Saw Bridge and Tunnel ---- I don't get it.

[DancerGirl16]

Posted: 2/24/06 at 10:03pm

Ok, so I saw three broadway shows this week: Sweeney Todd, Rabbit Hole and Bridge and Tunnel and although Sweeney Todd was FABULOUS and Rabbit Holes was very good also...

I just didn't get Bridge and Tunnel....
I got the plot but how did it get those great reviews? Besides the lighting I thought the whole thing was monotonous. I can appreciate one person shows but I felt that there needed to be a much more clear focus with every single character she did as well as throughout the entire show.

Am I the only one who feels this way?
Please...explain.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 2/25/06 at 12:34am

You do realize that Bridge and Tunnel is a poetry slam of sorts right?

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 2/25/06 at 9:06am

Don't worry, DancerGirl16: You're not alone. There are many of us who were underwhelmed by Bridge and Tunnel. Sarah Jones is undoubtedly a very talented performer, but the show is pretty drab and boring. Also, it really is a victim of hype. Those who saw it at its original off-Broadway incarnation went in with no expectations and were blown away. Those who have seen it recently have gone in with sky-high expectations, and it falls short.

[jv92]

Posted: 2/25/06 at 12:03pm

Neither did Clive Barnes, a well respected critic. Don't feel bad.

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 2/25/06 at 12:07pm

I actually thought it was pretty awesome. Each of the stories contributed such a unique experience to the poetry slam event. I didn't realize until the end that Sarah Jones wrote the whole thing herself, unlike say Anna Deavere Smith or The Tectonic Theatre Project.

I think one of the reasons people don't like it is that it really is exactly as that event would be. It takes a long time to end, and people are allowed to keep talking when in a normal play they would be stopped. That said, I'm very glad I saw the show. She's enormously talented, and I really think the show is something special.