THE FILE ON RYAN CARTER...OUCH

[glancingforward]

Posted: 5/26/07 at 12:39am

And people wonder why off off broadway is dying. The file on ryan carter at the sanford meinser in like a nail in a coffin. if it isnt bad enough that this show finds it neccessary. to cater to the lowest common with the nudity which is only a guise for the worst script i can remember in recent years. the set is horrible, the lights awful, the sound makes not logical sense...and lastly the direction....well...yuck. if there is a muse for shows to close..hopefully it will vist the sanford mesiner tomorrow.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 5/26/07 at 12:52am

Please describe the nudity more clearer.
Updated On: 5/26/07 at 12:52 AM

[B3TA07]

Posted: 5/26/07 at 1:16am

People care about off-off-broadway?

[neddyfrank2]

Posted: 5/26/07 at 1:19am

I have never heard of people wondering why off-off broadway is dying. I have heard of people wondering why Off-Broadway is dying.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 5/26/07 at 2:01pm

"People care about off-off-broadway?"

Yeah, some people do. Talent isn't just restricted for Broadway.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 5/26/07 at 2:05pm

Is this an all-male version of THE FILE ON THELMA JORDAN?

[hughman55]

Posted: 5/27/07 at 2:28am

Well, it's a bit unfair to say that this is a "bad" show. I've seen some "bad" ones "on" Broadway, and paid a lot more for the misery. I found this show enjoyable, developed, and in need of a lot of work. It tries very hard and you have to admire the effort, and the accomplishment. (Yes, it accomplishes something.) It is an interesting glimpse, centering on two gay men, into a two decade period that begins in the 1930's and ends with the de-cliche-ing of "the McCarthy era". This play takes the terms like, blacklists, hearings, the Hollywood 10, house unamerican activities, etc., and puts a gay human story to it. Yes the nudity is overdone. There are problems with the sound and music. And yes at times it is a little overwritten and that fact doesn't allow the actors the room they need to be human and still at moments that could be very powerful. But, if you have ever wondered what it could have been like for two gay men in Hollywood during the McCarthy era, this is as interesting and personal as I have ever seen. And in a time when Gerry Fallwell has declared that gays caused 9/11, it is frightenly relevent. Go see this.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 5/27/07 at 8:27am

Exactly how is the nudity "overdone"?
Please explain.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/27/07 at 9:10am

Yes I'm curious. Do they remove their skin?

[hughman55]

Posted: 5/27/07 at 11:22pm

It's full on, and very soon in the play. And, it's very uninhibited; which is the opposite of the character developement being established, (or should be established). In the beginning these two men should only be able to do this in complete darkness, and with a certain level of embarrasement and clumsiness. I know that's contrary to how we do it today, but this is supposed to be in the 1930's. Then, there are several scenes with casual nudity. Once would have been enough to be titilating and effective. As it is now the effect gets lost and some other agenda seems to be at play. Sparingly, and more personal, (whether emabarrassed, lustful, shameful, or erotic), would have been very effective for the play and the audience.

[stevenycguy]

Posted: 5/27/07 at 11:36pm

Is it a 2 character play? Do they both get naked, hehe? Are they cute ? :) I like to watch trash like "Married with Children" :)

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 5/27/07 at 11:43pm

So the nudity is unimpressive or just too pre-mature?

[hughman55]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 6:26pm

The nudity is too soon and too much to be effective. And it's just done in a manner that is so contrived that I almost felt insulted by it. (and I like naked men!!!) I'm not going to comment on the visual desirability of either of the actors because that would miss the point of what I believe the problem to be.