Here’s what audience members wrote about the show when they posted their reviews on the Fringe website:
“The acting is stunning. The two leads were spot on, not one false moment. Really enthralling, great writing, the reason to go to the theater.”
“The acting was beautiful. The material was served well by such a cast. The play was unpredictable, compelling and moving. Brian Foyster’s presence and acting throughout the piece and the interactions that ensue from an incredible monologue done brilliantly by Eddie Kehler are a force of nature. Great cast.”
“Shining City was a spectacular production from beginning to end. It was great to be in such an intimate setting with such beautiful acting.”
“Brilliant acting, outstanding writing, beautiful set. This was a stunning performance by the entire cast. Shining City was a delight to experience, with laughter and heartbreak. Not to be missed.”
“Strong, very pro, very lived-in performances by a terrific cast. Every aspect of this moving show is realized, from the acting, staging, wardrobe, sound, lighting, sets, everything was meticulously wrought and delivered. The nuances and subtleties in the performances take you right into the play and don’t let up through the final, startling, chilling conclusion.”
“Beautiful play about connection and intimacy, masterfully written and skillfully acted across the board. This is the real deal of exceptional Los Angeles theater.”
I, for one, wholeheartedly and respectfully disagree with you Deb. The close quarters and intimate nature of the set with all its constraints lent itself well to the inner tumult of these characters, who felt they had nowhere to turn, boxed into a figurative corner of their lives… That discomfort was palpable to me in the audience and that there was nowhere to escape from it was key in my enjoyment of the piece. I would suggest to your readers to go and see it and decide for themselves. And Eddie Kehler was phenomenally nuanced and moving.
I have to say that I disagree whole heartedly with this reviewers take on the play. I personally found it to be a rich and very realized production of this play. It is true that the stage is quite small and that presented some staging challenges. However I feel that the Directed overcame these limitations and ended up crafting a wonderfully choreographed and poignant piece of theater.
The acting is absolutely superb. Eddie Kehler is masterful. Brian Foyster is rock solid and is the common thread throughout that grounds the piece and ties all the moments together. Charlotte Gulezian is anything but screechy. Her performance is full, it is truthful and it is powerful.
What disturbs me the most about this review is that it will discourage people from seeing it. In that way, it is irresponsible. It is inaccurate. This production deserves to be seen. Anyone with a love for theater will be moved by this wonderful event,
I find it curious that there are zero replies posted to this mediocre and myopic review. Could it be that Stage Raw has no problem posting Ms. Klugman’s opinion, but doesn’t have the balls to post replies and rebuttals? I am reminded of the great Harold Clurman’s qualifications for critics:
Besides having cultivated taste, feeling and a talent for clear observation of people:
I. The critic should know the greater part of classic and contemporary drama as written and played. Added to this, he must be conversant with general literature: novels, poetry, essays of wide scope.
II. He should know the history of the theatre from its origins to the present.
III. He should have a long and broad playgoing experience – of native and foreign productions.
IV. He should possess an interest in and a familiarity with the arts: painting, music, architecture and the dance.
V. He should have worked in the theatre in some capacity (apart from criticism).
VI. He should know the history of his country and world history: the social thinking of past and present.
VII. He should have something like a philosophy, an attitude toward life.
VIII. He should write lucidly, and, if possible, gracefully.
IX. He should respect his readers by upholding high standards and encourage his readers to cultivate the same.
X. He should be aware of his prejudices and blind spots.
XI. He should err on the side of generosity rather than an opposite zeal.
XII. He should seek to enlighten rather than carp or puff.
In these end times for theater as we’ve known it, I strongly suggest Ms. Klugman study well Mr. Clurman’s advice for the sake of good criticism in the service of art.
I have to say emphatically that I completely disagree with this review. I have seen this production twice, once at the Fringe and at its current location. I am not a critic, but I have seen theatre all over this country for many years. It isn’t often I leave a play and feel wholly moved and illuminated, and that is what I felt both times after I left this production. I go to the theatre to have an elevated experience of something, and this production certainly gave me that. My critical heart was more than satisfied. These actors pour themselves into these roles, and deliver stellar performances. Eddie Kehler is phenomenal in his monologue and both times, I was glued to my seat and traveled through a multitude of my own awarenesses and emotions. What more can you ask for when you go to the theatre? I would love to know what the reviewer thought the “unexplored ironies” we’re because they weren’t explained. I say, don’t walk but “run” to see this production.
Here’s what audience members wrote about the show when they posted their reviews on the Fringe website:
“The acting is stunning. The two leads were spot on, not one false moment. Really enthralling, great writing, the reason to go to the theater.”
“The acting was beautiful. The material was served well by such a cast. The play was unpredictable, compelling and moving. Brian Foyster’s presence and acting throughout the piece and the interactions that ensue from an incredible monologue done brilliantly by Eddie Kehler are a force of nature. Great cast.”
“Shining City was a spectacular production from beginning to end. It was great to be in such an intimate setting with such beautiful acting.”
“Brilliant acting, outstanding writing, beautiful set. This was a stunning performance by the entire cast. Shining City was a delight to experience, with laughter and heartbreak. Not to be missed.”
“Strong, very pro, very lived-in performances by a terrific cast. Every aspect of this moving show is realized, from the acting, staging, wardrobe, sound, lighting, sets, everything was meticulously wrought and delivered. The nuances and subtleties in the performances take you right into the play and don’t let up through the final, startling, chilling conclusion.”
“Beautiful play about connection and intimacy, masterfully written and skillfully acted across the board. This is the real deal of exceptional Los Angeles theater.”
I, for one, wholeheartedly and respectfully disagree with you Deb. The close quarters and intimate nature of the set with all its constraints lent itself well to the inner tumult of these characters, who felt they had nowhere to turn, boxed into a figurative corner of their lives… That discomfort was palpable to me in the audience and that there was nowhere to escape from it was key in my enjoyment of the piece. I would suggest to your readers to go and see it and decide for themselves. And Eddie Kehler was phenomenally nuanced and moving.
I have to say that I disagree whole heartedly with this reviewers take on the play. I personally found it to be a rich and very realized production of this play. It is true that the stage is quite small and that presented some staging challenges. However I feel that the Directed overcame these limitations and ended up crafting a wonderfully choreographed and poignant piece of theater.
The acting is absolutely superb. Eddie Kehler is masterful. Brian Foyster is rock solid and is the common thread throughout that grounds the piece and ties all the moments together. Charlotte Gulezian is anything but screechy. Her performance is full, it is truthful and it is powerful.
What disturbs me the most about this review is that it will discourage people from seeing it. In that way, it is irresponsible. It is inaccurate. This production deserves to be seen. Anyone with a love for theater will be moved by this wonderful event,
I find it curious that there are zero replies posted to this mediocre and myopic review. Could it be that Stage Raw has no problem posting Ms. Klugman’s opinion, but doesn’t have the balls to post replies and rebuttals? I am reminded of the great Harold Clurman’s qualifications for critics:
Besides having cultivated taste, feeling and a talent for clear observation of people:
I. The critic should know the greater part of classic and contemporary drama as written and played. Added to this, he must be conversant with general literature: novels, poetry, essays of wide scope.
II. He should know the history of the theatre from its origins to the present.
III. He should have a long and broad playgoing experience – of native and foreign productions.
IV. He should possess an interest in and a familiarity with the arts: painting, music, architecture and the dance.
V. He should have worked in the theatre in some capacity (apart from criticism).
VI. He should know the history of his country and world history: the social thinking of past and present.
VII. He should have something like a philosophy, an attitude toward life.
VIII. He should write lucidly, and, if possible, gracefully.
IX. He should respect his readers by upholding high standards and encourage his readers to cultivate the same.
X. He should be aware of his prejudices and blind spots.
XI. He should err on the side of generosity rather than an opposite zeal.
XII. He should seek to enlighten rather than carp or puff.
In these end times for theater as we’ve known it, I strongly suggest Ms. Klugman study well Mr. Clurman’s advice for the sake of good criticism in the service of art.
I have to say emphatically that I completely disagree with this review. I have seen this production twice, once at the Fringe and at its current location. I am not a critic, but I have seen theatre all over this country for many years. It isn’t often I leave a play and feel wholly moved and illuminated, and that is what I felt both times after I left this production. I go to the theatre to have an elevated experience of something, and this production certainly gave me that. My critical heart was more than satisfied. These actors pour themselves into these roles, and deliver stellar performances. Eddie Kehler is phenomenal in his monologue and both times, I was glued to my seat and traveled through a multitude of my own awarenesses and emotions. What more can you ask for when you go to the theatre? I would love to know what the reviewer thought the “unexplored ironies” we’re because they weren’t explained. I say, don’t walk but “run” to see this production.