|re: Any Buzz on GARY: A SEQUEL TO TITUS ANDRONICUS?|
|Last Edit: mattyp4 01:48 pm EDT 03/14/19|
|Posted by: mattyp4 01:34 pm EDT 03/14/19|
|In reply to: Any Buzz on GARY: A SEQUEL TO TITUS ANDRONICUS? - Zelgo 11:12 am EDT 03/14/19|
|I thought the show was admirable & amusing but it needs some sort of focus. It's all over the place at the moment. (I too saw the first preview.)
I liked the absurdist, dark & oftentimes lowbrow humor. (Fart jokes don't bother me! The more the merrier!) The show worked best when it relied on physical humor. Lane, Nielsen & White were a hoot to watch. And the SET was actually very funny. But there were too many introspective soliloquies, which stopped the madcap energy of the show. Furthermore, the playwright's message was kind of muddled & unclear. I don't really know what judy [Taylor Mac's preferred gender pronoun] was trying to say.
It definitely needs tightening but I kind of wish they just made this show a full-blown farce. I didn't need all the profundity about our place in the world. Just give me slapstick & dick jokes.
Oh. I don't think you need to study up on Titus Andronicus before seeing Gary. I mean, a familiarity can't hurt, but maybe just read the Wikipedia summary. The only thing you really need to know is that there's a gory climax with a very high body count. Gary (Nathan Lane) kind of summarizes events at the top of the show. And they explain the significance of the pie & the tree branches, etc.
|Previous:||Any Buzz on GARY: A SEQUEL TO TITUS ANDRONICUS? - Zelgo 11:12 am EDT 03/14/19|
|Next:||After seeing taylor mac’s Christmas show - dramedy 02:00 pm EDT 03/14/19|
Time to render: 0.084145 seconds.