Comments for No Holds Bard: "The Taming of the Shrew," at the Rock Island Masonic Temple through March 16 at http://www.rcreader.com , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments http://www.rcreader.com Wed, 22 May 2013 12:31:31 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-564 Theatre Fan, I understand your point of view, but I have to disagree with your interpretation of the review. I think we have to read reviews as just the critic's opinion. Mike can only convey his impressions and thoughts about the show to a wider audience. If what he wants to get across in a limited amount of print space is that he loved the show and everyone should see it, then I think he's more likely to get in all the good stuff that he can, rather than working to find some criticisms. No review is going to be totally objective, because theatre is a subjective experience. It comes across in a different way to every person in the room. We can only hope that the reviewer paints an honest and accurate picture of his experience. And, even when I disagree with Mike's reviews, I can still say with confidence that he's in no way unfair. I'm sure that if one were to survey all those in attendance, you'd find some that hated the show, some that loved it even more than Mike, and everywhere in between. Regardless, your concerns about the audio problems are (in my opinion) justified. But hey, they're working in a found space that is most definitely not friendly to theatre speech. Would they benefit from more focus on diction and understandability? Yeah, I definitely think so. However, in the end, they have a good product with great public and critical support. And that's certainly not something to distrust. - Tyson Danner Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:33:30 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-563 Mike is only one person. Of course his review is going to be one-sided. There are three newspapers in the Quad Cities that review plays, along with an independent website and a TV station. All but one of these reviews for this show were overwhelmingly positive. As for the audio problems, maybe it depends on the person, or even where one sits. Maybe Mike didn't mention audio problems because he didn't experience any. My character sat in the audience for most of the first half of the show, and I didn't have any problems hearing or understanding anything. - Dustin Oliver Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:29:01 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-562 See, Tyson, THERE'S the exact kind of review that's actually helpful. Mike can certainly give as many positive reviews as he wants, but when he gushes about a production without acknowledging any shortcomings makes me feel as if he is more willing to overlook them when it suits him. He is more than ready to pick apart the productions of the local universities, but according to him the Prenzies have done nothing but give flawless presentations that everyone should see. You are not the first person to acknowledge the audio problems at their shows, but this goes right over Mike's head. Why should I pay good money for a show I can't hear? This is exactly the problem with a review as ridiculously one-sided as this one. - Theatre Fan Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:08:13 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-561 Maybe we should just stop allowing Mike to write reviews. After all, you can't be too careful! Maybe the Reader could just publish "GOOD" or "BAD" in size 40 font in the space Mike's reviews normally occupy. (But what if he gives too many "GOOD" reviews to any one theatre?! Uh oh...maybe we'll only allow him to give out a certain number of "GOOD" reviews. That sounds fair! yeesh...) I saw "Shrew" Friday night and was incredibly entertained! Like their last production (Othello), I had such a hard time understanding the actors that I felt bad for those who had never seen or read the play. It's really hard for me to get past that. And I didn't really agree with a lot of the interpretation or directing choices. For me, a message conveyed subtly with subtext is more interesting. But that isn't the Prenzie style - they're an energetic, in-your-face group, and I certainly wouldn't want them to change who they are! However, it was definitely laugh-till-you-cry hilarious. I don't remember when I've laughed so hard for so long at a play. Bravo Prenzies! - Tyson Danner Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:55:39 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-560 Hurrah, my dear Prenzies! What a magical night of theatre we were able to be a part of last night. A spot-on review, Mike sir. Although am wondering how I will even begin to get the vision of JC in a corset out of my brain. - Allison Collins-Elfline Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:26:09 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-559 This really is getting out of hand. The problem is that Mike's reviews are so glowing that I won't see this show because it couldn't possibly be as good as he says. You have to be careful. You certainly should say that the show is good, but can't you leave it at that? Do you really have to go so far as to say that it's the best show you've seen in years? This is a severe case of over-hyping with no real objectivity. - Theatre Fan Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:49:24 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-548 Yeah, I wonder what Mr./Mrs. Anonymous thinks about the three newcomers (including myself), since with the Prenzies, it's just"the SAME actors in each play". Bah. I've never had this much fun on stage. - Dustin Oliver Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:46:41 +0100 http://www.rcreader.com/theatre/no-holds-bard-the-taming/#comment-546 So, anonymous Prenzie-hater, whaddaya think? Is this another giant conspiracy? Does Mike's glowing (and spot-on) review of "Taming" signal the downfall of theater in the QC? Too much quality? Too many Woolleys? I say "Game on!" - moonlight graham Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:28:06 +0100