Fool For Love Previews — Page 2

Snow Geese! Now that was a clunker. I'm with TotallyEffed on that one- just unbearable. Fool For Love was watchable, it just took forever to get going and then was over without much payoff.

Kad said: "I wonder if a lot of Shepard's work hasn't been somewhat diminished with time. "

A few years ago I TAed an undergrad contemporary theatre class (for the English department,) and I think I can quite safely say that one of the plays we covered that got the class the most invested (and, yes, heavily debated,) was Shepard's Buried Child. I know that's one of his most known plays, but it certainly held up I felt (I am pretty sure we studied the revised version for what it's worth.) I admit I don't know Fool For Love at all but it sounds similar to some of his smaller, shorter plays I've seen over the years at Fringe Festivals, etc--which I've always found worth watching but perhaps didn't feel they really held up in the end.

That said I've always intended to get around to seeing the Robert Altman film of Fool for Love (which I think has a young Kim Basinger in it...)

This is definitely not something that I can recommend. I am a huge Arianda fan and primarily went for her performance. I can actually say that I enjoyed last year's "Tales from Red Vienna" so much more than "Fool For Love." I really wish I could have seen these two talented actors in a drama that would have induced me to care for them.

Saving grace...I almost made the trek last summer to Williamstown for this.

I saw Fool For Love last night. I was in the first row of the mezz. I have to say it was pretty boring. A lot of cowboy talk...that sounded like cowboy talk. The 75 minutes seemed to take forever. I think it might have been much more effective in a smaller off Broadway theatre.

I have to say that I think Nina Arianda was completely miscast. She looked stunning. The problem was she looked too stunning. Her hair was beautiful and looked like she spent the day at the salon. She was supposed to be in the middle of a dusty desert. How could her hair have been so curled and beautiful??She looked like a supermodel which is not really right for the character. She also doesn't have a natural "Gritty" quality to her, and I think the character needs it. Think of what her characters past was like? How did she grow up? Did she do a lot of drinking? A lot of Men? Drugs? What was her job? Waitress? Working in a bowling alley? I didn't see her history, her past life struggles, in Nina. It wasn't the right role for her. I'm wonder if anyone will agree with me.

I liked the two boyfriends. But again, it was a lot of "Look at us, we are cowboys, Let's get the lasso out"

As for the play, I didn't like it that much. Why would these characters would choose to divulge such personal information to someone who was just Nina's date? He wasn't really a threat to the Sam Rockwell character. And what about the big black fancy car that comes to the parking lot to shoot a few bullets into the room. Really?
It may have been shocking 30 years ago, but I really find it shocking at all. The big spoiler barely registered with me.

I thought Gordon Joseph Weiss was wonderful. He handled the language without sounding like an old cowboy. He was very moving.

And just for the record... I enjoyed The Snow Geese very much. I thought the set was beautiful and the performances very elegant. I thought the play was very layered and interesting. It was far from a clunker. I didn't understand the bad reviews.

I honestly have very little to say about this show because it's mostly a big whatever. Like it's a show that I saw but it had very little impact and I wouldn't even go as far as to say there was a story. The "twist/spoiler" was telegraphed from so far away I called it within 10 mins. The acting is mostly fine which is upsetting because I thought this was going to be another chance for Arianda to shine.

Much like VENUS IN FUR I think this would have benefitted from being in a smaller space. I really hate that they keep building these small boxes in the Friedman especially since you lose a lot of the scenic design from the mezzanine.

After having seen this and OLD TIMES, I guess this is the better of the two. At least they were both short enough that while I lost interest throughout I didn't fall asleep.

I caught this tonight. I found the entire 75 minutes to be incredibly boring and unbelievably long. The play is just boring and uninteresting. There's really not much else to say about this. The cast could not rise above the terrible material, which is truly a shame. I found the whole play to be incredible frustrating to sit through, and would not recommend this to anyone. Between Therese Raquin last night and Fool for Love tonight, I think I've had my fair share for uninteresting and boring plays for a while.

I was in the front row, so I can't comment on the size of the house since I felt like I was right on top of everything (which was pretty cool).