Equus

[Geoff Bannister]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
>
> There was a review of Equus in the Washington Post a few weeks ago. At 
> first I thought the play was coming  here, but no, the review was from 
> Broadway.
> 
> The writer stated that Daniel R did an adequate job, but his fame 
> pulled attention to his character and away from the therapist. 
> According to the review the therapist, not the young man, is the real 
> main character of the play. The reviewer also said Richard Griffiths 
> did an outstanding job.
> 
> Just wondering what those of you who saw the play think of this review?

Geoff:
Obviously one of those reviewers who believes that part of his job 
description is to always find something to complain about....

I saw the London production and was greatly impressed by both. But, 
as has been said I think, the play primarily revolves around Alan  and 
the action in which he reveals "Why did he do it?" and not Dysart  who 
is trying to say on the one hand "This is why I think he did it" and on 
the other "..but I'm darned envious of him."

Alan demonstrates the irrationality and apparent immortality 
of teenagers, whereas Dysart is the world-weary middle aged 
guy for whom this marvellous time for being iconoclastic and 
uninhibited has faded or not even been part of his life.

And I think that Dan and Richard capture those two opposing 
facets perfectly. So I shall revert to my teen age style and blow
 a raspberry at the reviewer as being a killjoy and nitpicker. So 
there.
:-)