The 2010 Capital Fringe Festival has now opened and this year DCTS has invited some of our favorite bloggers to join our team of 20 writers covering each Fringe production.
What did they like? The links to their reviews appear in the sortable table below along with their ratings from 1 to a top “Must See” rating of 5)
Favorite Fringe Performances from Week One by Joel Markowitz
Favorite Fringe Performances, Part Two by Joel Markowitz
Personal Reflections on the Fringe by Steven McKnight
Personal Reflections on the Fringe Musicals by Joel Markowitz
I know that this is about theater, but music is also an important part of theater. Please always credit the composer and music director, especially when it is a new musical. Let’s not forget that you can’t have a musical without a composer 😉 Many thanks!
I will weigh in thusly: I think that, at minimum, if you wrote or directed a play in the festival, you should be assigned to review plays that are not in your own category. Hence, people who wrote dramas should review dance/experimental. It would make things seem less unfair.
Also, though I think my show may have taken a hit in attendance due to the number on the review, I take it as one man’s opinion. The audiences we had were certainly appreciative, some even providing standing ovations. I’m proud of my show and the review will not change that.
Thank you Joel and your entire team of reviewers who spent countless hours covering the festival this year. DC Theatre Scene is the only organization I know of that strives to review every show at Fringe and also features interviews with the actors involved. I had many friends visit from out of town and they praised your web site for clearly presenting the variety of options of things to see and do. Hopefully Fringe realizes what a service you do for their festival and the plays involved (I suspect a significant portion of ticket sales are related to postings on this site). See you at the tent next summer!
I concur, in part, with Christine. The voting for Best of the Fringe is truly nefarious, but I wouldn’t call the system “rigged” per say. As the representatives of Eight and Engaged have discovered, the voter had more than one chance to vote by simply clearing his/her computer’s history and refreshing the page to vote again. I would not fault the participants and respective supporters for either production, as they are clearly enthused to support their work. The fault merely lies with the DCTS webmaster (not to point fingers or burn bridges or anything).
While the design of the voting system has made a charlatan and travesty of its own purpose, I hope a lesson can be taken from these proceedings to better modify future polls. That, or notify the local fire marshal of how many patrons are being packed into those small venues.
What is going on with the DCTS Best of Fringe voting? Should the winner be renamed “Who has the best IT person that has figured out how to rig the votes”? Something nefarious is going on.
No fair — my Fringe show “HORUS” is not even listed! It was a nice show! Really!! Maybe not 100% ready to got to Broadway — but that’s the joy of da DC Fringe Fest. We get to do a gazillion shows in THREE WEEKS!! AND this year we got to sweat like barnyard animals while we had fun and did kamakazi theatre and occasionally scream at poor Scot when things were sucky. It’s a huge thing — and it’s great to celebrate at the end — but let’s include everyone? As U Gino Kneel said on July 26th !!
What is the criteria for inclusion in the DCTC Best Of Fringe Poll? That the randomly-assigned critic from DCTC had to give it a 4 or 5? Given how tastes may vary between critics, wouldn’t it be fairer to list *all* shows, and let the voter decide?
Hey, so I just saw DCTheaterGirl’s lovely little diatribe above, I especially love her one-liner about my show,
Do Not Kill Me Killer Robots: merely a charming idea, no script, an actor who didn’t know his lines and needed direction got a 3?
you know, I was pretty surprised I got a three, too. What with both the Post and CityPaper both giving my show solidly positive reviews, I was kind of taken aback by some of what I felt were the more dismissive lines from this reviewer, but that is neither here nor there; I know my show isn’t for everybody, and I’m not going to go around dissing reviewers for expressing their opinions. That’s their job, and I don’t bemoan it.
But you are not a reviewer. And you are not making comments as to the content, style, or subject of the show, just making obnoxious claims. Which I will now respond to:
-I’m so glad I workshopped that script that I didn’t have for 8 months. Coincidentally, I believe what you’re reacting to is something called “storytelling.” I know this is a foreign idea to some, but the basic gist of it is, I tell a story. Which I wrote. In my own performative style, as a part of a theatrical piece. They seem to be pretty fond of it in a lot of places. Like NPR.
-Wait, and I didn’t know my lines! Huh? What lines? There’s no script! (Oh wait, perhaps you’re referring to the two parts of my show where I read passages from a page. This is intentional, the two pieces feel fairly jarring when I’ve performed them scriptless. Interestingly, the first one of these is one of the parts that people usually tell me they enjoyed the most. But maybe I should be doing it scriptlessly, just to prove to people that yes, after acting for most of my life, I know how memorize a page of text.)
-I needed direction. Sure. I’ll buy that. One of my biggest dissapointments in this process is that as writer/performer, I find it harder to direct than it is if either I were directing others or someone else were directing me. But I’ve done what I can given that I do everything in this show, taken comments from those whose opinions I respect, and found that the show has been pretty well received in the eleven cities I’ve performed in so far. But those people are all a bunch of idiots, right? They clearly don’t understand Theater like you do, DCTheatergirl!
-Last point. Listen, I’ve disagreed with a lot of the reviews on this site. I tend to disagree with a good number of reviews. Mostly, I’ve found that too many of the reviewers covering solo shows are saying the same thing, which is “where’s the plot?” And I guess, reading your comment, I get it. I get why a good chunk of the solo performers, poets, storytellers, and performance artists I know told me to steer clear of DC. But for the most part, I’ve enjoyed my time here. I’ve found audiences excited to see new things, and that most artists understand that the point of a Fringe festival is, among other things, to build a strong local artistic community, as opposed to leaving petty anonymous comments demeaning the work of other artists because it doesn’t fit into your notions of what Theater should be and therefore is objectively bad. I hope that works out well for you. I want nothing to do with it.
Good question. This site remains committed to reviewing the first or second performance of each show. Due to how Fringe applicants submit their schedules, date restrictions, etc to the festival, some shows are only just now beginning their run, and will play throughout the final week. Tonight, for example, I covered three shows (you’ll see the reviews here tomorrow) all of which were in their second performances out of at least five. Certainly we share your desire to get the word out there about every show as soon as possible! So keep reading… 🙂 – Hunter Styles
Any reason some shows have not yet been reviewed at this point in the festival? Especially some terrific ones?
“War and Therapy” is provocative and moving. This short play’s resonance goes on and on. The playwright makes her audience a fly on the wall in a therapy session, as the therapist desperately tries to ease a Veteran’s anguish. Don’t miss this one. I think they have 4 more performances.
Why has “NIGHTS AT ST. JANUARIUS” not yet been reviewed??? The reviewer — David Winkler — seems to have covered all the other plays assigned to him but not this one!!! There are only two more performances:
* TUES 7/20 (TONITE!!!) AT 10:00 P.M.
* FRI 7/23 AT 6:00 P.M.
This play is hilarious – E.R. meets True Blood – and is one of few Fringe plays EVERYONE can attend !!!
So….where’s the review????
[Editor’s note: Just posted, JL.]
Great. Thank you very much.
Just curious: I was wondering if Caitlin DeMerlis was still doing reviews. I have noticed that she hasn’t posted any. I ask because I am interesting in seeing “Shirley Dreaming” and “War Zones” and I wanted to know if they were worthwhile.
[Editor’s note: We knew that by this point in the festival, the crew would need fresh reinforcement, and that would be Caitlin, who just returned from Europe, and is diving into seeing the last shows and is writing up her reviews, even as you read this. Shirley Dreaming is just posted.]
One Fringe-review suggestion: If you keep the rating system, put the symbol not only on this main Fringe page, but also on the individual review pages as well. People often link to the particular review, meaning that rating will not be seen.
Keep up the great work with the reviews! What a great service to the DC Theatre community!
twenty critics and they still have over twenty shows not yet reviewed… some review crew… this festival is about over
I hope someone from DCTS gets a chance to see Ridgefield Middle School Talent Nite. I was lucky enough to see Sunday’s performance. It is the best show I’ve seen at Fringe, maybe since Dizzy Miss Lizzy’s first go-around in 2008. The set-up is simple and immersive. Members of the audience become parents attending an actual middle school talent show with all the awkwardness, cheap props, annoyed teachers and desperate-for-attention student performers that implies. The duo portray about a dozen characters each in what could have been nothing more than a high-concept sketch comedy show but, as little plot threads and deeper characterizations emerge, becomes a real play. One with more heart than anything I’ve seen at this year’s festival. It’s quite thrilling to watch these two young performers walk such a tightrope. Ridgefield could easily have failed, had Marron and Firestone take the easy, cynical way out and portrayed these kids and adults as bitter caricatures. Instead, each is infused with a real heart and soul. It’s a show made with a real humanity and love for it’s subject matter that is absolutely infectious, and a technical efficiency that denotes an unusual level of polish for a Fringe show. Sort of a mutant child of Glee and Andy Kaufman, Marron and Firestone have crafted a wonderful homage to an American rite of passage. I encourage you to get tickets while you can.
http://www.theatermania.com/washington-dc/shows/love-game_168925/
I’m not a hater or cynical in any way, shape, or form. I wish I can see every show. Money is an issue for me. But I know that these reviews for Love Game reflect 13 months of hardwork. I’m not just a talker. I back up everything I say.
Everyone who made comments on here made some valid points. Hunter gave my Love Game a 1. He had valid points but he spoke of no good for my show. Yet an audience member gave my show a 5. And she call our show the stand out in the whole Fringe festival. I don’t know the girl at all but check my Theatermania page and her comment is there. So the irony there between an audience review and an artist who trashed my whole show on his review. A 1 though? I respect his constructive criticism or lack of effort but for a show that got a standing ovation on OPENING night deserves more than a 1. I have faith that Love Game is one of the top shows in this Fringe. Maybe top five. Come find out for yourself.
That’s a nice thought. Personally, with over one hundred shows to choose from, I’m looking to reviews to help make my selection. This appears to be the only source to find reviews for all of the shows, and the suggestion is to improve journalistic operations. The fringe awards don’t matter to me as a patron, but I’m sure they matter to some of the artists. I agree that the rating system is flawed and unnecessary. I saw a 5 rated musical that I really could have passed on, and was far more impressed by Claudio, Potter and Skinny Bitch.
“Competing” shows? Not sure you read the above comment…
Those “audience best” votes are made up overwhelmingly of people who have actually SEEN the shows and formed their own opinions. The shows themselves aren’t competing… there’s no practical or logical way to do so other than the conspiracy theory beaten to death above. See the difference?
Whether a theatregoer ends up at show X or show Y in the first place… well, that’s the role of the reviewer, to assist in recommending. But a reviewer can’t make a show good or bad art any more than they can hijack a smart viewer’s opinion of what they’ve just seen. Bad theatre won’t win audience choice awards because it got too positive a write-up somewhere. And, good theatre WILL get good audience responses regardless of the write-up!
If you don’t trust this site, don’t read it. But clearly diversity of opinion matters to you, as it does to me. And I’ve found the site a great resource. I have no foundation for saying it doesn’t hire writers who are smart enough and big-enough thinkers to study things for what they are, not for small petty reasons.
I don’t disagree about artist reviewers, but it’s not unreasonable to expect that the artists are not working in the fringe. There is a best of fringe vote, and that does create an element of competition. How can we know that a participating artist doesn’t want to discourage audiences from seeing competing shows?
I agree that the numbers system is a little wack. It actually doesn’t seem very necessary at all.
BUT… saying that theatre artists shouldn’t write critical analyses of shows is ridiculous. It’s like saying it’s a conflict of interest for surgeons to contribute to medical journals. It’s funny, people are always calling for more arts reviews by real artists, not dry-minded critics… And then don’t like it when they get it.
We’re not in elementary school anymore fighting over crayons… Only the most deeply cynical would push the idea that there’s some workable way to “steal” viewers and incite competition between festival shows. If you take a look around the Fringe community — including the reviewers — you’ll see that just not how it works. The idea is bizarre and totally off the mark. Fringe is a completely unjuried festival, with PLENTY of DC audience to go around, believe me.
Just go see what you want to see! And if you disagree, just disagree on the review!
And now that I’m on a roll… It does seem the biggest problems are in the 1-3 star range. The 4 & 5 star reviews seem more consistent.
The system might need a revamp before next year. Maybe 5 stars is too broad. 4 stars could be more clear: must see (4), should see (3), maybe see (2), do not see (1).
Last: yes, Hunter is a great guy. But from my reading, the theater folk seem to be harsher than the non (heck, that happens when I see shows – my non theater friends are much more lenient than me). The site is setting up the perceived biases by using these people.
That last bit was a bit of rambling and trying to figure out why the biggest discrepancies were theater folk… it sets up for perceived conflicts, as Glenn points out.
As a theater person, I know that we can be thoughtful critics – but also harsher critics. We can see “I would have done x to fix y. Why didn’t they?”
But the MUCH bigger issue is that the number ratings seen arbitrary, at best. Yes, there could be 20 opinions from 20 reviewers. However, there needs to be clarity in what a 1 or 5 means. Some of the 1 & 2 star reviews say better things than shows that got 3 stars. There needs to be a clear explanation of the rating system. Better yet, be like Metacritic & have a system – other than the reviewer – that gives the number ranking. Just as there are 20 opinions on a show, there seems to be 20 opinions as to what each rating means.
The site should not set reviewers up for perceived conflict of interest. It doesn’t look good that the writer’s play is the only one named a top pick here when the other two plays I mentioned also earned a Post recommendation.
And I will add that from my perspective, the performance Hunter attended had a couple “rough spots” that he generously overlooked in his review.
Hey look, I know you all want every show that you like to be a 5 star and get great reviews, but some people have diffrent opinions…thats why they allow comments on DCTS (which is wonderful). So that other people can say what they liked and didn’t like about a show and argue about what a reviewer saw and didn’t see within a show. Its the beauty of theatre that not everything is for everyone…some people just want to be entertained, some people want to be enlighten, some people just want to be communicated with. Its really amazing.
Now I know Hunter personally and I can say in all honesty he is one of the the most unbiased and brilliant critical thinkers about theatre. I know we all like to think there is some conspiracy theory in theatre, that there are many of us who will just bash each other to get ahead, that we are only looking out for ourselves and that the industry is cut throat, in my opinion from working with the theatre community for 5 years now its not the case. More often then not we want to see things succeeded wether we had anything to do with it or not. I am not sure what kind of competition Hunter’s show is in with Carrie Potter or anything else he didn’t seem to give high praise too…but trust me Hunter was giving his honest opinion and not thinking about any competition. He is not that person. He would tell you if a show was better then his and be very unbiased about it.
Oh and other theatre artists have a critical eye….thats how we get better at our craft, by honing our critical eye…perhaps they are too critical at times, but that is only cause we want every show we see to be the best show we have ever seen.
It is late and I am rambling, but just this…give people the benefit of the doubt and disagree with them, but please don’t unjustifiably judge them without knowing them.
Thank you, Glenn, I’m one of the creators of Carrie Potter. I have a lot of respect for Hunter’s opinions and hope to meet him someday – and in my world, any comparison to “South Park” is high praise. 🙂 Several really impressive shows that I know of have earned “4” ratings on DCTS, so we can’t complain about that.
It’s great to know that our play works on different levels for different audience members, because that was our intention. Happy Fringing!
DCTheatreGirl makes a valid point. Why send a reviewer who wrote a play in the same category? Hunter kind of knocked two productions I attended that earned Post critic nods alongside his own play. The Skinny Bitches were master performers, and Carrie Potter was smarter than his review admits. Not to cry foul, but seems like conflict of interest.
I’m really not trusting the number rating system on this site.
– Be Here Now: well acted, well directed, with a script that is clear but needs some edits got a 2?
– Do Not Kill Me Killer Robots: merely a charming idea, no script, an actor who didn’t know his lines and needed direction got a 3?
– The Cloak Room: reviewer praised the acting (“fully committed performance” and “two talented actors acting their hearts out”) got a 1?
– Superheroes Who Are Super: the actors didn’t know their lines for a STAGED READING with SCRIPTS IN HAND, that your reviewer called “mostly half-hearted” got a 2?
(I’m only commenting on shows you’ve reviewed that I’ve seen. Word of mouth says here are plenty of other inconsistencies.)
While it is great you are trying to review all shows ASAP, this is a case of more is LESS. Fringe shows have a limited window to get an audience; an okay review with a low score does more damage than a mediocre review with a middle of the road score.
It wold be better to have reviewers who have written with you during the year to have consistency in the ratings. We can then also have a body of work to reference to understand the review. It seems the reviewers in theatre (i.e. Jessica Pearson, Hunter Styles) are more harsh than those who can view it with a critical, thoughtful eye (i.e. Jenn Larson).
Call me a conspiracy nut (“you’re a conspiracy nut!”) but it looks like reviewers with shows in Fringe are giving poor reviews to give their shows a better shot at getting an audience. An appearance of bias makes it hard to trust any reviews on this site.
Daniel,
I am indeed still on the crew. Scheduling has just necessitated my seeing most of my shows in the later part of this week. Two of my reviews have been posted (the first on Tuesday), and two will be coming later today, with the rest following on the weekend.
Thanks for following our coverage!
Has David Winkler pulled out of reviewing? Unless i am mistaken, none of the shows he was to see have been reviewed? However i have been impressed with the speed and vigor of the dc theatre scenes entire troupe of reviewers! thank you!
Thank you for the reviews – it’s very good to read these. In Edinburgh there are a number of papers which come out every day, but also the online rating hosted by the Fringe. Hope DC (a capitol of InfoTech) can offer that feature next year. We depend on the opinios of our fellow audience mambers!
Saw Lysistrata – great cast, terrific singing, outrageous lyrics, and very funny!
I have also been pleased by the number of reviews you’ve been able to post so quickly. I still think – and this has been suggested in past years – that it would nice to be able to comment on a show before the official review is posted. Is this a technical hurdle or a design choice? Thanks for the good work.
On behalf of the cast and crew of CASE 22, huge thanks to DC Theatre Scene for covering the Fringe so carefully, and to Mr. Kahn for the thoughtful and thought-provoking “Five Thumbs Up” review of our show. I can die happy now. Or just sleep. Yes. Think I’ll just go with sleep.
Hi, Charlene. On behalf of everyone working to bring you the Fringe coverage, I’d like to say – thanks so much for the applause.
And here’s a surprise – this week, not only are we covering Fringe – but we’ll be bringing you daily reviews from the Contemporary American Theater Festival in WV.
I too want to commend and thank DCTS for the hard work they’ve done this year. I look at that list and I can’t believe how many have reviews have been done within just the first week of the festival. Well done!
I just want to commend DCTS and its reviewers for doing such a great job of covering Fringe so quickly and completely. It’s quite impressive the number of reviews that have been posted after just one weekend of performances. Kudos and thanks!
Kudos to Josh Fixler for his review of the Miss Teen Jesus Pageant – a train wreck of a show. A rating of “1? was the score this “show” earned. As a gay audience member who attended with gay friends – you voiced what we were all thinking. I don’t think you needed to add any disclaimers. Why did some of the audience members give the show a standing ovation? They must have been related to the cast or crew. I would trust any of your reviews – you certainly nailed this one. ChiChi seems to have had a moving experience at the Miss Teen Jesus Pageant. I am baffled and amused by that. It seems that the power of the Fringe Festival is that there is something to amuse and entertain everyone. But to credit this haphazard wigstock as “both a satire of the human condition and ultimately an affirmation of acts of kindness that reveal the divine in all” is just ludicrous. DCTS, Josh Fixler and your critics are doing a great job!
Booo to Josh Fixler for letting his personal feelings and discomfort with gay subject matter rather than the quality of the Miss Teen Jesus Pageant influence his rating of this hilarious show. A rating of “1”? You’ve got to be kidding. The other 100 people in the audience who were howling with laughter certainly disagreed with you. But more disturbing is your abandonment of journalistic ethics. It’s your responsibility as a reviewer to provide a critique of the play on its own merits and not use this blog as a forum to express your homophobia. Your “disclaimer” about not being the “target audience” was code for “I’m uncomfortable as a straight man being aroused by beautiful cross dressing drag queens.” Why did some of the audience members give the show a standing ovation? It’s your job as a critic to try to understand that and tell us what moved them. Your inability to see that this show was a both a satire of the human condition and ultimately an affirmation of acts of kindness that reveal the divine in all of us is the real travesty. DCTS, where did you dig up this blind, deaf, and dumb bum steer of a wannabe critic?
The audience (me included) loved the Miss Teen Jesus Pageant – very entertaining and funny. We gave it a standing ovation. Your reviewer totally missed the boat.
The Darfur musical is so clever and entertaining and frightening at the same time due to a cast of talented young college actors. Don’t miss it!
I saw someone posted a small review on the Darfur show’s theatremania page.
http://www.theatermania.com/washington-dc/shows/darfur-the-greatest-show-on-earth_168669/#userreviews
has anyone heard anything about the Darfur show?
Thanks for the suggestion, Steve. Capital Fringe lists the running time on their site and in the program. We’ll include that info with the review. Should have that done by Monday. Meanwhile, check the Capital Fringe site.
Could you ask ALL your reviewers to include the running time of the shows in each of their reviews? This would make scheduling, and planning time to get from one site to the next a lot easier.
Would love to see you all at the show!
QUEER in the U.S.A.
queerintheusa.com
http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/27bd481036156468fc659e4a01649c7b.png