reasons to be pretty - Conensus?

Hey All!

So, it's like this: Recently, I had what I look upon as 'luck' of obtaining a pair of tickets to *reasons to be pretty* later this month. Now, I never did catch the show Off-B'way, but since the reviews came out a couple weeks ago, I was taken by the positivity. I'm curious, with those who've ventured to the Lyceum as of late, what's the consensus with regard to the play? Was it worth the money? I'm not too familiar with LaBute, so I'm goin' in there blank...

Any and all insight appreciated.

Best,
- Mike

From what I've read and heard, it's not a new topic, but it's fresh writing, with very strong performances.

How did this so-called "luck" fall into your schedule? I want that "luck" as well.

Mhm.

I didn't enjoy this play at all...but the critics loved it. You should just see it and form your own opinion, Limelight.

LaBute is an acquired taste and people tend to be divided on him. I really don't like him anymore, but I think his stuff is worth seeing and forming an opinion on. I think he was fresh and cutting edge and controversial when he started, but now I think people go to his plays to be titillated by how vile he will have characters speak to one another. To me it seems more like a side show act, than really saying anything profound. I'm a therapist, and in my experience, even with couples, people just don't speak to each other like that. His plays are not realistic to me.

---

I completely agree with Bettyboy, and think that this review sums up the problems quite well.

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/stage/ny-etcaps0312609522apr01a,0,5184288.story

I thought it was ok. I am a fan of LaBute's work, but I didn't leave the theatre thinking it was remarkable. I by no means thought it was bad. I still enjoyed myself. I just didn't think it was particularly as strong as it could have been (a lot of that has to do with the casting I think). But overall, one of the better plays this season.

Saw it last week--- thought the 2nd Act dragged just a tad, but overall... great production with excellent cast !

I'm sorry Auggie, but great humanity? Are you referring to the constant verbal abuse or the unnecessary physical violence? And I'm surprised you say that LaBute takes her character on a journey, when it is the male character who is the focus. Who's to say she won't snap one day and verbally assault her new husband?

And Bettyboy, no the character is still overbearing and insane.

Believe me, I quite understood that it's the male character who is the protagonist. But like most good writers, LaBute charts journeys for the other three characters as well, all of whom end up in different places than at the start. I found the Ireland Steph's arc to be quite rich and compelling. She starts in high dudgeon, in a state of rage and abject humiliation. She segues into revenge, then shaky self-acceptance, and (MILD SPOILER) ends up with self-knowledge, growth, and making a leap toward blistering honesty about her deepest, contradictory (a fantasy of security vs. her heart) feelings. All of which mirror, or work in couterpoint to, the Sadoski Greg's equally powerful journey.

Love it or not, this is a play, not (just) an idea for a play! It takes a common situation, one might say a cliche, and digs in.

I'm the last person to be a LaBute defender. All too often, I have found his work to be gimmicky and facile in extreme (The Shape of Things, exhibit A), despite many natural some might say extraordinary gifts (he has a helluva ear, he knows how to shape a story so that it actually comes to something...) But with this script, he does move forward bigtime. In a way, it's the anti-LaBute spin on the LaBute world. (SPOILER) When the two men are leading into the fight, and a weary, disillusioned Greg tries hard to resist, and articulates his loathing of the way men employe such violent challenges to one another -- how fights strip them of complexity and maturity -- it's just a damned honest moment. As are the multiple shifts in the final scene. This is a thoughtful play that seeks to illuminate, not distract or play to its supposed cynical base. Ultimately, the play is devoid of cynicism.

---

This was my first experience with a LaBute play and I was totally pleased by what I saw, even though the understudy for Steph went on. I love LaBute's use of language and I agree that the ending give some shreds of tentative hope for the protoganist -- he has grown considerably by the end. In no ways was I bored and I heartily recommend it for students of what's going on in the American Theatre today.

---

Has anyone seen this show lately?

I have a good friend in New York who got a nicely discounted ticket, and he has been raving about it. He was really impressed with the writing and performances and enjoyed the edginess of it. He wouldn't tell me much about the story because he didn't want to ruin it, but he said the end was heartbreaking.

I'm just impressed that there is a play on Broadway that doesn't have a celebrity as a star. I'm curious how it will do with Tony noms on Tuesday, and I'm now antsy to get to New York to see it!

---

I definitely enjoyed it and thought it was a good play with great performances. I loved Thomas Sadoski (absolutely heartbreaking) and thought Marin Ireland was great too. I just kind of regret seeing it by myself because I feel like it is one of those plays that could start up interesting conversations (judging from those around me during intermission) and I kind of missed out on that. I would recommend seeing it if possible!

Another take:

Reasons to Yawn at Neil LaBute

---

Updated On: 5/7/09 at 12:51 AM