I guess because a show about five heterosexuals eating a quiche just wouldn't have worked or been nearly as funny. The real question is why you feel threatened by it. It's a play. Come see it. You might enjoy it.
Why do lesbians rate extra attention in the media? How about "5 heterosexuals eating a quiche"? Hardly newsworthy. But LESBIANS!! That's somehow suppose to be special, even magical. Why? I'm just saying.
Thank you, Leah! And thank you Elizabeth Pandolfini for seeing the value in allowing theatre productions outside of downtown Charleston to be reviewed!
Just ordered our tickets. looking forward to seeing the show!
If you want to see Broadway caliber acting, please go see "The Birds" at Pure Theater. Joy Vandervort-Cobb and Laurens Wilson are so believable in their characterizations that one forgets that this is a portrayal and not real. The play itself is tightly written with no wasted lines or roles. It is a perfect production. Kudos to all the performers and the director.
Nice job y'all. really looking forward to seeing the show.
Anybody going to go and review "See How They Run" at the Footlight Players? Hilarious British comedy!
Please-I am BEGGING you to find someone to write these reviews who knows something-anything-about theater. A mommy who wrote a bad zombie book is not what needs to be on the resume' of someone who is being given the capability to cause damage to ticket sales and the future of Charleston's oldest community theater group! What part of "community theater" don't you get? And by the way, Turing is a somewhat of a household name, at least in the homes of more educated people.
Critiquing the critic: what qualifies this person to write a theatrical review? Or anyone currently writing for the City Paper, for that matter? Really, City Paper, I would think that you could find someone with more qualifications than someone who was in some high school plays! I'm sure that there are some folks out there who actually know something about acting, set design, lighting, etc., but she sure isn't one of them. PLEASE hire some people who understand what they're writing about!
And those irritating women's voices...all night long. Rude house staff.
I split my time between Washington DC and Charleston SC. I saw Camelot Saturday evening, and it was delightful. I thought the vocals were excellent, and the sets and costumes charming. I particularly liked the character development the actors used for their roles. I believe after reading the above comments that the Post and Courrier needs a new theater critic!
Great job Director and all that were involved in this play! THANK YOU!
Opening night is always a bit different then later performances. This is where changes are made and improvement come as no one is perfect. I am not a director or such but I do know that King Arthur was a gentle leader. I saw this play and thought it was wonderful. The songs were great and the people doing them all did a wonderful performance. They gave freely of their time to do this play and did put a great deal of hard work into it. All of them! It takes great effort to get up and do what they did do. I feel no one should be bashing this play and if they do so they should have better manners and a better knowledge of things that should be said in a review. I feel it is wrong to call out people by their names and to sort of rub their faces in the dirt as was done here. These people put many hard hours into practice and then to be reviewed so unjustly seems so unkind. There were some mistakes as no one is perfect but there were many great things these people all did to deserve a pat on the back! I have been to different plays in different places and have before heard the person speak of people devoting time out of their busy work days to be a part of a play. A good reviewer would see the good people did and not be so cold about that review. And exactly how many plays have you yourself be in I am just curious. Yes a person should be able to stand criticism and that can help them grow but this review was rude and cold. Things could be more tactful. Yes, she is entitled to her opinion but that does not mean she is correct. When I stood in the lobby I heard so many people comment on how great it was, and how wonderful the actors were. I heard many people give glowing reports on what they had seen. So why do they enjoy it and see it different then the critic does? Thank you all for the wonderful performance that I as well as many others fully enjoyed. Keep up the great work and I hope to see you in in other plays in the future. Wonderful job!
I've read more simplistic, dull and general CP reviews than this one but they all happened to be positive ones. However you never hear anyone complain about those. It seems this reviewer actually had the 'nerve' to give specific actors a negative review by name (gasp!) and that is upsetting.
Look, if you are an artist and can't handle a bad review or two, then you shouldn't be in the theatre world which is full of rejection and criticism. The woman is entitled to her opinion and she gave it based on the performance she saw. Writing back as a cast member and saying she was wrong...how do you know? You're on stage and not in the audience. It's a totally different and unbiased perspective.
Although its hard to be unbiased with someone pointing out before the show how hard the cast worked and that they are volunteers and have day jobs. That's making an apology for what you are about to see and it sets the cast up for even more scrutiny....which is probably why this reviewer was tougher.
I saw Camelot and agree with some of what the reviewer says but not all of it. What did she say that was so horrible anyway? That she thought a couple of the actors didn't interpret their characters strongly enough? That the orchestra was off and the music was kind of a mess? That is hardly a scathing review. Let it go.
And calling her writing 'superficial' and her a 'hack'? She's writing for City Paper not the New York Times. The general public doesn't want an in depth analysis of the show. They want to know if it is worth their money and entertaining. She served that purpose well.
Kudos to the cast of Camelot for a good performance. I enjoyed it for the most part. And thank you to the reviewer who wasn't afraid t give some specific criticisms.
As a member of the cast of Camelot, I appreciate the more objective review from "Arterial." It is unfortunate, indeed, that an individual that is an anonymous commenter provides a better assessment of the show than the reviewer.
This "writer" is a hack. City Paper should be ashamed to give her a platform. I have never read any "review" by her that mentions anything more than superficial observations about the play she is watching. Her comment about how she understands how hard it was to put on a musical because she did it in high school is an insult to all artist and shows her shallow understanding of live theatre. I could go on but hey...at least she had costume envy. Do you understand depth of character? Theme? If you do why not prove it in your next review.
I'm sorry but this women clearly has no understanding of either the character of Lancelot OR Aurthurs as characterized in either "the once and future king" or the Musical. Maybe she's more of a fan of 1998 cartoon. Lancelots abrupt change is essential to the dramatic element of the play.
Sounds like it could be worth a look with a little more doctoring..
Theres some nice dirt over here dennis. help me i'm bein repressed. see the violence inherent in the system.
It's only a model.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper