268 posts
|
Post by gmoneyoutlaw on Nov 18, 2022 21:07:51 GMT
I'm seeing The Sex Party in a few weeks. Coming in to London from NYC for birthday. Seeing a few pantos, Newsies, Mandela and Bugsy Malone. Question for someone who has seen The Sex Party, is the title a play on words. Is it really about sexual identity and not actually a sex party?
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Nov 19, 2022 7:17:55 GMT
SPOILER >> If a Mod would like to put this in a tag, please do - sorry, I can't remember how. {Spoiler - click to view}
gmoneyoutlaw - it's both.
Imo, the play considers the high-pitched, sometimes febrile nature of discussion around transgender people in sport, in toilets, in changing rooms, and then applies that to an environment where body fluids can be exchanged between consenting adults. There is a twist, or twists.
Perhaps, what we are primarily left with at the end is, partly, how we - not the law or venues or sports - consider a particular kind of relationship (is it heterosexual, homosexual, transexual or a number of other options), but probably more about how we might respond when theory very suddenly becomes a personable, rational, adult, in the flesh, and partly transitioned ...
Younger generations will have had more cause to address this, the average Menier punter not so much. In traditional adult relationships there are also gender/power splits, roles and responsibilities to fulfil, etc. It transfers the Internet screaming match to a real-world, mature adults scenario, for discussion purposes. There is sex, though it happens off-stage (in another room).
I wouldn't say it's a complete success in its high ambitions, though it is a decent thrust at something not easy to portray. Especially given the dearth of theatrical responses to what has been the issue of the moment for quite some while, both in earth years and social media years. Perhaps the tepid response to this effort explains why.
I thought it offered a good amount to chew over, in a clever set-up, and is ambitious for this venue - I'm not convinced the wider society is as engaged with the subject matter as are the young 'uns (Habeas Corpus did pretty well here, in a long run at high prices).
The play is quite some distance from Bugsy Malone.
|
|
2,056 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Nov 26, 2022 22:32:19 GMT
Saw it tonight and while I didn’t dislike it, I think all I can say at this moment in time is ‘hmmm…’
I went to collect my ticket earlier and there was a sign outside the Menier saying the matinee had been cancelled due to an illness in the cast so I wasn’t expecting the evening performance to go ahead, it turns out Amanda Ryan was ill and the character of Magdalena was filled in by someone who had only had two and a half hours rehearsal time : I didn’t get her name but she read the whole play from a script which was initially a bit distracting but she did well considering the circumstances.
The actual play: I wasn’t expecting a modern day Ray Cooney or anything along those lines (some of the audience looked like they had gone to have a leer, but they would have been disappointed, a few glimpses of undies is about as risqué as it got), the first act had a couple of mildly amusing moments but the second act, which is mostly an argument/debate all seemed a bit shoehorned in as if it had to justify its being produced. I thought there was a better play that could have been made about the relationship between Jason Merrells and Lisa Dwans characters but that got an all too brief mention right at the end of the play (not sure about some of the plot choices in the second act either, far too dark and unnecessary, and just breezed over)
The cast were generally good, it was only on the second appearance of the middle aged American guy in sweat pants with his hair in a bun that I realised that was Timothy Hutton so maybe not one for his agent to advertise his availability on Broadway though.
|
|
1,471 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jan 2, 2023 2:49:03 GMT
Rather ironically, I watched The Sex Party this evening completely oblivious to someone's true identity. It was only reading this thread and the programme afterwards that I discovered I had been watching Timothy Hutton, yes the Timothy Hutton, the one I had a crush on 40+ years ago when he won an Oscar.
He may have long lost his boyish good looks but certainly not his acting chops; his portrayal of an unlikeable American visitor to an Islington swingers' party is flawlessly delivered, and his is the most believable of the characters here, mainly because he says what others are thinking in that plain-speaking way that Americans often do, while uptight Brits typically dance around an issue, hypocritically making all the right virtuous noises as their actions belie their real prejudices.
There is a line about throwing in a hand grenade, and that's precisely what writer/director Terry Johnson does here after about 50 minutes. His conceit is, what if you take a group of white liberals, who are already content to deviate from the perceived social norms of monogamy and fidelity and vanilla sex, and see how they cope when you introduce a character who doesn't align with their established gender-identity politics.
It's a brave and timely idea, but the execution fails. The problem is that the characters seem to be there only to serve up particular points of view rather than be fully developed people. I found myself wincing at lines of dialogue that jarred; it was as if the various party guests were taking imposed debating positions rather than speaking naturally and credibly.
Anyone expecting a sex farce is in for a disappointment; there is the odd laugh, but for the most part the evening's events are pretty serious and downbeat. As for the subject matter, I don't think I was any the wiser by the end -- there are no insights here; it merely poses questions and lets people row about the answers, often at quite a superficial level.
Of note was that there were a couple of jokes at the expense of men that had the female half of the audience laughing uproariously and with approval while the rest of us squirmed. That's not bad from a male writer.
While it's not the main focus, I was disappointed that ultimately the piece seems to suggest that sexually free lifestyles lead to trouble. From personal observation of relationships of all flavours, I've seen no correlation between good outcomes (happiness, fulfillment, partnership-longevity) and the rules people follow in their sex lives.
Some of the most content people I know are in very loving relationships but with the freedom to play around separately, while I can think of many relationship disasters where monogamy led to lying and affairs. Conversely, I've seen people in an open relationship leave their partner because they've fallen in love with a casual fling, and there are of course plenty of faithful couples apparently enjoying marital bliss.
We see only the negative aspects in The Sex Party, and it presents only problems when trans people are added to the mix. Actually, it's not that complicated. Some people will be attracted to trans men, some people to trans women, just as some are to tall people, or redheads, or whatever more niche interests they have. Finding a partner with whom you share a mutual sexual attraction is one of life's challenges. It's not easy, whatever your particular predilections. Just be honest about what you really want and meet plenty of people would be my advice. I'm not sure that's what this play is saying though.
Three stars.
Act 1: 19:33-20:33
Act 2: 20:47-21:49
(The 20:33 time is an estimate as I forgot to check my watch.)
|
|
