All That Chat - re: Curious Incident ... What a dog!

HOME ALL THAT CHAT ATC WEST COAST SHOPPIN' RUSH BOARD FAQS

LOGIN REGISTER SEARCH THREADED MODE

not logged in

Threaded Order | Chronological Order

re: Curious Incident ... What a dog!

Posted by:	MockingbirdGirl 09:12 am EDT 09/12/14
In reply to:	Curious Incident ... What a dog! - uwsrdh 11:54 pm EDT 09/11/14

cheap set (black walls, black floor, lots of lights spinning and flashing in place of furniture) I have never subscribed to the theory that you need to see elaborate sets on a stage in order to "get your money's worth." It's a really superficial way of looking at theatre. The only requirement of a set is that it serves the needs of the play, which the minimalist and rather innovative -- but assuredly not cheap! -- Curious Incident staging does in spades.

reply to this message \|

re: Curious Incident ... What a dog!

Posted by:	uwsrdh 11:04 am EDT 09/12/14
In reply to:	re: Curious Incident ... What a dog! - MockingbirdGirl 09:12 am EDT 09/12/14

I should not have used "cheap" to describe the set (this is Broadway so we know THAT'S not true!). I should have said "minimalist" and left it at that. I agree that a set's only requirement is to serve the needs of the play. Furthermore, so often when I watch over-elaborate sets revolving and so on, I wish they had simply used a table and chair instead. So I wasn't implying that I wanted to "get my money's worth" by having an intricately detailed set with lots of Louis XV furniture to look at. For if you have interesting characters, a fascinating plot and great dialogue (or pauses if it's Pinter), there doesn't have to be a set at all to create a completely satisfying theatrical experience.

reply to this message \|

All That Chat is intended for the discussion of theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)