THE THIRD STORY - Charles Busch

I think I'm seeing it Friday... I need to double check when my ticket is. LOL.

---

I left at intermission. Only the second time I've EVER done that. I just could not take any more. Not my thing I guess. It seemed that a lot of the audience was loving it based on the laughs. I don't think I cracked a smile. Yuck!

---

I'm seeing it tomorrow. I had been foreward by someone who has already seen it that it is LONG, that Turner is marking through her performance, although the 2nd Act is better than the first. I'll submit my thoughts on Sunday.

---

Sorry to report that I was vastly disappointed. It began promising enough and as far as I'm concerned, Charles Busch can do no wrong. The weak link with Turner, who I also loved in Indiscretians and thought did merely okay with The Graduate.
The writing was disjointed, going back and forth between the 3 stories. The third 'magical' story was confusing and I still don't know why it had to be included. The cast, exclusive of Turner, were spot on in their portrayals and dialogue. I wanted to like this so badly, but left the theatre thinking about my grocery list.

Too bad, too, since I had last row aisle seats, and when it began and the lights went down, the usher told us to actually go grab the better seats, 2nd row aisle. Thanks you to the kind usher...all other seats were sold out with the balcony closed.

I saw it in La Jolla and was vastly disappointed. Way too long. I thought that Mr. Busch might make some changes or cuts, but it doesn't sound like it.

Most of it was mildly amusing to me, but rarely laugh out loud funny. Some good performances, but many scenes that were way too long and some that should have been deleted completely.

There is way too much plot in this show and perhaps "The Second Story" would be much better by removing the "magical" story which is poorly incorporated and doesn't really add much to the whole structure anyway. Stick to what works best the pastache of 40's melodrama mixed with mad scientist story.

Updated On: 1/24/09 at 01:36 PM

I saw it, finally.

I agree with some, but not all of what has been said here.

I think the show is basically a big mess, but I also thought it was a fairly fun mess. Busch is trying to make some sort of big dramatic statement about mother/son love, but he has to remember that the reason we love him is not because he is Eugene O'Neill but because he is Charles Busch. One goes to a Charles Busch play looking for a zany, fast-paced, spoof or a wild camp comedy, and not a layered drama. Every time he has tried to do a dramatic play, he has failed. Queen Amarantha anyone???

Here, he tries to have the best of both worlds and combines a spoof with a somewhat serious story of an alcoholic mother (Kathleen Turner) and her rather damaged son.

This is not what I was expecting, that's for sure. When I heard that Turner had signed for this, I assumed that she would be playing the role usually played by Julie Halston, the hard-boiled, zinger-spouting best pal of Busch's character. But because Turner is in a different story than Busch, they rarely share stage time (except for when Turner doubles as a minor character in Busch's story). I think this is a big opportunity missed.

The acting is very good, and there is a certain amount of fun to be had here, but the overall feel is that this is really not a very good play. The critical response should be mixed, at best. I wanted to love this, and I'm sorry that I didn't.

Yikes.

Saw this show tonight, and Julie Halston was sitting in front of me. Holland Taylor was sitting to my right.

NOBODY laughed. The room was deadlier than "To Be or Not to Be."

Here's the thing. If JULIE HALSTON, who is the quintessential Charles Busch interpreter, doesn't even chortle at her best friend's show, there's something terribly wrong going on here.

In the playbill, Charles said he has ideas, and the first idea is usually bad, the second is worse, but the "third story" ties it altogether.

I've seen EVERY Charles Busch play, from "Times Square Angel" (up to now, my least favorite) to "Psycho Beach Party" (a work that I think is genius).

But even a middling Busch piece like "Die, Mommy, Die," had hysterical laughs, and was an entertaining night in the theatre. Whether you think Charles Busch is a genius or not, he's never put together a piece of theatre as bad as this is.

NO ONE laughed at the Lortel tonight, including his best interpreter, Julie Halston.

Yikes.

However, the cast was terrific. Especially Jennifer Van Dyck and Scott Parkinson. This production was NOT THEIR FAULT. The entire cast did great work, despite the odds.

It's just, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein, there was simply no "There, There."

Actually there was not even a "The" there.

Updated On: 1/29/09 at 12:40 AM