Monday, January 22, 2007

Jewbiquitous Outing: Dirty Girl

Since Harley and I clearly don't spend enough time together, when CJ invited us to go see a play with him, we jumped at the chance. The play? Dirty Girl. The attendees? Harley and Prettyboy, CJ and me, CJ's coworker, and his girlfriend.

The basic premise is that Dori/Ronnie hates law school, so she answers an ad for an editorial assistant, that "must be comfortable with male nudity." She gets a job at Loverboy/Playgirl magazine and begins her search for a woman who is actually turned on by the magazine (as opposed to the MANY gay readers). The play, which has 5 cast members who take turns playing different roles, started out as a one-woman show. And it shows. Harley and I agreed that it might have been better that way.


I pretty much agree with the review from Backstage.com (link above). The characters hammed it up a bit too much, they would have been better if they were a little less stereotypical and ridiculous. The writing was good, and there were some funny jokes, but as CJ pointed out, if they had spent 5 more minutes on each joke, polishing them, it could have been really great. He, for the record, really enjoyed the play, as did prettyboy. I spent a great deal of time cringing in discomfort (I am kind of prudish). Also, the guys who play beefcakes in the play aren't really that buff. CJ thinks that it was intentional, whereas I thought that it made the play seem even more ridiculous and unbelievable.

One last point, there was a mini-play/commercial at the beginning of the show for a lingerie company called Secrets in Lace. As part of this cross-marketing, a catalogue was given out with the program. Most of the stuff is really retro, and in my opinion, not terribly attractive. Also, if I'm going to buy expensive stockings, 100% nylon isn't a selling point for me. Maybe 100% silk, but then again, I have somewhat expensive taste. Also, I had some issues with the "commercial." First of all, a boss should absolutely NOT give you a promotion based on the fact that you are more/less attractive than your coworker. If you have to resort to showing some leg to get ahead in your chosen field, it is either time to seek a sexual harassment suit, or move on. Secondly, do you really want a guy/girl who wants you only because you are dressed in a sexy manner? If they can't see your beauty/attractiveness through the clothing that makes you comfortable, then they are not someone that you should be with. Ok, rant over.
Long story short? At $18 the play is overpriced. I'd have seen it for $8. Maybe. And would have prefered fewer images of naked people.

6 comments:

LT said...

And would have prefered fewer images of naked people.

Or at least that the naked people shown be more buff?

Anniegetyour said...

LT- the semi-naked guys were the ones who were not buff. The naked people were typical (according to Slate) porn star material. Airbrushed, perfectly tanned, toned, hairless people.

harley said...

I think the writing was pretty terrible, but I have ridiculously high standards. It would have made a cute short story. Very short story.

Anonymous said...

has annie never seen a porno?

Anniegetyour said...

Anon- Nope. Sorry. Sheltered childhood and all that. And then once I hit college I was very conflicted about the degredation of women vs. emancipation of women's sexuality aspect. Also: my love life is quite exciting enough without it.

Amishav said...

Just about any outing is better than sitting at home, so... Glad you went! Even if they were't quite perfect.