It's been a while since I've posted one of these, so I thought I'd go all old-school ... retro even ... and do one of those "Grade" reviews just to see who gets ticked off first by the concept. So kick back and enjoy. As luck would have it, it takes a lot for me to get talked into a trip to Webster, TX to take in our dandy Websterian Rocky Horror troupe: Sadistic Pleasures. As even better luck would have it, Pete's performance as Dr. Frank was more than enough. Simply stated, there was no wrong that Pete could do in this role ... and he didn't disappoint. Despite various efforts. The rest of the show, however, brings me to this one regrettable recommendation ...
It's time for Jarimie to yank whatever license this cast has to the name "Sadistic Pleasures." I still give this cast enough credit to be a skosh over the level of the infamous T.H.E.M. experiment at River Oaks. But it's a close call at that ... the parallels are pretty strong. Read on to find out why.
Preshow (F---) - Worst ever ... and that takes a lot of doing. If it's to the point where the preshow must be more time consuming than a World Cup soccer match, it should at least be entertaining. I'm pretty sure there were days that Jarimie kept everyone in the theater till 4am at times ... but it was usually warranted by the entertainment value. Sometimes. Either way, I've forgiven him. Second rule ignored is this: when guys fail at swallowing a banana whole, move on; when hot chicks fail at swallowing a banana, they get a do-over. Many if looks warrant.
Dr. Frank - Mary Woronov/Abe Vigoda (A) - what need be said? The legend clearly arrived before Frank made his entrance. And for Pete's efforts, he gets a solid A. Not a Randy-esque A+++ ... just a solid, workmanlike A. The portrayal bears some parallels to The Amazing Randy due to the fact that when both played Frank, they didn't morph into character. Instead, they basically played themselves to the tune of Frank. It's also worth noting that the wig should be kept on hand by Pete since it makes for an improved overall product. The leather can be lost. Fishnets ... optional.
Brad - Erin (F) ... oddly, it's sorta like seeing a much younger, more inhibited Randy with this one. Maybe there's some longterm potential that can be molded and shaped. Just not Saturday night.
Janet- Ashley D. (A+) ... Clearly the high point of the evening. And not just as Janet, but also as a rather strong second-banana (so to speak) for the preshow. Just a shame there wasn't a solid first banana! Obviously, good looks go a long way in any performance and that base is impressively covered. But there's just enough thespiatic talent here that gets a character across as well. Well done, ma'am ... well done.
Riff - James (F) ... F, as in "forgotten."
Magenta - Patricia (F) ... F, as in "forgettable."
Columbia - Evan (F+) ... ok, so good looks help. But there's that other element that's a bit lacking. I think by the end of the show, I'd concluded that if Evan were switched out with Glitter, the entire performance would be light years better. I stand by that. A good Columbia requires a bit of personality be exuded.
Eddie - Robert (F) ... It's been suggested by others, with far more acting talent than I possess, that speaking/singing along with the movie aids the performance on the part of the actor/actress. I've counted numerous moments where it probably didn't matter to me simply sitting in the cheap seats. But there is something that comes out of a performance that you're ... ya know ... performing. As opposed to lip synching. On the whole, I tend to agree with that ... but in this role in particular, it's irrefutable. Doesn't matter if you have the singing chops of a ... well, me. Just belt out the tune and you're much more into the swing of things. Otherwise, you're battling Carlos for the worst performance of Eddie ever.
Rocky - Glitter (F) ... stretch marks and the blank stare brought about by a bag full of bad pot do not make this character more intriguing. Far from it. That is all.
Dr. Scott - Cowboy (F) ... This grade deserves to be much lower. I mean, I'm not sure how you can screw this up more. It says something when you've been outperformed by a wet floor sign. But I'm forgiving Cowboy on this score - that he's taught me that movies are truly bad for civilization. They bring about the worst fads. I mean, I thought it was cute when everyone wanted to immitate Molly Ringwald back in my day. I seriously did not mind that one bit. But with the advent of Brokeback Mountain, I could use a bit less in the way of gay cowboys roaming about. For that, Cowboy, I thank you for opening my eyes.
Crim - John A. (F) ... aka - Weekend at Bernie's, Part 4.
Trixie - Dustin (F) ... I may not have been paying attention, really. But then again, that's really a knock on this performance, isn't it?
Lights - B.B. (F) ... A.D.D. has truly ruined what little hope I previously had in the future.
Crew - Casey (F) ... I'm going to be nice and just leave this one uncommented.
So there ya go. Aim your ire appropriately.
12 Comments
to all cast and crew. this is just one persons opinion and remember, opinions are like assholes: everyone has one and they're usually full of shit!
your Cast Director,
Rob...
p.s. Kay and myself think ALL of you are doing an A+ job.
OK, who thought this reflected the collective opinion of all mankind?
Thank you for your critiques, however, I would have liked for my castmates and I to be told what to IMPROVE rather than what was WRONG or RIGHT. Thanks again for your opinion.
XOXOXO
A.D.
test
First of all if you're going to insult someone make sure you are bagging on the right person, there were some last minute cast changes so some people were put into roles they were not familiar with. Next time please take the time to atleast get your facts straight and know who played what. Second of all, someone who possess no guts to get up on stage has no right to rag on people who do. It takes a lot for someone to get on stage and try to satisfy any crowd. Most performs ,like myself, fear some random critic who comes to the show once on an off night and makes a decision about the whole cast. If you were a performer you would understand that last minute changes sometimes throw everyone off their game and we are only human and cant help if we're not at the top of our game all the time. If you think you could do better please ask to be cast, I would love to see were your flaws would be and what your grade would be for the night. Putting down people's looks is also pretty low, any one of the cast members who was on stage that night could kick your ass in the looks department any day of the week, I know because I remembered seeing you Saturday so, dont complain about our cast memebers.
Steph,
Exactly how many "random critics" are there really out there? The cast list was taken from the cast message board with as many corrections as I could catch. If there remain errors on that score, then I'd like to note that "confirmed" be a word held to the definition it should be.
Secondly, let me save you a bit of time from getting all worked up over this. Start by grabbing a few grains of salt. The cast of Rocky makes their attempt to be funny by immitating the likes of Tim Curry and Richard O'Brien. I choose the means outlined by Statler & Waldorf. Feel free to look that reference up. I'm by no means the longest serving Rocky veteran in whatever capacity, but in the too-numerous years I've witnessed a show or two, I've seen most everything that the recent decade of Rocky cares to show.
There's not a whole lot new under the sun here - including the "if you were a performer" schtick. I'm merely one who likes to be entertained. I know what I like. I know what I don't. If everyone agrees with me, so be it. If nobody agrees with me, so be it. But the spirit of Rocky being one to go slightly overboard, I think taking any review personally is a stretch. Heck, there's a sizable alumni group that would once approach me to demand a scathing review.
Oh, and the day I try to get by on my good looks is long past gone. Instead of getting free stuff based on that, I'm reasonably certain that I've been getting a few items marked up at the grocery store as of late. Sheesh, show a little leg and you'd think people would be grateful for the attention!
Seriously ... salt, people ... salt.
Ashley,
Your request is duly noted and in the spirit of overt, unabashed favoritism for cast members I prefer, I leave that task to those who are better cast coaches (coaches, not couches!) than I. Such people exist. Heed them. Well, not you so much ... but you know what I mean. Keep up the good work.
All,
Seriously ... all this reaction and nobody's dying of laughter at that photo of Barney Fife?
For the record, I thought this was highly entertaining. heh.
someone who possess no guts to get up on stage has no right to rag on people who do. It takes a lot for someone to get on stage and try to satisfy any crowd. Most performs ,like myself, fear some random critic who comes to the show once on an off night and makes a decision about the whole cast.
Would that this kind of thinking exhibited even the slightest bit of consistency, but it does not. Try it in the reverse: if someone came up to you after the show and said you were absolutely fantastic, would you tell them "You have no right to compliment me because you don't have the guts to get up there yourself." Of course not. When we're given a compliment, that audience member is considered the most discerning and eloquent of all critics. When he slams us, he's a gutless know-nothing. It essentially renders one immune from ever hearing a harsh judgement. I wonder how that kind of narcissistic thinking might affect a performer's desire or willingness to improve? "Why, I never hear anything but praise... I must be perfect!"
Greg's right about one thing: all the old-timers certainly remember his judgements of us. For a while I was convinced that our cast director was called "Jef with one F" because I was carrying around the other F in perpetuity. When it came to handing out grades for the cast, Greg was a veritable Macy Struthers: "F for... F for.... F for...." My recommendation is to reread Uber's post, and then get on with your lives.
(If you don't get that last reference, go directly to jail, do not pass go, and do not collect $200.)
My recommendation is to read the review of Satan's Cheerleaders ... and THEN get on with your lives!
wow. that was pretty harsh. even for greg. heh.
anyway, that was well said, Jim. People forget that performing is not for the benefit of the performer, it's for the benefit of the audience. They are paying after all.
As far as the whole, "i'd rather here what to improve than what we did right or wrong..."
uh? what? read that again please. read your comment. you improve what you did wrong. what else are you going to improve? hell, if you're bad ass you improve what you did right also.
8:04pm, OSX 10.4.7 - 7/16/06
These comments (originating from this particular system on a certain subnet at the time noted above) appear to be going through, but with more latency than trying to tow a fucking aircraft carrier down Westheimer & Voss at 5pm on the Thursday before a 3-day weekend. An earlier attempt on XP at same location got a 404; blame that one on Gates' cost control. But on Friday, I think I got the same result over XP via service off of uh.edu (eventually populated on comment window, but with such latency as not to be obvious at the time of comment - like 30 min. to an hour later at least).
Is there an eComStation version of MT? Dos 6.22? Epicac??!
btw, I tried commenting in the middle of town (around San Felipe and 610 some weeks ago) and seem to remember no problems. The outfit on my end at that point was a FreeBSD shop. Latest guess: the code now in play has some incompatibility with either IIS or Apache. I'm told those are the most commonly seen workhorses, so I'd check there.