Thursday, May 24, 2007

Equus Report

For all those who are interested...

No, I didn't go to see Equus, but half of our group did. Here are some of their thoughts...

First of all, at least for me, it's not worth the money, mostly because they poke fun at religion. It's a good show, but no one would really think to go see it if Daniel Radcliffe weren't in it. Apparently it's very graphic, the whole premise is very disturbing, though still interesting.

The main character worships horses, though he doesn't ever "do" anything with them. Daniel is naked on stage for about five minutes, along with a naked woman...

The girls say that the girl in the show looked a lot taller than him. They think that Daniel is about 5'7" or 5'8". He just looked really tiny compared to the other actors...but he's been working out a lot. He's really scrawny, but really muscular.

Again, this is the other girls reporting, not me.

He's a really good actor in person, though. They say that it proves he's capable of doing more than Harry Potter and they really think that he's going to go a long way. And, for a seventeen year old to have done this show since February every night? That's pretty impressive.

The actor who plays Uncle Vernon in Harry Potter was also in the show. The girls say that he's really good, too. There was a very simple setting, mostly just with boxes. They say that the horses were creepy, especially when they come down from the ceiling, but really good actors...they really sounded and acted like horses. It was apparently a VERY weird show and they aren't so much fans.

And it got a standing ovation. But they think that that might just be standard now.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Abri,

Your description of Daniel Radcliffe just cracks me up! I hope in spite of their critical statements of the show your friends had a good time at the play.

I'm just sorry you didn't choose to go; sometimes appreciating your beliefs and learning to tolerate those of others comes from viewing something like Equus. Another thing to remember about this particular production is that it was originally a product of the 1970s; those of us who lived through that era know that the writers of the period were products of the previous decade whose ideas turned the world on its ear as they rebelled against the establishment.

Well, that's my two cents worth. have a great day tomorrow.

Arnel