Critics just Criticise

10:27 AM

It's like theirs JOBS! Did you read what they said about Oi! Sleeping Beauty!? I was OUTRAGED!! Well, not really THAT outraged. In fact, I never knew there was a review on it until Ebi and Duane told the rest about it. They were saying that they gave us a bad review. I couldn't believe it. I thought we did okay. I mean, the play's awesome. How can they give us a bad review? I didn't know what the reviewer said since I am the LAST person on earth who would read the papers unless there's latest gossip about my favourite celebrity. So, I wasn't too bothered about it. I thought Ivan Heng was gonna be pissed with us. But he wasn't. I thought he would ask us to PUMP up our performance but he didn't. He said that we just have to keep telling the story and have fun. It goes to show: "Sticks and stones may break his bones, but Bad Reviews can never hurt him". Perhaps he's just used to reviewers and knew that sometimes they just don't get things. He said that it's fine. I thought it was fine as well. I knew my friends enjoyed the show. I knew many people who have enjoyed the show.

Allow me to quote some lines from the article:
"But the second act may have been a different play."
"From here on, the main entertainment was watching the cast chalk up their many barbs against the Government" - Okay seriously, WHAT??!!! I don't remember anyone chalking so-called 'BARBS' at the Government. Barbs! For Pete Sake!
"It was for the children's benefit, but their wide eyes, careful enunciations and loud voices - which threatened to crack - made for bad acting, and even worse singing, with many sour notes spiking the air throughout." - That's just nasty. I admit that that Friday night, there were some bad notes because it had been quite a week but JEEZ!! This woman make it seem like we were some cheap-o, non-talented cast. Let's see her sing, dance and do backflips all at once, eh? Let's see if her notes don't go all 'SOUR'.
"In the end, the marriage of kiddie entertainment with biting social commentary - on the death penalty and low birth rate, among other things - did not quite gel, with the critiques buried in saccharine story-telling." - Excuse me, but there was no so-called 'social commentary' being commented in the first place. All the king said was that anyone owning batik would be punishable by Death. This is because he loves his daughter so much and wants to protect her. It wasn't even a pun! And Kings have rights to do that, y'know. And what's this about low-birth rate? It was in the ORIGINAL story that it was the King and Queen's first daughter and that they have been trying very hard for a child. And when they lost their first child, the Fairies naturally tried to cheer them up by saying that they could try for another. What's so wron about that? I think it's perfectly rational! What really bugged me was the 'kiddie entertainment' part. I'm like JEEZ!! It's not KIDDIE, for Pete's sake!

But there were some good stuff that that Woman wrote about:
"Chua Enlai, Gani Abdul Karim and Mohamed Helmi Fita - as a Chinese, Indian and Malay fairy respectively - were hilariously over the top"
"Kudos to the costume designer Moe Kasim for his gorgeous creations"
"It was still an infectious, feel-good show that was quite edgy in context"

That Woman is really... thinking too much. This play is all about fun and living life to the fullest. It has morals. It's about making your dreams, your own memories and not be too caught in 'productivity'. It's truly a pure and enjoyable play. There is no pokes and stabs on the Government. It's about love and romance and magic. What is so 'biting' and 'edgy' about that? Seriously, some people just don't get it. Those who are going to watch the play: Keep an open heart and mind and simply have fun and good hearty laugh.

You Might Also Like


Like us on Facebook