Is Naked Macbeth naked??

[kasim]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 12:18pm

maybe a dumb question? But is it totally nude???

And if so, can i pretty much gurantee their is not one straight man in the audience?

[Dre2387]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 12:52pm

totally nude.

[kasim]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:03pm

like nothing even covering their privates???

wouldnt that get annoying for the guys? Especially if they are moving around a lot?

[Dre2387]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:04pm

that's theatre

[midtowngym]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:14pm

There is no frontal nudity. As you enter, three men lie naked face down. The theater goes dark and they exit--you can't see a thing. The show is performed fully clothed, other than some open shirts. An all-around disappointing adaptation.

Updated On: 10/20/05 at 01:14 PM

[spintoboy]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:17pm

In addition to the three naked actors lying on the stage when the audience enters the auditorium, there is some nudity in Act II (which not many people stay to see): the actor playing Macbeth is nude in one scene, and the actor playing Macduff's son is nude in another scene.

[Dre2387]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:19pm

that sucks. I thought it was done completely naked. glad I didn;t see it now.

[midtowngym]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:22pm

Sh*t! We left at intermission. We would've stayed had we known...

[kasim]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 1:28pm

i think i'll pass ... but thanks for satisfiying my curiosity :)

[Avigdor]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 2:10pm

nudity is not theatre..it is porgnography and a cheap cheap way to sell tickets. it panders to the lowest common denominator.

[nydirector2]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 2:45pm

I thought male nudity was theatre, while female nudity was a strip club?

Actually there was a female nude Macbeth in Florida at a strip club, because the town passed a law saying no nudity unless for artistic purposes, so that's how they got around the law.

But yeah...I'm still waiting for Naked Girls Singing!!!

[blaxx]

Posted: 10/20/05 at 3:19pm

"nudity is not theatre..it is porgnography and a cheap cheap way to sell tickets. it panders to the lowest common denominator."

You have to be kidding...were you born in 1920? That is one of the most idiotic statements that I've read in here.
I have seen many gorgeous perfomance (yes, some of them with the full cast naked) that have showed me how beautiful the human body is - in all forms and shapes, and a nude scene can also be a costume choice that makes an impact it couldn't in any other way.

[Avigdor]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:31pm

hey blaxx..thanks for being so...kind...i was only stating my opinion. calling me idiotic and assuming i was born in during the flapper years is quite the stretch. but whatever...my question for everyone now is..what did you think of the show. i saw it. and i am curious what others thought. best and worst performances.

[nydirector2]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:35pm

Avigdor, you amaze me. You make all these claims about nudity not being theatre and then to show your outrage...you go see it? Weird.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:37pm

to avigdor's defense...sometimes you just wanna see some naked men. It doesn't mean you go with the expectation that you'll be viewing art. You go with the expectation to see penis.

[ken8631]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:41pm

Saw "Naked Guys Singing" - it wasn't bad actually (I'm definitely straight though)....

And yes, they were totally naked - like 6 or 8 of them I think....

[nydirector2]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:47pm

So they did a female version of The Odd Couple....why not a female version of Naked Boys Singing?

[midtowngym]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:48pm

(I'm definitely straight though)....

If you need to DEFINITIVELY state your heterosexuality, well....you're probably not.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:50pm

All nudity aside Naked Macbeth was FOOLISH. I want my $24.95 back. The production was a hot mess.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:50pm

nakes girls singing wouldn't be a commercial success, but it might sell critics.

now, naked fat girls singing might do well.

[Avigdor]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:53pm

nydirector. i always try to keep an open mind no matter what. i can change my mind.but this show clearly did not. further. if i go see a show and i dont like it. i will go back a second time just in case i was not a good audience member. i am very fair about my viewing habits. (i have been directing for 30 years)

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 12:57pm

Avigdor does have a point there. I mean as much as I said the show was Foolish, I knew it would be. I saw it anyway because I was intrigued by the concept and how they would use it. Although it wasn't a good production, there are things to learn, maybe even more so than in good productions.

[Avigdor]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 1:09pm

my least favorite part of the show was the big queen duncan. very painful to watch

[RecycledH20]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 1:23pm

The show was awful and I left at intermission. Even the prospect of Macbeth totally nude, and he was beautiful, could not make me stay. The acting was horrid, naked torsos or not.

[nydirector2]

Posted: 11/2/05 at 1:30pm

Avigdor...so just in case you're not sure you didn't like it, you wanna go get a second peak?

BTW....Quantity of years in directing does nothing for me...quality is how theatre should be judged, not quantity.