Taboo is this Season's Radiant Baby

After seeing Taboo over the weekend, it reminds me of Radiant Baby which closed early at the Public Theatre. Not only does it cover the same topics, the 80's, HIV and homosexuality, but it has much of the same format and suffers from the same problems as that play. Like Radiant Baby, it has some enjoyable moments, good music and impressive staging but ulimately doesn't live up to its potential. First, they both have narrators and employ the flashback technique not very effectively. The narrators end up taking over the play instead of allowing the characters to shine. Second, in both the male lover of the main character is a composite of several real life people who comes across as a composite rather than a flesh and blood person you care about. In Taboo like in Radiant Baby, the lover is given a dramatic song near the end, but alomost nothing to precede it to make you care about the character (Marcus in Taboo.) I predict Taboo will get the mediocre to negative reviews that Radiant Baby got and will close sooner than expected like Radiant Baby. Anyone else agree?

I just found and joined this board, so I didn't see your messages in earlier threads. I guess you're right about not many people seeing Radiant Baby. I went to see it because I have always been a fan of Haring's art. I think likewise people who are BG fans will see Taboo, but not many other people. I thought of Radiant Baby because Michael Musto mentioned the comparison in his Village Voice column awhile back. He said he hoped Taboo would be better than Radiant Baby, given the involvement of Charles Busch. I hoped so, too but unfortunately it isn't. I was surprised that Charles Busch didn't do better given his past track record.

TAboo is a completely mediocre bore.

But I would hardly call Taboo edgy. The opening number, so important in establishing the tone of the evening, is this peppy music-hallish type of number that has nothing to do with the period and hardly conveys the impression that "we are freaks." Then we are introduced to a group of pathetic people who show no discernible reason we should be watching them on a stage. They just want to be "a star" with not a smidgen of talent demonstrated or presented as bottom-feeders (literally), engaging in anonymous sex in bathroom stalls to another peppy music-hall number.(It's the same problem as The Boy from Oz: the creators of the musical assume the audience knows who Peter Allen is and presumes this third-rate songwriter is worth the audience's attention). So, you start thinking, perhaps this show's point-of-view will be an incisive social commentary or a statement on empty, hollow celebrity. But no, it's just an evening of every showbiz cliche in the book. And exactly why is Leigh Bowery in this show at all? He has virtually no interaction with Boy George at all, not even on his deathbed. Poorly dramatized and motivated, these "characters" have no point. To have Big Sue and Nicola making statements about Leigh Bowery like "I believe in him" or "I love him" and have them fighting over this grotesque individual when we have seen NOTHING to explain their infatuation or dynamic with the man is incomprehensible and unbelievable. And then the creators of this crap DARE to beg the audience for sympathy at Bowery's demise by showing home movies of this slob.
It's no secret that Esparza had no desire to do the show and turned it down several times. And it shows in his performance--he seemed like he couldn't wait to get off the stage and get into Assassins rehearsal.
Where exactly did the 10 million go? It has to be one of the cheapest, ugliest set designs in memory, sort of a third-rate "disco Follies" and a rip-off of Rent. And that's goes for the staging as well, with everyone directed to stand there and sing out front like zombies.
In the end, it's not hellishly bad--just totally misconceived, unnecessary and thoroughly mediocre.

no matter though..we have to give it a chance..it is in previews..they should be allowed to make the necessary adjustments...even though i personally dont think its very good and think the whole thing is just so the producer can toot her own horn, they still deserve the chance.

Oh no, LC, I am well versed in Sallon's antics, it's more Raul's performance energy, you can tell he's uneasy with the material, if anything it's a compliment as he at times is the only thing onstage that's on a solid theatrical footing.

---

Just like its producer, apparently.

Having animated characters' names spelled correctly: It's Pepe Le Pew.
Gets me wet.

To barb,Peppie and a myriad of other e-bite/sound bite posters, shouldn't you be going over your lines and whatever daily changes are being made to your "show"? Oh and barbrasfanny, maybe a "edgy" number about water sports is just what TABOO needs!

---

barbrasfanny, what we like are good musicals.
And TABOO ain't one of them. It's P.U. Willy.