Last weekend I went to see a play at Bats Theatre called Winter. I didn't like it very much as I thought it was awkward and pretentious. The dialogue was strained, stilted and completely unrealistic. It was the sort of thing that people write at drama school when they imagine that everyone else has the same over-earnest conversations they conduct in their own head.
I wrote a review for the Lumiere website, in which I presented my opinions. Immediately I am accused of not having a sense of humour, having ADD and having problems relating to people. I find this is the sort of vituperative diatribe that meets many reviewers in this town who say they don't like a play, which is usually written by a local and so their friends defend them.
Fair enough. We all have different opinions - otherwise those CSI programmes would cease to exist - but I find it frustrating when people assume that because you don't like something, you 'don't get it.' Yes, I got it; I just didn't like it. It's like when you don't laugh at someone's joke and they accuse you of not having a sense of humour - yes, I got it; I just didn't think it was funny!
This seems to me to be a very immature attidue; the sort of thing you thought when you were a teenager, but hopefully grew out of. Do we only appreciate reviews when they agree with our view? In which case, what is the point of a review?
No comments:
Post a Comment