Image provided by the company
Presented by VEX
AHAHA. Okay. Take a breath. Let me try to make some sense of this. Or, at least, prime you for fever dream nonsense.
Awkwardly squinting into a spotlight, doing his best to be brave, a timid comedian tries to coax a laugh out of us—the titular “ahaha.” The vibe in the room is anxious and expectant. This guy is bombing and it’s excruciating, but also sort of adorable. You can’t look away. He tells us he has to pee and that “they” won’t let him leave unless he gets someone to fill in for him.
Anybody do comedy?
From the audience, a watchful, irritable guy in a suit volunteers. He tells us he works for Goldman Sachs, but now he wants to “save television.”
And then, all hell breaks loose.
We meet the “god of life and art and everything else.” There’s an art film. Disney appears as a super-villain atop bags of cartoon money. There are giant hands and lips, fight scenes with dead family members, and a popular celebrity figures into the scenario with a trademarked sword.
Is it an allegory? Is it a prank? Is it post-dramatic? Is it bullshit?
I had absolutely no clue what was going on or how to react. It feels like it’s supposed to mean something, but does it? It feels like they are making it up on the spot, but I can tell they aren’t. There’s craft here—the set-ups and execution are relatively complex.
It’s wild, y’all. Completely unhinged. Oddly specific. I’ve rarely been confronted with an experience that so aggressively deflects any attempt at interpretation.
The performance I caught was late at night and very thinly attended. I’m not sure it would work any other way. Daylight and a crowd would, I imagine, undermine this bizarre, indulgent effort by allowing you to properly orient yourself.
I’m glad I saw it and that it was short. I’m not sure I would recommend it or even know how to, but I was transfixed. It was anarchic, disruptive and thrilling.
I took a “Drama Criticism” course. This review should be part of that course. I love this review. The show was not on my radar. Is now.
Saw it. Wish I hadn’t. I agree with everything Istvan wrote, except I was not transfixed, and I did not find it thrilling. There was some talent in the room, but despite multiple aspects changing frequently, some parts felt too long. I enjoyed the fight with the deceased relative, the celebrity, the return of the giant lips, and the corrupted deus ex machina.
Saw it. Wish I hadn’t. I agree with everything Istvan wrote, except I was not transfixed, and I did not find it thrilling. There was some talent in the room, but despite multiple aspects changing frequently, some parts felt too long. I enjoyed the fight with the deceased relative, the celebrity, the return of the giant lips, and the corrupted deus ex machina.
Thank you Istvan. Your review gave me an inkling that I could like this and I very much did. This is what Fringe theatre should be about. It was experimental, daring, adventurous, unexpected, defied interpretation and not afraid to be silly. I saw it as a delightful mish mash, a sort of cauldron of mixed ingredients of today’s superficialities. One can interpret why the story focuses on a critic of a bad comedian. I was engaged even if some of it was over the top and campy. The cast committed to creating an atmosphere. I loved little touches like the main character conversing to the audience with asides, the jokes that come out through the story and loved the use of different media. It won’t be for everyone but I would suggest that people see it to determine that.
Same thing here as Jonathon except different result. From your review, I had a sense I would like this. I really did! This play is what Fringe should really be about. I love adventurous plays that take me into the unexpected. The cast created a great atmosphere. I see it as a sort of cauldron of mixed ingredients of certain societal superficialities. Not for everyone but I would tell people to try it if enticed by the review.