We’re in the second weekend of the show, and the notices have come out. There may be more, but the first two reviews have been largely positive. Your Humble Blogger has been called “oily”, “evil”, “cobra-like”, “insincere”, and “sinuous”. Also “skillful”. Well, actually, it was Monsieur the Vicomte that was called “oily” and “insincere”, although it should be pointed out that it was Your Humble Blogger who was called “evil”, and that wasn’t in a review, just in an interview with our Director. But I think she meant to say that I was playing evil, not that I was actually evil. I haven’t asked.
I am always dissatisfied with reviews and reviewers. Of course, in the small-town weekly, I don’t expect a magnificent writer to give incisive and detailed reviews. As it happens, though, the small-town weekly had a much less annoying review than the nearby daily with a circulation of 30,000. The fellow there spent most of the review telling the plot in tedious detail (yes, up to and including my death by the sword) and most of the rest making clever-clever witticisms. I oughtn’t complain, I know, since it was a positive review, nearly a rave for him, I understand, and there’s a good chance it will sell tickets. And, of course, it’s never bad to have a performance described as a “strong turn”. Still, something a trifle more specific would have been nice. I can’t help thinking that the same review could have been written by somebody with a playbill and a vague memory of the movie, without going to the trouble of driving an hour to see the thing.
The picture’s nice, though, in the print edition.
It’s ridiculous, of course, to care about the notices for a little community-theater show. Or, at least, it’s ridiculous to care about them on more than a rotten-tomatoes level. So far, we’re 100% fresh. Still, I can’t help thinking—is that guy paid to see theater and write crap? Nice work, if you can get it.
chazak, chazak, v’nitchazek,
-Vardibidian.
I hate writers who feel that retelling a plot counts as criticism.