2008 Woodie Awards
Witness showcase suffers slow start but ends strong
Issue date: 10/9/08
The play progressed from a man discussing his violent dreams to taking off his shirt to beating his significant other after a few swigs of alcohol. It superficially contemplated that perhaps people are guilty for sins they committed in past lives and marginally explored the concept of karma, but it ultimately drowned in inconsequence. The play was not saved by Levitz's persuasive acting as an inherently deranged man who thinks about shredding puppies in a wood chipper. The writer apparently mistook his cryptic plot for thought-provoking material.
Lives employed sophomore Andrew Sender's sound board and Dayna Gordon's light board to make weird transitions between flashbacks with prerecorded lines being played while the lights dimmed. The technical directors tried too hard to make the play seem like a freaky film, but the effects only contributed more to stagnation in the pretentious plot.
The showcase improved with Shik's Spin, directed by recent grad Tony Chiarito and sophomore Amy Morgan and starring Arnie Butterfield (junior Kempton Baldridge), Lachewitz (junior Alex Neville) and John P. Rancher (Jack Berger). The script of Spin was slow, though. Initially, it seemed like it only consisted of Lachewitz's rambling to his mentally challenged assistant, Arnie, about the political scandals of Carter-era Georgia.
Baldridge's Arnie had some barely cute antics with a vending machine and a newspaper puzzle that could be considered borderline-offensive. Still, Baldridge saved the first part of the play with hilarious facial expressions, despite his stale delivery at times. Neville as Lachewitz, on the other hand, seemed to be passionlessly reading his lines throughout the entire play.
The second part of the play, however, was dominated by Berger's superb performance as Rancher. He proceeds with an accent that is not overdone and the cowboy hat and boots of a convincing Southerner as he bursts onto the scene as an opportunistic politician trying to spin a sex scandal. It was only now that it became clear the play was about campaign spinsters.
Lives employed sophomore Andrew Sender's sound board and Dayna Gordon's light board to make weird transitions between flashbacks with prerecorded lines being played while the lights dimmed. The technical directors tried too hard to make the play seem like a freaky film, but the effects only contributed more to stagnation in the pretentious plot.
The showcase improved with Shik's Spin, directed by recent grad Tony Chiarito and sophomore Amy Morgan and starring Arnie Butterfield (junior Kempton Baldridge), Lachewitz (junior Alex Neville) and John P. Rancher (Jack Berger). The script of Spin was slow, though. Initially, it seemed like it only consisted of Lachewitz's rambling to his mentally challenged assistant, Arnie, about the political scandals of Carter-era Georgia.
Baldridge's Arnie had some barely cute antics with a vending machine and a newspaper puzzle that could be considered borderline-offensive. Still, Baldridge saved the first part of the play with hilarious facial expressions, despite his stale delivery at times. Neville as Lachewitz, on the other hand, seemed to be passionlessly reading his lines throughout the entire play.
The second part of the play, however, was dominated by Berger's superb performance as Rancher. He proceeds with an accent that is not overdone and the cowboy hat and boots of a convincing Southerner as he bursts onto the scene as an opportunistic politician trying to spin a sex scandal. It was only now that it became clear the play was about campaign spinsters.
Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 10
Django
posted 10/10/08 @ 12:27 AM EST
Man, the critics get tougher each year. The review, while harsh, was written with adequate skill at sentence construction. However, it was also littered with nonsensical (though grammatically, pretty well constructed) sentences and on at least one occasion, the author grievously misused a word in ignorance of its definition. (Continued…)
ejango
posted 10/10/08 @ 3:08 PM EST
Haha, apparently you were involved with the play? Don't worry, not all plays can be good. Don't take it out on the review. Maybe your next showcase will be better. (Continued…)
ejango
posted 10/10/08 @ 3:47 PM EST
And Django, you should spend less time reviewing reviews and more time writing scripts that actually make sense.
Fjango
posted 10/10/08 @ 4:16 PM EST
And so ejango retaliates with a classic use of argumentum ad hominem, attacking the man speaking rather than his words. Perhaps he does so in the hopes that the failure of such counterarguments to be in any way valid over the last two thousand years will be miraculously remedied in time for his comment to come across as sardonically witty, yet aptly derisive of Django's efforts. (Continued…)
Gjango
posted 10/10/08 @ 4:28 PM EST
Even I feel some of that "aftertaste" of disappointment, and I don't really want to go to a Witness show ever again. The author made his point clear in the sand. (Continued…)
Hjango Y HALO THAR
posted 10/10/08 @ 5:03 PM EST
Y HALO THAR. I AGREE, THE SHOW WAS NOT GOOD AND SCRIPT WRITING NEED TO IMPROVE...
Django
Django
posted 10/11/08 @ 10:54 AM EST
Gjango and Manimala, I hope I did not offend you too much. It was not my intent. I criticized the review because it was not well written and because I do not like it when I see a poorly written article in the JHU Newsletter. (Continued…)
Neil
posted 10/14/08 @ 11:54 AM EST
You should all calm down with your posts. I admit that my review had some minor problems; it was my first review. However, I stand by all my points, and I wish Witness Theater better luck next time. (Continued…)
Post a Comment