We're just letting "black comedy" by?

THE SHADOW BOX is also on my "plays I should probably read some day, to be more aware of history" list. If you're in Chicago, Michael Cristofer has a new play running: http://www.courttheatre.org…

Angela Lansbury is a goddamn international treasure.

If we expand it from "playwright" to "dramatist", I'd like to propose Stephen Sondheim.

Have you read Eno's MIDDLETOWN? It's a stunning play.

Confirmed—the female version is a separate play. The basic structure is the same, but everyone is gender-swapped, and also updated to the 1980s (when it premiered). Both the original and the female versions are interesting time capsules now.

As someone whose job involves finding and developing new plays and playwrights, I can tell you: the talent is absolutely there. There's some remarkable theatre being written. The issue is that it's harder to get money for new shows, and really adventurous, exciting stuff rarely impacts the mainstream. (HAMILTON is the…

You say George Bernard Shaw 2: Electric Boogaloo like it's a bad thing.

The play (which I like quite a bit) kept getting compared to a sitcom when it premiered, so I find this fitting.

A good director is what takes a one person show from "hanging out" to an actual work of theatrical storytelling. Particularly important for pacing issues.

I object. The way she commits to selling that awful, hideous material is a shining example to us all.

"At auction" may be my favorite fancy-pants locution ever.

"In a play, we don’t get as physically close to the actors as we do in a movie, and we just don’t develop as close a bond. We may feel for the stage versions of Seymour and Audrey when they meet their ends, but we probably won’t feel gutted."

Am I the only one who assumed that "Thomas Middleditch" was the name of an obscure British author from the late 1700s, and Reeves was appearing in an adaptation of one of his novels? That just doesn't sound like a name that someone in 2016 has.

That's brilliant.

I feel like I need to watch this movie just so I can understand this review. (That's not a criticism—the review seems to perfectly suited to the bizarre film in question.)

I think 1776 is actually the best-case scenario: yeah, it's an unimaginative filming, but the material and cast are so strong that it's still very worth watching.

My only problem with it is that most subsequent stage productions have tried to ape the movie, instead of doing the actual 1966 version of the play. I'm not sure that version is even available to license anymore, which is a damn shame.

It's been a long time since I've seen A CHORUS LINE, so I can't speak from experience, but it's fair to say that yours is a minority opinion.

That's honestly my reaction every time I see him. I am thrilled that he's doing so much work, and greedy for more of him, but the man needs a rest.