I’ve asked Shelly to take a break from the reviewing seeing how this is my brother and all.
The Innocent Eye Test was the fart that Healey needed to release. Actually referring to people’s perchance to build up hate, the “fart” monologue turns out to be the most thoughtful and meaningful moment in this farce. Michael needed to get this play out there as he ventures into different writing genres. A typical Healey play is abundant with well written actrobatic comedy and Eye doesn’t dissapoint. However I’ve always equated “farce” with “Blake Edwards” (the later, forced, unfunny Blake) and this “farce” doesn’t dissapoint me in that way either.
Eye has all you’d expect in a farce: entrances, exits, slamming doors and mistaken identities, deftly handled by Christopher Newton (as an emerging actor, Michael sent Mr Newton a series of letters over a period of a year and later adapted it into a novella called “Dear Mr Newton” making Eye a bit of a cyclic moment for Healey). Eye had typical production woes as well, made evident by the loud mouthed patron behind me, eager to explain to whomever what scenes were re-written from the Winnipeg production, including the ending! Well thank you, you schmuck! Why not pull out your cell phone and do a play-by-play while you’re at it. And yeah, I know Kate Lynch too.
Eye pulls from my family life with low level reconnaisance accuracy (without giving away much of the plot): the gay husband on vacation, the Italian setting – a possible reference to my mother, my brother’s facination for the city of Vegas, vast amounts of drinking, and of course, the signature “lead character’s pants off in the saftey of their room” moment. I’m probably reading too much into all that but it’s easy to see where he’s getting his inspriation. Is my family a farce?
Who’s isn’t, when you take parts of it and put it up on stage?
In all, an excellent evening. I did find some of the Canadian vs American dialogue a bit atypical, almost mirrored from any episode of The Rick Mercer Report, but the majority of the play was brilliantly written, if I do say so myself. I have to mention the excellent work on the set design and lighting. In a farce, characters enter and exit with bravado and to have the cast all pour through Mona Lisa’s eye was a stroke of genius.
I give Innocent Eye Test an unbiased 4 out of 5.
7 thoughts on “The Innocent Eye Test – A 35 Second Review”
i forgot to mention mr. ouzounian’s column today busily praises liza minnelli, harry connick jr. and that grotesque ball of sebum, mario batali, as well as a pair of (ick) disc jockeys, so his dismissal of your brother’s work is actually quite reassuring, i’d think.
fanbots need to stop taking the canon so seriously. somewhere around here i have a copy of the manson family opera and you don’t see me grumping about the mischaracterisation of the treacherously beautiful squeaky fromme or susan atkins.
Buzz is that it’s so cut down, only the fan-boys would get what’s going on. And the fan-boys would never get caught seeing a musical of their beloved books.
Dinner with brother Michael the other night was good. In great spirits despite the Star review (others were more than positive). We talked at length about how people critique things and had a good rollicking larf.
i distrust professional critics in their opinions, their motivations and i’d never lend one a dime, either.
i’d never see it, but i think a musical of lotr is a great idea. what better way to extract money from 905ers that doesn’t involve hockey?
Dad’s friends were rather catty when they read the reviews:
“Oh he’s just a failed playwright himself.”
“What a bitter man!”
“What play did he see?”
Etc. etc. All being kind. I went to thestar.com and read the review. Then I looked back at his other reviews, revealing a litany of hate-on for Toronto theatre and yet he liked “Lord of the Rings”. Very telling, that.
While this isn’t my favorite of my brother’s plays, I wouldn’t call it flat.
Nah. I’m just a starstruck kid with vasaline around my lens.
Similar reviews were from Winnipeg but not that…uh… harsh.
Weirdly enough the vibe I got from the audience was that they enjoyed it. They seemed to laugh hard and long at all the right places.
Maybe he wasnt a fan of Farce either.
i’m guessing you read the review of it in the star today — it got completely panned, sorry to say.
the headline: cast of cliches falls flat.
the bylines: shoddy farce lacks plot, pacing, humour and even the sets manage to be disappointing.
reviewer richard ouzounian apparently liked your brother’s other plays, but he hated this from start to finish. feel free to email him and the star, since it’s such a crappy paper and everyone involved with it should be burned at the stake. oh, and if you want a copy of the review, i kept the arts section.
sorry to be the bearer of bad reviews.