>>
The set? It was perfunctory at best A lot of you go to the the theatre to enjoy the performances. You will rhapsodize when this actress or that singer does something well, and you will (sometimes) be merciless when they screw up.
Well, so is it for me when it comes to the physical production. If I'm shelling out a hundred bucks for a ticket, I dont want "perfunctory". I want
good. I dont want the set to disappear; I want it to
participate as fully as any chorus dancer: to the very best of its ability. This is why FOLLIES was such a profound disappointment, why CLEAR DAY will never make it onto my ticket list, and why PORGY is such a wildly missed opportunity — in all three cases, the designers simply did not do their homework. They went to for easy solutions that either gave a vague suggestion or went careening hopelessly out of control. When interviewed, they'll talk about
intent. I dont want to hear about
intent, no more than any of you would want to hear intent from your performers when they give a lackluster performance. The proof is what's on the stage, period, end of story.
Yes, it's a harsh economy, and the design aspect is usually the first aspect of any show to suffer as a result. But that doesnt excuse something that winds up being so much a non-entity that it could serve ANTIGONE as equally well as PORGY AND BESS.
Just my 0.02. YRMV.
http://docandraider.com