Comments for United States Marine Bore: "A Few Good Men," at the Richmond Hill Barn Theatre through July 22 at http://www.rcreader.com , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.rcreader.com Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:11:12 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/united-states-marine-bore/#comment-290 I just have to say I would have been embarrassed to be in the cast of this show. Now I look back and am glad I declined any role in it. - Anonymously Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:41:43 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/united-states-marine-bore/#comment-266 First off, I think we need to realize that a reviewer can really write whatever he wants it's up to us as an audience to decide what to do with it. I feel that the first comment was perhaps a bit too sensitive....what I find more interesting is that the last comment attacks who she is, and and lets be honest creates a glass house just as big as the one the first poster created, but at least the first lady had the fortitude to do it while signing her name, as the other person does so anonymously.......i respect her for that even though I feel she is being a tad too sensitive.....but I cant attack the last person for being anonymously, as I write this anonymously........ - d Sun, 22 Jul 2007 08:39:10 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/united-states-marine-bore/#comment-264 I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion. But as long as the actors had a good time and enjoyed their shows, thats all that matters. - Anonymous Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:53:41 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/united-states-marine-bore/#comment-263 Granted, Mr. Schulz' review is strongly worded and perhaps goes into flaws in more length than is necessary. But I would like to note a couple of points with regard to the first poster's comments. First of all, while she acknowledges Schulz is entitled to his opinion, she states opinions of her own as though they are incontrovertible facts. For instance, in claiming that she knows "for a fact" that the actors "did know their parts", that is only her opinion. Schulz rather goes out of his way to say that, while he has no way of knowing whether the actors were underprepared or not, it [i]seemed[/i] to him as though they might be. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter if anyone "knows for sure" the actors know their parts; if they appear insecure onstage, that's what the audience has to judge. Most importantly, though, I think since the first poster goes out of her way to label Schulz "a liar", she might have at least, in the interest of full disclosure, have pointed out that she herself is married to one of the key crew people who worked on the show, a fellow who was observed by many to sleep through another show presented in Richmond Hill's season earlier this year. And yet, this did not prevent him from congratulating that cast and director on the fine job they'd done. Which simply goes to prove, I think, that it is perfectly possible to sleep through a show in that theater without alerting the entire audience. And it also calls the subject of truth-telling into question. Glass houses, anyone? - anonymous Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:27:33 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/united-states-marine-bore/#comment-262 I would just like to state, for the record, that I was indifferent to this performance. I also went on opening night, and I didn't think it was ground-breaking, but I didn't fall asleep. However, the man behind me, DID. Just thought I should point out that Mike is not lying here... I literally heard the woman next to her husband (the man snoring) say, "Hey! Wake up! You started snoring out loud..." and then they both giggled. - anonymous Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:18:46 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/united-states-marine-bore/#comment-261 Wow, you must have seen a different show than I did. I was at this performance last Thursday and I thought the show was well done. It certainly did not deserve the condescending comments that you made. Joe DePauw is a fine director and I felt that his vision for this difficult show was realized through his staging and the lighting. The actors did know their parts. I know this for a fact. You wax on and on about two minor technical problems, but in your review of Joseph, you forgive them for not being able to hear Pharoah due to the mic (Joseph was a great show, too, btw). Why give slack to one group and not another? Your opening paragraph is insulting and ridiculouos. You decided you would not like the show when you heard the Marine Hymn at the beginnig and it wasn't the peppy version you expected. This was played by the Marine Band, incidentally. It is THEIR version. And then you complain about the seriousness of the play. It is a DRAMA. I heard people laughing at the appropriate times, I heard them gasp at the appropriate times, so I know they were paying attention. If it were so boring, I don't think the audience would have noticed these things. I am very disappointed in your snotty review. I thought better of the Reader. I did a couple of reviews for them before I got sick and had to quit. You must be paid by the word because you sure could have trashed this and wasted a lot less space. As a rule, I don't get too upsert about reviews of plays that I have seen, but this was so far off base I had to coment. Oh, and the comment about the man snoring? That is a bald faced lie. It is such a small theatre that I would have heard snoring. What a rude thing to say, though it did make a nice snappy ending for your diatribe. You owe Mr. DePauw, his crew and cast an apology, not for your opinion because you are entitled to that. You owe them an apololgy for being incredibly rude and lying. Shame on you for using your standing in your little paper to show how high and mighty you are. Really sad. - Patty Baugh-Riechers Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:55:49 +0100