Second review

Our first bad review.  Ouch!

The 2010 review of the debut was very positive, and the Vue gave us 4 stars in its review, so it was an unpleasant surprise to only get 2 stars in the Journal's review by Gordon Kent. So, two reviewers liked it, and Mr. Kent? …not so much.  I guess it's a matter of taste; it's just not his cup or tea.

Still, I'm a bit miffed by Mr. Kent's suggestion the play's entire context is unrealistic. Firstly, many fringe plays are whole-heartedly unrealistic, and secondly, the script's inspiration came from an actual, true, real life event.  Years ago an auditioning actor turned down a role because she did not want her first kiss to be on stage. At the time I was annoyed, as I wanted to give her the part, but I was also intrigued.  Her first kiss was very important to her, what if she had accepted the role?

A first kiss isn't going to change history (at least not typically), but it is a first, it does have a place.  This light, little comedy plays with that notion, and does not pretend to do anything more.  The other reviewers were able to judge the play in its own context, and they gave comments like:

"a really adorable little piece"   "clever plot and earnest performances"   "had me nearly on the floor"   "hilarious … and immeasurably sweet"   "utterly charmed"   "adept script engages from start to sweet, sweet finish"

Where they so wrong?  No, I think they took the play for what it was.  They didn't demand something dark and disturbing, or an emphasis on strong social commentary, or no-holds-barred improv, or an exploration of something forbidden.  Kiss Within A Kiss is just a good little comedy, with decent acting, with a modest set à la fringe, which (at least before Mr. Kent's review) everyone really seems to like.

© Jim Herchak 2012