Posted: 10/7/16 at 11:34am
^
The quality of the writing, the presentation, the acting, etc. all play a great part in making an evening worthwhile --- or not.
Posted: 10/7/16 at 12:22pm
After Eight, I think we all get that YOU didn't like it (as you don't like much of anything written post 1950.) Maybe even the majority of audiences don't like it, clearly it's not for everyone. But some (including most of the critics) LOVED it, as did wonkit. So why is it so hard to accept the fact that enjoying, or being moved by something that you detested makes those "wrong" or you "right", or that someone is foolish for having an opinion that differs than yours. We get (after seven posts by you on the subject) that you didn't like The Encounter. So can you now just shut up? Or will you continue to have this "debate" any time someone else posts a favorable reaction?
Posted: 10/7/16 at 12:42pm
ROM,
I'm glad you've joined the discussion.You told us you were going to see this show, and I've been waiting eagerly to hear your opinion. Did you go yet, and if you did, what did you think?
My response to wonkit addressed not his opinion, but his put-down of others as only wanting spoon-fed pablum. It's not for him to say what other people want when they see a play.
Posted: 10/7/16 at 1:36pm
After Eight said: "ROM,
I'm glad you've joined the discussion.You told us you were going to see this show, and I've been waiting eagerly to hear your opinion. Did you go yet, and if you did, what did you think?
Not yet, soon, BUT: I have decided to keep my opinion about it to myself, and here's why: If I like it, or even love it, I'll simply subject myself to your ridicule. (Since you love it, you must be a snob like all the critics who raved about it.) And if I don't like it, or even hate it, it will just give you more ammunition to use against others who disagree with you. I call that a lose-lose proposition for me. If people want to go see it, they will, and if they don't, they won't. Sorry to disappoint you given how "eager" you've been to hear to hear my thoughts.
I'm seeing Falsettos on 11/19. Will you be eagerly awaiting my opinion on that. (And I saw the original, by the way, just as I assume you did.)
Posted: 10/7/16 at 2:12pm
"I have decided to keep my opinion about it to myself,"
That's a shame. I'm disappointed. I hope you'll reconsider, though. After all, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to hear your thoughts on the matter.
"I'm seeing Falsettos on 11/19. Will you be eagerly awaiting my opinion on that. "
No, because I'm not reading the thread on the show. I have no interest in the show or in reading anything about it.
Posted: 10/7/16 at 3:24pm
Raised onMusicals, thank you for the defense. I fully expected AfterEight to respond as he did.
And, AfterEight, I said what I said because I heard no fewer than three audience members around me say something to the effect that they didn't want to "work that hard" to listen, which suggests to me that they wanted it to be presented with small bite-sized pieces that could be easily digested. Anything that is this far from the standard main stream theater experience will always surprise and confound some people. I accept that both the format and certain parts of the content (ewww, maggots) are not what some people go to the theater for.
Posted: 10/7/16 at 4:54pm
Saw the show last week and was kind of distracted and therefore confused mainly because I couldn't figure out whether the show should be seen or heard. During those descriptive scenes, when I closed my eyes I could really immerse myself in the journey because the binaural effect was pretty strong, but at the same time I wanted to open my eyes because obviously something was going on on stage. But doing so to a certain extent discounted the immersion brought by the binaural sound. Sometimes one worked better and sometimes the other did. Thus, I was pulled away from the experience by constantly having to worry about whether a scene should be heard or seen.
Updated On: 10/7/16 at 04:54 PM
Posted: 10/7/16 at 6:10pm
I ended up closing my eyes for most of it (nearly missed the ritual fire) but opening them for the scenes with his daughter. Some of the more intense scenes between the protagonist and Barnacle put me almost in a dream state. And no - no chemical assistance or alcohol involved!
Posted: 10/10/16 at 2:22am
Most of the theatre I see is off-off, experimental, avant-garde sorta stuff, so it was pretty cool for me to see such a Fringey show in such a big and beautiful theatre. I'm actually not entirely sure how The Encounter made its way to Broadway, but I can't complain. It felt like something much better suited for Three Legged Dog or maybe even The Public.
I enjoyed it a lot. I'm very much into tech/sound-related things, so binaural sound isn't new to me, but in this particular setting it felt like experiencing it for the first time. I thought the story was captivating and told in a poetic way. I thought the parallel between Simon's spiral into obsessive madness and Loren's descent into the labyrinth of the jungle was great. There were some really beautiful moments I thought.
My big complaint is that for a show that invites you to feel lost in the elasticity of time, it was a pretty linear show. He talked a lot about his and the tribe's relationship with time, and I guess I expected something a lot more narratively skewed. YOUARENOWHERE is an ultra downtown show with similar discussions of time, but fully acts upon its ideas and makes you feel like you're in an alternate universe. They're very different shows with very different MOs, but it was hard for me to not think about YOUARENOWHERE.
Posted: 10/10/16 at 10:09am
Izzio2 "I enjoyed it a lot."
Predicted response from After Eight: "How dare you?"
Posted: 10/10/16 at 4:57pm
^
Brilliant. Hope you have on your flak jacket.
Posted: 11/17/16 at 7:40pm
Quick, weird question: are there snakes at all in this show like pictured or sounded in the headphones?
