were all relatable. There are some great moments set up between the two gay couples and I liked the parallels in the lives of their straight friends. There was also a level of sexiness that I didn't expect because there are bits of making out that I found to be really hot. With regard to jbm2's question of whether it's appropriate for a 16 year old, there is a quick bit of nudity and I honestly think a teenager would be bored by adults discussing their everyday problems.

The set is really nice and makes a great use of the space. I'm always shocked by how many different locales they're able to produce in such a fairly small space. My issue with this theatre is always the sides. Some shows were great at taking the whole audience into consideration (most notably DOMESTICATED) but I don't think this was as successful. There are multiple scenes where 4 people are sitting at a table eating so one actor has their back to the audience. Also if you're too far to the side you miss some of the great set design of the rooms. My seating advice would be to sit facing the stage directly.

I hope to revisit the show again to see if there is any tightening of the script because I think it'll just get better.

I am seeing it this weekend. I hear it is only 90 minutes with one intermission,

Do they have merchandise in yet? (i.e. the poster?)

Hey Clyde – any seating advice? Where did you sit?

I really, really, really adored it, but in hindsight it is REALLY whitebread.

It's well done if you like the subject. I was bored because regardless of whether or not it's a heterosexual or homosexual couple it brings little that's new to marriage as fetish. These are themes for subscribers, and I'm one of them, but I usually steer clear of this theme because it's overdone. I expected something more from this take on the same story. However, the companion Lincoln Center magazine in the kiosks for a dollar have wonderful and enlightening essays and interviews in it. Yes, it is bourgie - beautiful sun-dappled apartments, a house in the Pines, exclusive restaurants each inhabited by types that telegraph - a successful freelance writer, a psychologist, a private equity manager, a TV actress ... And, the two women are written and directed to be shrill. Seen it.