Applause! Applause! Review of Popesical: A Papal Musical Comedy at Theatre 80 by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens

This review of Adam Overett's Popesical: A Papal Musical Comedy at Theatre 80 was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

Popesical: A Papal Musical Comedy

Book, Music & Lyrics by Adam Overett

Directed & Choreographed by Drew Geraci

Theatre 80

80 St. Mark's Place

New York, New York 10003

Reviewed 8/20/15 

The 19th Annual New York International Fringe Festival has over 200 shows in its lineup. When they were announced, I recommended Popesical: A Papal Musical Comedy (and three other shows) to the membership of the Beaux Arts Society (www.BeauxArtsSociety.org), a prestigious arts organization founded in 1857. If they listened to my advice and purchased tickets at fringenyc.org, then they are set to see one of most amazing and entertaining new musicals of the year. If they, or you, have not yet purchased your reasonably priced $18.00 tickets, do so now (I mean now! Even before reading the rest of this review!) because otherwise it may be too late. There are very few tickets left to this hilarious, irreverent, five-star play with its stellar cast and outrageously funny premise. If you miss out, don't worry. I guarantee Popesical is destined for a very long Off-Broadway, and possible Broadway, run. The only problem is that by then, you will need to pay eight to ten times more for a ticket but it will still be worth your time, effort and money to see this memorable and moving musical comedy.

The premise is that the Pope is dead and the remaining Cardinals must gather in the Sistine Chapel to elect a new Pope by 2/3 vote. This process has historically been secret, but now all is revealed. A most exalted, brass, phallus-looking, chimney of St. Peter (together with a recorded soundtrack added in the 1980s) guides the Cardinals through required exercises that challenge their physical abilities, mental acuity, and spiritual purity. The Roman Catholic Cardinals are required to play Biblical Chairs, The Ten Commandment Hot Potato, and Sinner In The Middle prior to voting. 

The problem is that the old Pope, "in his loving goodness, made a Cardinal of just about anyone," and now that most of the members of the College of Cardinals died on a Caribbean Cruise, all who are left are "Heathens, Whores & Homos," says the conservative, hunchback, trollish, tyrant Cardinalissimo Francisco Franco (Rachel Coloff, Urinetown). She is a leading contender along with the eager, spirited, and charismatic Cardinal McCafferty (Stephen Christopher Anthony, The Book of Mormon), a young Irish lad (suffering from the Irish Curse) who questions the entire process and has an attraction (which he won't admit to himself) to Cardinal Bergenstein (David Perlman, Baby, It's You!), who was brought up Jewish until he got the "calling" to join the priesthood. Also competing for the honor of being named the next Pope are the shy Aussie Cardinal Wallaby (Susan J. Jacks, Forbidden Broadway); the mute, unitard-clad, ballet-dancing Cardinal Fouette (Lucas Thompson, Cats), who is seduced in the Sistine Chapel by the oversexed, Southern belle, former mental patient Cardinal St. Louis (Danette Holden, Annie & Shrek The Musical); the foul, mouthed New Jersey Cardinal Robin (Alexa Green, Wicked), who can't put down her cell phone and wants to be Pope for the clothing; and the unflappable, non-Asian looking Cardinal Hu-Jin Chao (Jason Veasey, The Lion King).

Each and every actor in this musical was exceptional and extraordinary. The songs were upbeat, funny, and oftentimes moving. I particularly liked "Pope!,", "He Could Be The One," "I Love You Always," and "Different." I look forward to the cast album coming out so I can listen to the songs in this musical over and over again. Many are destined to become classics. The only problem was with the sound system that crackled and interfered with the audience's enjoyment of the show. A few of the female performers had microphone problems and I was unable to hear the lyrics clearly even though I was sitting in the second row. There are a few things I would immediately change. The first is that even though Cardinalissimo Francisco Franco's speech impediment is "funny" (after all, who doesn't laugh at other people's handicaps), it was still difficult to sometimes understand what she was saying (was that "The Face Of Our Faith"?). Second, while I easily can suspend my disbelief (for example, accepting that all the other Cardinals died together when a Caribbean Cruise Ship sank), it is hard for me to accept the outrageous assertion that the Cardinalissimo is the Baby who ate Cardinal Wallaby's dingo, or that the tall, male, well-endowed, African-American looking Asian Cardinal Hu-Jin Chao is really Patricia, the sister of Cardinal Robin from New Jersey. These cross the line to the point they detract rather than add to the story, but all are an easy fix. 

I kept a smile on my face from the opening number to the final selection of the new Pope. The musical's tone, in its silliness, reminded me very much of Nunsense, but Adam Overett, who wrote the book for this musical hit a home run both by making all of the characters likable (with the exception of Cardinalissimo Francisco Franco), and by interweaving into the story a serious, first-love attraction between Cardinal McCafferty (Pure as a Pearl from Perth) and Cardinal Bergenstein, who had some of the funniest lines in the musical. Cardinal Bergenstein asks whether "it would be wrong to ask him out for some communion wine?" and after he comes upon Cardinal McCafferty looking in the Bible for clues regarding how to select the next Pope, Cardinal Bergenstein suggests the answer may not be in there. After all, he says, "the Bible doesn't say anything about sharing a sleeping bag with a fellow Cardinal and there's nothing wrong with that!" McCafferty: "What?", Bergenstein: "What?" - just hilarious! Then there are more serious moments such as when McCafferty insists, "I am not." Bergenstein says, "Yes you are." McCafferty: "Are what?" Bergenstein: You are different. You are special and that's O.K.!" In the end, Cardinal McCafferty accepts the "g-word" to describe himself. He admits, "I am guilty. I need to be myself. I have lied to all of you, and I have betrayed him - someone who loved me!"

You will also learn that "Hope is a fickle slut, and always has been," and that if you choose to abandon your honesty and integrity because you hold the cynical opinion that "what the faithful believe is all that matters," then you should at least make sure you are walking out the right window onto a balcony when your moment comes.

Popesical: A Papal Musical Comedy is a politically incorrect, blasphemous, totally offensive, breath of fresh air that will be around for decades. It is destined to become a Cult Classic. If you patronize the show and help it achieve its Papal Dreams, they may even eventually decide to set free the "little boy they keep chained behind the organ"). Its message is that after all else, it is love that matters most and that, with love, both you and the world can be transformed. Now that the new Pope has been selected, let's party and papalize! The only thing that was missing from the after party of this FringePLUS event was the cast singing Tom Lehrer's The Vatican Rag, which would have been a perfect ending to a perfect evening. For more information about Popesical: A Papal Musical Comedy, visit https://www.facebook.com/Popesical?fref=ts

Applause! Applause! Review of The Underpants Godot at The Secret Theatre by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens

This review of Duncan Pflaster's The Underpants Godot at The Secret Theatre was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

The Underpants Godot

Written & Directed by Duncan Pflaster

The Secret Theatre

44-02 23rd Street

Long Island City, New York 11101

Reviewed 8/18/15 at 7:00 p.m.

The underlying premise of this play is that while Samuel Beckett requires the main characters in Waiting For Godot to wear hats, boots, and "rags," that he does not necessarily dictate they have to wear clothes. As a result, this production, currently in rehearsal, will feature Estragon and Vladimir in tighty whities; Estragon naked in one scene; and Pozzo in red long-johns with an open butt flap. The Director also intends to explicitly interpret the play as having a gay theme with gay characters and plans to have Estragon and Vladimir kiss right after they embrace making the subtext into text that was never written or intended. It is implied he also wishes to bring out the master/slave BDSM dimension suggested in the relationship of Pozzo and Lucky. Enter Tara, a representative of the estate of Samuel Beckett, who has been alerted by an anonymous call to check out this production, who someone obviously felt was taking interpretation and adaptation far beyond the intent of the author. Tara takes the position that any new spin on Waiting For Godot must not be explicitly contradicted by the text and that even a "pantless" version could be authorized so long as it "serves and enlightens" the text. The problem with this is that anyone who has read or seen Waiting For Godot remembers there is an explicit reference to "trousers" in the very last lines of the play. This inconvenient truth reveals the anticipated ending just moments after the play begins, destroying any suspense that may have been intended.    

The characters in this play engage in preachy philosophical debates as to whether we should honor a playwright's words or his intent, and whether a script written decades ago needs to be updated and interpreted in order to remain relevant to modern audiences. Samuel Beckett, when alive, authorized an all-black version of Waiting For Godot in the Republic of South Africa even allowing Pozzo to be portrayed as a landowner, but he drew the line at having two women in the lead "because they don't have prostates" (and Vladimir is required, in the script, to leave the stage to pee). Another argument raised in favor of adaptation and interpretation is that many of the cultural references written into a play become outdated over time. Discussing Shakespeare, it is said only pompous elites like his work because they get all the obscure jokes and think themselves superior to the masses. But then again, the analogy between Shakespeare and Beckett is flawed because Shakespeare's work is in the public domain while Samuel Beckett's plays are not. You could argue that having Estragon and Vladimir in underpants serves the original intent of the playwright in the sense that, like with wearing rags, the two main characters are stripped down to their very essence. But on the other hand, having the main characters played by younger actors takes away the implied history both men have with each other. Still, I think having young actors play the parts could, under the right circumstances, bring a vibrancy and new perspective to the script. 

The star of the show is Alyssa Simon (www.alyssasimon.com), who played Tara, the representative of the executors of the Samuel Beckett estate. She is a very talented, charismatic actress who shined and brought life to this play whenever she appeared on stage. Her best line was after she "encouraged" the Director to strip down to his skivvies before stepping into the role of Estragon. He asked, "Satisfied?" to which she sarcastically responded, "Electrified!" The other standout performer was David J. Wiens (www.davidjwiens.com), who was extraordinary as Biff and Pozzo. Appearing with his red, long-john, union suit butt flap open, his cheery, cherry, cherubic ass stole the show. His character reminded the audience that as we go through life, "all of our metaphorical butt flaps are open," and while waiting to find out whether Tara was going to close down the show, and in direct contradiction to the line "nothing to be done," he said, "We have to take action to see what's happening to us. We don't just want to get fucked. We want to know the reason why!" Hilarious! 

Unfortunately, I felt the other actors in the cast fell short of being as entertaining. It is not that any of them are bad actors. It is just that I felt they were miscast for these roles. Pierce V. Lo and Roberto Alexander, who played Vladimir and Estragon respectively, had far too many distracting tattoos and body flaws, and all of Jason Pintar's energy (Kevin/Lucky) went into one monologue that flew by like a shooting star. Patrick Walsh, who played Doug the Director, was just annoying from the moment he appeared on stage to warn the audience about taking pictures to how he interacted with his fellow actors. Amber Rhabb on Tech kept the lights too low during the brief naked scenes and no one thought to mop the floor of the stage before this entry to The Secret Theatre's UNFringed Festival began. The advertising for this show featured attractive boys in briefs, but that is not what is presented in The Underpants Godot. I would bet that if any of these characters (other than Tara & Biff) wanted to jump into bed with a random audience member, that they would be kicked out even if they were willing to pay. Such is not the formula for performing a play that was allegedly intended to be homoerotic. In the end, all we got were boys standing in their underwear and gay characters throwing accusations and attitude at other cast members. 

The Underpants Godot was an interesting experiment and a vehicle to launch a discussion regarding the limits of acceptable interpretation and adaptation, but in the end, nothing was resolved and the issues were raised more in inserted monologues than through the unfolding story itself. That, combined with the concerns I already discussed, made this play a disappointment to me. The playwright didn't even have a press packet ready for those who might have come to review it. Despite it being the opening production on the opening night of the UNFringed Festival, Duncan Pflaster told me he hadn't expected any critics to attend the show. Mr. Pflaster, like Vladimir, might say in response, "Nothing to be done," but that is not quite true. Because as Vladimir reminds himself, "You have not yet tried everything." Duncan Pflaster needs to take this to heart. In my opinion, this play needs a re-write and better casting before it is ready for an extended run Off-Broadway or at some other local or community theater. For now, "shall we go?" I recommend against it.

In the summer of 2013, The First Annual UNFringed Festival brought bold and daring new works to The Secret Theatre in Long Island City. Now in its third year, there are many shows playing that are worthy of your consideration. For more information, visit http://www.secrettheatre.com/UNFRINGED.html 

Applause! Applause! Review of Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt at Drom by Dr. Philip Ernest Schoenberg

This review of Terry Baum's Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt at Drom was written by Dr. Philip Ernest Schoenberg and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt

Written & Performed by Terry Baum
Additional Writing Contribution by Pat Bond

Directed by Adele Prandini

Dramaturgy by Carolyn Myers

Drom

85 Avenue A

New York, New York 10009

Reviewed 8/14/15 

Hick: A Love Story, written and performed by Terry Baum, directed by Adele Prandini, and dramaturgy by Carolyn Myers is playing at Drom as part of the Fringe Festival. It is about the 30-year romance of Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok, an Associated Press reporter assigned to cover the future First Lady on the campaign trail. They became fast friends and later, Lorena literally lived in the White House for a time, having a bed in Eleanor Roosevelt's Dressing Room. Ms. Hickok was referred to by the press as the First Friend, but there were a lot of winking eyes at the time. According to Hickok's version of events, their relationship was common knowledge. In her words, "everybody knew."

Extramaritial sexual relations by Presidents and others residing in the White House is nothing new. Just think of JFK and his brother. But the prize for the most prolific offender would have to go to President Bill Clinton. Hillary was clearly aware of these transgressions, but instead of divorcing him, she agreed to stay married for the sake of both their political careers. I am certain she was angry when Bill's liaisons became public knowledge but she closed ranks and helped him clean up his mess by defaming the women who were his victims and by encouraging her contacts in the women's movement to do the same. President Clinton's sordid entanglements with Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, and Monica Lewinsky drew barely a squeak of protest from the powerful writers, lawyers, activists, politicians, and academics who call themselves feminists. We have little reason to suspect any of this behavior has changed since he left the White House. It is just a time bomb waiting to go off in the Hillary Clinton campaign for President.

In contrast, here, we have a romance between two consenting adults in a non-traditional relationship. It is, technically, adultery and a crime, because Eleanor is married to Franklin Roosevelt. However, theirs is a political partnership hiding a dysfunctional marriage. After she caught her husband having an extramarital affair with her social secretary, she punished him by withholding sexual relations. She agreed not to divorce him so he could continue to advance in his political career, because in those days, the American public tended not to vote for divorced candidates for any elective office. That changed with the election of President Ronald Reagan. As Eleanor's children got older, they were sympathetic to their father over the issue and her daughter Anna actually facilitated FDR's liaisons with one his mistresses. FDR wrote his will to leave half of the income from his estate to Marguerite "Missy" LeHand (FDR's Private Secretary for 21 years who had been disabled by a stroke), whose exact relationship with FDR is debated, but it became nonoperational since she died before Eleanor.

This was a different time in America in which great privacy was accorded to the President's family. The newspapers were not looking for scandal and, if it fell in their lap, they were reluctant to print it. Newspaper reporters and photographers collaborated to hide the true extent of Franklin Roosevelt's handicaps caused by polio. Indeed, they formed a softball team to play the summer baseball circuit in the Hudson River Valley as the President's official team. At Eleanor's request, the Secret Service did not "protect her" when she went away to New York for the weekends (sometimes to meet Lorena Hicks) but she did agree to keep a gun in her purse.

We meet Lorena Hicks in 1968 as she is contemplating whether or not to leave Eleanor Roosevelt's correspondence to the FDR Presidential Library Archives. She already destroyed a number of letters containing juicy stuff that would indicate a passionate romantic and sexual relationship with the First Lady took place but she is conflicted as to what to do with the rest of the letters. It has been six years since Eleanor's death and she has no idea what her friend would want her to do. During this one-woman play, Terry Baum becomes Lorena Hickok to channel her life, her hopes, he disappointments, her failures, her successes, and her loves. Baum's extraordinary portrayal of Lorena Hickok's love for Eleanor Roosevelt reminds me of a romantic moment I observed in the East Village just before I gave a walking tour. Two men from Minneapolis that joined the tour sat on a bench opposite one another. They looked like a pair of lumberjacks complete with beards dressed appropriately for the autumn weather. I saw bliss on both their faces as they each looked into each others' eyes. It was just the purest example of true love I had ever seen between two human beings.

This love is brought out perfectly in the play by Terry Baum as she narrates the ups and downs of Lorena Hickok's relationship with Eleanor Roosevelt. We get a picture of the desperate condition of the country through her eyes in the early days of the New Deal. Eleanor Roosevelt is shown to be very much a romantic, but she was too shrewd to let any personal, intimate relationship undermine her public image or her ability to make a difference. Together, they brought out the best in one another and made the country a better place. It was Lorena Hicks who suggested Eleanor have a daily news column, "My Day," to publicize what she was doing as First Lady and it was she who also suggested Eleanor Roosevelt hold Press Conferences before "all lady reporters" so they wouldn't lose their jobs during the Depression. 

Accurately reflecting the decisions Eleanor Roosevelt made, she once wrote, "One's philosophy is not best expressed in words; it is expressed in the choices one makes...and the choices we make are ultimately our responsibility."

Applause! Applause! Review of Garrett Heater's Lincoln's Blood at the Flamboyan Theater (at the Clemente) by Dr. Philip Ernest Schoenberg

This review of Garrett Heater's Lincoln's Blood at the Flamboyan Theater (in the Clemente Soto Velez Cultural & Educational Center) was written by Dr. Philip Ernest Schoenberg and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

Lincoln's Blood

Written & Directed by Garrett Heater

Costumes by Debbie Ritchey (CNY Costumes)

Flamboyan Theater (at the Clemente)

107 Suffolk Street

New York, New York 10002

Reviewed 8/14/15 

When a crime takes place, especially a murder, we too often forget the collateral damage that is done to friends and relatives of the victim. Lincoln's Blood, Garrett Heater's latest superbly written play, investigates those consequences and successfully depicts the effect the assassination had on those closest to Lincoln, those who were there by chance, and those who were involved in the conspiracy. All the actors in this play did a superb job but Ryan Santiago, who played Booth, was particularly outstanding in the role of John Wilkes Booth, actually making him into a sympathetic character. Of course, plays could be written about other people and families who were deeply affected by the assassination, such as that of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd, but those stories will have to wait for another day.

Lincoln's Blood presents us with three particular characters having flashbacks as two are in mental asylums and one is just about to be hanged. Each has two primary characters in their memories - Major Henry Rathbone coupled with his fiancee Clara Harris, Mrs. Mary Todd Lincoln paired with her dressmaker Elizabeth Keckley, and Mary Surratt joined with the assassin, John Wilkes Booth. Mrs. Lincoln, Major Rathbone, and Mary Surratt are all tragic characters. The scenes switch back and forth along parallel time lines. The history portrayed in the script is remarkably accurate except for the suggestion that Booth was romantically involved with Surratt and used her infatuation with him in order to get her to join his cause and aid in his conspiracy. All three highly engrossing memory plays take place in a remarkably staged set. The three scenes take place on different parts of the stage and the intimate setting of the scenes almost makes us feel as if we are part of the action.

The play opens with the self-centered Major Rathbone (played by Garrett Heater) insisting that his fiancee Clara Harris (played by Maya Dwyer) join him in a game of cards. The couple is clearly in love. Clara demurs to get ready to look her best in order to join her friend Mary Todd Lincoln and her husband at the theater. Rathbone tries to talk her out of going since they were not the first, second, or even third couple to be invited. He points out what termagant Mrs. Lincoln is. Clara still wants to go so she can support her girlfriend. When the Lincolns' carriage arrives, Rathbone, not really prepared, reluctantly joins the Lincoln entourage. The memory of this encounter is really Rathbone's attempt, in retrospect, to imagine what would have happened had Clara sat down for the card game and whether the President would still have been killed had they not joined him in the box that night.

Mrs. Mary Todd Lincoln (portrayed by Kate Huddleston), who had several idees fixes, manages to keep them in check. However, she does have a temper, demonstrates that she has a very sharp tongue, and imagines that other women are trying to grab the limelight away from her. Going to Ford Theatre will be her opportunity to shine socially and outmaneuver people who she feels are her rivals. With peace having been achieved, Mary's paranoia is held in check for the moment and she is very happy. She confides in Mrs. Elizabeth Keckley (portrayed by Karin Franklin-King), her personal modiste, that she is a shopaholic who owes $27,000 to department stores in New York. To put things into perspective, Abraham Lincoln received a presidential salary of $25,000 (the equivalent of $750,000 in today's money when adjusted for inflation). She calculates she may be able to shake down some Republican Congressmen who she fancies owes her husband for political favors. Keckley manages to reassure Mary without being subservient to her.

Mary Surratt (acted by Karis Wiggins) develops a relationship with John Wilkes Booth in which she helps him carry out his dream of conspiracy against the Union and Abraham Lincoln. John Wilkes Booth, envious of his brothers, Edwin and Junius Brutus Jr,, wants to do something that will make him more famous and well-respected than either of his brothers or father. Hence, the assassination plot, which he feels will make him the avenging angel of the Confederacy and spark a second uprising that will overthrow the Union government. Ryan Santiago plays John so well that we like him despite his pomposity. We see him as a rational person, a patriot, plotting against the President. He then carries out his deed just as Act One comes to a close.

We next see Major Rathbone and Clara Harris with blood on their clothing due to the consequences of the assassination. Like an episode out of The Twilight Zone, Major Rathbone, while living in an asylum, has constant flashbacks where he tries to imagine how he might have acted or responded differently. Rathbone cannot shake the idee fixe that he could have done more to save the President or capture his assailant. He is unable to move on with his life despite the entreaties of Clara Harris and kills her several years later. Major Henry Rathbone is living in a closed loop in his own head. None of his scenarios have a happy ending, despite the supposed advantage of hindsight. A veteran of several Civil War battles, the Major is an unfortunate example of untreated PTSD.

The assassination of Abraham Lincoln makes his wife Mary Todd Lincoln even more dysfunctional. At one point, her oldest son Robert puts her in a mental asylum in Batavia, Illinois by order of the Court. (Not in the play: Despite her mental problems, she becomes functional enough to get released from the asylum but never forgives her son for putting her in there in the first place. Many of her defenders argue her son put her into the mental asylum more to spare himself from the embarrassment of her behavior than to really help her mentally.) The flashbacks indicate she suffered a nearly complete meltdown. She is no longer able to keep her personality defects in check, but instead now allows her temper, tongue, and paranoia full reign. No one's loyalty is good enough for her including her long-suffering friend Elizabeth Keckley, who wrote a book to defend her and also raised money to help her. Keckley movingly relates a dream Abraham Lincoln shared with her - that of the death of a President in the White House. We really end up hating Mary Todd Lincoln far more than we could ever hate John Wilkes Booth.

Mary Surratt rots in her jail cell where she hopes she will not be hanged for her participation in the conspiracy to assassinate Abraham Lincoln. In a flashback of memory, John Wilkes Booth comes to her as self-centered and concerned only about himself. He is shocked the South regards him as a villain. His deed is seen as that of a coward that will cause revenge against those who supported the Confederacy. Booth treats Mary and the audience to snippets of his finest moments on the stage as he mentally falls apart. He commits the equivalent of suicide by Federal soldier as opposed to being burned alive in a barn that has been set ablaze to smoke him out. We get to observe Booth's final delusional moments and Surratt's resignation when she realizes President Johnson has sealed her fate and that she will, in fact, become the first woman ever executed by the federal government. 

The play successfully portrays the immense amount of collateral damage an assassination or murder can have on the survivors. Our nation, North and South, was traumatized by the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, and Lincoln's Blood enables you to feel the dramatic and deeply emotional impact of that notorious act. It provides you with the opportunity to view this historical event through a different lens and perspective. From a broader philosophical viewpoint, one leaves the play with the understanding that life is short and can end or be tragically altered for anyone of us at any time. Knowing that to be true, I recall the following quotation of Abraham Lincoln, which we would all do well to keep in mind, "In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."

Applause! Applause! Review of Garrett Heater's Lincoln's Blood at the Flamboyan Theater (at the Clemente) by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens

This review of Garrett Heater's Lincoln's Blood at the Flamboyan Theater (in the Clemente Soto Velez Cultural & Educational Center) was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

Lincoln's Blood

Written & Directed by Garrett Heater

Costumes by Debbie Ritchey (CNY Costumes)

Flamboyan Theater (at the Clemente)

107 Suffolk Street

New York, New York 10002

Reviewed 8/14/15 

What do know about President Abraham Lincoln's assassination? If you are an average citizen, you probably know John Wilkes Booth, an actor desperate to aid the dying Confederacy, shot Lincoln at Ford's Theatre. If you are above average in terms of your knowledge of history, you will know the President and his wife were attending a performance of Our American Cousin on April 14, 1865, just five days after General Robert E. Lee's surrender at Appomattox Court House. You might also know that after shooting the President, John Wilkes Booth jumped onto the stage injuring his leg before escaping through the back of the theater. (Some heard Booth cry out "Sic semper tyrannis" while others heard him say, "The South is avenged!)" Booth was later caught and killed. His co-conspirators, each assigned to murder a different leader in the government, failed in their goals, and the injured President was carried across the street to the Petersen House, where he died the next morning. John Wilkes Booth had imagined there would be celebrations and that the South would rise again now that Lincoln was dead, but instead of being viewed as a hero by Confederate sympathizers, he was reviled as a coward (called a "misguided, yellow-bellied, asp" by Southern newspapers) who would be the cause of severe retaliation against the South by an angry North. 

Lincoln's Blood focuses on the other people who were deeply and devastatingly affected by the assassination, which included President Lincoln's wife, Mary Todd Lincoln (whose spending habits, abrasive opinions, and haughty demeanor made her an isolated figure in the White House); Elizabeth Keckley (Mrs. Lincoln's African-American seamstress and closest friend who later wrote a tell-all book entitled Behind The Scenes In The Lincoln White House: Memories Of An African-American Seamstress, chronicling her life as a slave before buying her freedom through her appointment as a dressmaker to the First Lady. The act of publishing the book, which was deemed unfavorable to Mrs. Lincoln, ostracized her from Washington society); Major Henry Rathbone (who was wounded trying to apprehend Booth in the box and later, continuously recreated in his mind what happened on the evening of the assassination to ponder whether he could have done something differently in order to have prevented the President's death); Clara Harris (Rathbone's fiancee, who was also in the box sitting next to Mrs. Lincoln on the night of the assassination. The white dress she was wearing, supposedly covered in Lincoln's blood was kept by her following her marriage to Henry. It was later thought to be cursed and was bricked up in their bedroom closet. Clara is eventually murdered by her jealous and deranged husband who suffered from guilt, depression, obsessive-compulsive thoughts, and probably PTSD); Mary Surratt (executed for harboring at her Boarding House the men connected to the assassination); and John Wilkes Booth (who interacts with Mary Surratt, detailing his aborted kidnapping plot to get President Lincoln to release Confederate prisoners and asking her to deliver various packages to different locations). These individuals suffered consequences as a result of Lincoln's death that are not often focused on. They were the unintended collateral damage of the decision to kill the President and that is what this play is about.

Garrett Heater meticulously researched the facts he included in his script. As a result, Lincoln's Blood is historically accurate with the possible exception of his suggestion that Mary Surratt may have been motivated more by her infatuation with John Wilkes Booth than by her commitment to the Southern cause. While waiting in prison for the appointed time of her execution, Mrs. Surratt reflects on the many flirtations and interactions she had with John Wilkes Booth and wonders now whether she was misled by a man who had no real feelings for her (after all, Booth had five other girlfriends, one of which was his fiancee). Now, Mrs. Surratt, wondering how she got to the point of being hours away from her execution, would prefer "life over blind allegiance." 

The interactions between Surratt and Booth are one of the three mini-plays being simultaneously unfolded on different timelines before the audience on stage. The second mini-drama involves Major Henry Rathbone and his step-sister Clara Harris. Major Rathbone, having already failed to prevent the President's assassination, spends years going over every detail in his head regarding the decisions he made just before and just after the assassination wondering whether he could have done something differently to effect an alternative outcome, but it always turns out the same. The third mini-story involves First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln and her seamstress, Elizabeth Keckley. We learn of Mrs. Lincoln's jealousy, neediness, and pettiness, as well as her sharp tongue (Major Rathbone is heard to quip, "If they had shot her out of a cannon at the Confederates, the war would have been over in a day."). We also hear Elizabeth recall the premonition President Lincoln had regarding his own death. He supposedly dreamt there was a death in the White House. Approaching a mourner during a dream, he asked, "who is in the coffin," to which the person responded, "the President."

The writing is non-linear and broken into many scenes from before and after the assassination of President Lincoln, who does not appear as a character in this play. Garrett Heater's inspired writing is high-quality and makes for an intense and compelling theater experience. However, given that each of the three mini-dramas is unfolding along different timelines and, in each, we are sometimes in the past and other times in the present, it is easy to get confused. We are not always able to determine when, or even if, Mary Todd Lincoln is in her room in the White House, somewhere else, or in Bellevue Asylum. Similarly, I had no idea when Major Rathbone was at home or in a German Asylum for the Criminally Insane because the same bed was used. As for Mary Surratt's story, we could easily tell when she was at her Boarding House or waiting for execution in her jail cell, but it was not clear when we were witnessing reality and when we were observing memories. There was also one scene between John Wilkes Booth and Mary Surratt that was so similar I thought the actors had made a mistake and accidently performed the scene twice. These confusing elements detracted from the audiences' understanding of the play. Extremely loud character outbursts, such as when Mrs. Surratt repeatedly called out for her son, Mary Todd Lincoln called for Elizabeth, and Major Rathbone called for his fiance, were also distracting and unnecessary.

The excellent cast included Garrett Heater (the author) as Major Henry Rathbone, Maya Dwyer as Clara Harris, Kate Huddleston as Mary Todd Lincoln, Karin Franklin-King as Elizabeth Keckley, Karis Wiggins as Mary Surratt, and Ryan Santiago as John Wilkes Booth. The Covey Theater Company, out of Syracuse, New York, produced this entry into Fringe NYC (2015). In 2014, that same company entered Lizzie Borden Took An Axe, and in 2013, it entered Playing God, all which were written by Garrett Heater. In the Director's Note to Lincoln's Blood, Mr. Heater says, "As a memory play, each main character simultaneously lives in their past and present; reliving old memories and conversations, desperate to change crucial details, or repeating mistakes without respite. Longing for relief and yearning for companionship, all the while living somewhere between reality and fantasy." 

Lincoln's Blood is not a comedy. It is a very serious look at the horrifying aftermath of one of the most notorious acts in American history and the six people who were most directly affected by it. The play examines the excruciating burden of memory, from which, for some, there is no escape. Tickets cost $18.00 each. You can purchase them at www.FringeNYC.com. For more information about The Covey Theatre Company, go to www.thecoveytheatrecompany.com 

Applause! Applause! Review of Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt at Drom by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens

This review of Terry Baum's Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt at Drom was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt

Written & Performed by Terry Baum
Additional Writing Contribution by Pat Bond

Directed by Adele Prandini

Dramaturgy by Carolyn Myers

Drom

85 Avenue A

New York, New York 10009

Reviewed 8/14/15 

The first show I decided to see at the 19th Annual New York International Fringe Festival was the highly anticipated one-woman show by Terry Baum entitled Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt, which had its New York City premiere at Drom. It is set in 1968 when Lorena Hickok is considering whether to destroy or donate (to the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidential Library in Hyde Park, New York) the remaining 2,336 letters (that survived her purge) written to her by Eleanor Roosevelt from 1932 right up to 1962, the year of Eleanor's death. The play then focuses on the time period from 1932-1934 and we get to experience in detail how the two met and the ups and downs of their early relationship. Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok & Eleanor Roosevelt is a moving, brilliantly written and acted one-woman play that keeps your attention from the very beginning of their relationship to the very end when Hickok, after destroying some of the more salacious letters written between the two of them, decides to donate the remainder of the letters to the Presidential Library. Hick is afraid her dear friend will be hated and despised for having been involved in an adulterous relationship with another woman. In addition, since Hick admired FDR, she was struggling with how she can reveal to the world that she was having an affair with his wife. However, after 30 years of love, Hick finally concludes, "People will never understand, but they will know. I want people to know. I want you to know!"

In May of 1978, Doris Faber visited the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library in Hyde Park, New York to do research for a biography of Eleanor Roosevelt. While there, she found 18 filing boxes willed to the Library by Lorena Hickok, a close confidante of Eleanor's, with the instructions, "Not to be opened until ten years after my death." Hick had died exactly 10 years earlier. Faber found 2,336 letters from Eleanor Roosevelt to Lorena Hickok, several hundred of which are noted as being particularly intimate. In 1980, Ms. Faber wrote a full-length biography entitled The Life Of Lorena Hickok: E.R.'s Friend. The Faber biography inspired Pat Bond, a lesbian monologist, to write a solo play on Hick in 1984 entitled Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok, A Love Story. For the 2012 National Queer Arts Festival, Terry Baum, the writer and performer of this one-woman show, read a segment of Pat's play focusing on the very beginning of their relationship. Audience reaction there was so overwhelmingly positive that Terry Baum developed a workshop version in 2013 during a SAFEhouse for the Arts residency at The Garage in San Francisco, which was followed by her spending a week at the FDR Library doing research, and then actually speaking to people who knew Lorena Hicks. Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hickok and Eleanor Roosevelt premiered on July 10, 2014 at the Eureka Theatre in San Francisco, and had a second run at Berkeley City Club in January, 2015. Now, New Yorkers are able to hear what is in many of those letters since Terry Baum, the playwright, obtained permission from Nancy Roosevelt Ireland, Eleanor Roosevelt's literary executor, to quote Eleanor Roosevelt's letters to Lorena Hickok in this show.

Lorena Hickok (known as Hick) was one of the country's highest-paid female reporters with her own by-line working for the Associated Press in 1932 covering Franklin Delano Roosevelt's campaign for President. When she suggested a woman reporter be assigned to cover Eleanor Roosevelt on the campaign trail, to her dismay, she ended up getting the job. Eleanor Roosevelt (who signed her letters E.R.), once said a woman gets her name in the paper only three times (when she's born, when she gets married, and when she dies), and while she didn't normally trust reporters, she came to rely on Hick as a personal friend, from whom she sought advice and counsel. Hick, a big FDR fan, was ultimately compromised when she allowed FDR's Advisor to pre-approve her articles on Eleanor before she submitted them to the Associated Press. In the end, when she refused to betray Eleanor's trust by revealing any of the inside information she learned, it cost Hick her job with the AP. She later worked with the Roosevelt administration reporting to Harry Hopkins with respect to where the New Deal was working and where it was not.

It must have been obvious Hick was a lesbian (described once by Time Magazine as "rumpled, masculine and fat") but Mrs. Roosevelt, who at 15 years old, attended Allenwood Academy in London (an English Boarding School for Girls), was very open-minded about the topic, with her four best friends being two lesbian couples. There is no doubt in my mind that Hick was more in love with E.R. than E.R. was with her, especially since Hick exhibited all the bad traits of being jealous and possessive. Hick clearly was interested in having Eleanor Roosevelt as her lesbian lover. According to Hicks side of the story, after many months spent on a campaign train together, she invited Eleanor Roosevelt to the Russian Tea Room for lunch, during which she said, "I love you and not just as a sister or a friend." Eleanor Roosevelt supposedly responded, "Don't you know I love you too!". Eventually, Hick gave Eleanor a ring and said "will you be mine?" and Eleanor accepted the ring and wore it to FDR's inauguration ("Oh! I want to put my arms around you, I ache to hold you close. Your ring is a great comfort. I look at it and think she does love me, or I wouldn't be wearing it." - a passage of a letter from Eleanor Roosevelt to Lorena Hickok). 

According to Hick, for Eleanor love had always been about serving others and now, finally, she found someone who loved her and whom she could love. I think it is an open question whether Hick and Eleanor had a passionate love affair and had sex with each other. It is not unthinkable that Eleanor gave Hick what she wanted and enjoyed the experiences along the way. But in the end, Eleanor knew she had to pull away when Hick became too demanding and distraught whenever Eleanor needed to cancel an appointment or was too busy with her own duties as First Lady. She explained this to Hick by telling her that they "must do their best in an imperfect world."

The funniest lines in this magnificent show are when Lorena Hickok's character turns to the audience and says, "I see some of you are familiar with what goes on in an English Boarding School," as well as when she says, "When you've been had by Eleanor Roosevelt, you stay had!" I highly recommend you make a special effort to see this show. It is a hit you shouldn't miss! Terry Baum delivers the performance of a lifetime as Lorena Hickok in this triumphant production! All the time and effort put into making this one-woman a smashing success is evident in this audience-pleasing masterpiece. There are four remaining presentations of Hick: A Love Story, The Romance Of Lorena Hick & Eleanor Roosevelt. Tickets cost $18.00 and are available at www.FringeNYC.org  

Applause! Applause! Review of Fantastic Four by Dr. Philip Ernest Schoenberg

This review of 20th Century Fox's Fantastic Four was written by Dr. Philip Ernest Schoenberg and published in Volume X, Issue 5 (2015) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!

Fantastic Four

Produced by 20th Century Fox

Directed by Josh Trank

Main Street Cinemas

72-66 Main Street
Flushing, New York 11367

Reviewed 8/9/15 

Fantastic Four is a contemporary re-imagining of Marvel's original and longest-running superhero series, first unveiled in November, 1961 by writer/editor Stan Lee, and artist/co-plotter Jack Kirby, for their launch of Marvel Comics. Although, at the time, I was a big Walt Disney fan and was a regular reader of DC Comics' superheroes Batman and Superman, I did like reading the debut issue of Marvel Comics and occasionally read subsequent issues. As I recall it, the art had a chisel-like feeling that somehow made it more realistic and energetic than the contemporary DC Comics.

The original Fantastic Four consisted of Mr. Fantastic (Reed Richards), who had the ability to stretch his body into incredible lengths and shapes; the Invisible Girl (now Invisible Woman to be Politically Correct) (Sue Storm), who can render herself invisible and project powerful force fields; the Human Torch (Johnny Storm), who can generate flames, surround himself with them and fly; and The Thing (Ben Grimm), who possesses superhuman strength and endurance due to the nature of his stone-like flesh, that originally looked more like dinosaur skin before further transforming into his trademark rocky appearance.

In the original story as I remember reading it in the comic Fantastic Four #1, Reed Richards' spaceship was specifically referred to as a rocket and it was implied he and his friends went up in it in order to beat the Soviet Union to the moon. Fantastic Four #2 states he was trying to reach Mars. Twenty years later in Fantastic Four #236, it was stated that Reed's experimental ship was intended to travel to the edge of the solar system and while it needed a rocket booster to reach escape velocity from Earth's atmosphere, it relied on a Star Drive to reach its destination. This tale also goes on to expand on how the quartet were mutated and gifted with their superpowers. While Fantastic Four #1 merely states they were hit with "cosmic rays," Fantastic Four #236 goes further to explain that these rays passed through the Van Allen Belts that are held around the Earth by its magnetic field. Fantastic Four #358, published in 1991, states that their Star Drive was intended to bring the Fantastic Four into hyperspace in order to visit other solar systems, and that unusual sunspot activity from the Earth's sun also played a role in boosting the strength of the cosmic rays that mutated them. In the movie version, the classic rocket-based origin of Marvel's First Family is dropped in favor of one involving interdimensional teleportation and an undefined, conscious mystic energy, which was the same origin story first reported in 2004 in a comic book reboot entitled Ultimate Fantastic Four. 

In the movie version, the origins of The Fantastic Four are less heroic; in fact, they are stupid and foolish. Richards and the Strong siblings, along with Victor Von Doom, are disappointed when they are told by Dr. Allen, the Baxter Foundation's Supervisor, that NASA astronauts are going to be brought in and that they will be given the honor of being the first humans to venture to Planet Zero. (Professor Franklin Strong had promised them that they were going to be permitted to be the first to go). This was an entirely reasonable decision made by Dr. Allen given the seriousness of this scientific exploration and the millions of dollars that were expended to achieve these results. What is their reaction? The guys get drunk and decide to go first to get their names into the history books so they will be remembered. Reed Richards refuses to go unless his childhood buddy, Ben Grimm, is permitted to go too, but they all completely forget to invite Sue Strong, who was an essential part of their research team. Under the influence of alcohol, they explore Planet Zero at their peril and suffer the consequences. Left unexplained is how they dodged government security in order to take off. For the rest of the movie, we are expected to take the side of drunken teenagers over trained, experienced, adult, explorers. The assumption is that those corporate types, whether private or governmental, must possess selfish motives and that they want to hog all the glory for themselves.

In the comic book universe, I recall The Fantastic Four discover their new found powers very quickly over a brief period of time without suffering too much pain in the process. In the movie relaunch, each of the Fantastic Four takes over a year to recover in a special government facility, "Area 57," which might be better described as a prison. Dr. Allen's character is now transformed into an evil, power-hungry scientist who has gone over to the dark side. He promises the Fantastic Four that if they undertake covert, military missions for the government, that they will get help returning to normal once the mysterious, conscious energy on Planet Zero is fully understood. In fact, Dr. Allen intends to use the energy to take over both Planet Zero and the Earth. The second mission to Planet Zero finds Victor Von Doom (now just Doom) alive and brings him back to Earth, where he performs a useful public service by killing Dr. Allen. Unfortunately, he goes a little too far and decides the Earth itself must be destroyed to protect Planet Zero and the rest of the universe. The Fantastic Four becomes the team to stop him. In the end, it appears they have killed Doom, but it is highly unlikely they did since this would leave no room for sequels and future plot lines. 

In the original comic book launch of The Fantastic Four, Reed Richards, a very rich man who is a scientific genius, a father figure, and the unofficial head of the team, and his childhood friend Ben Grimm, are the "older generation" while Sue and Johnny Strong, brother and sister, are the "younger generation." Richards' trademark gray temples disappear in the relaunch. Despite their age differences, Reed and Sue eventually marry. Sue is presented as a pioneer female superhero who is the equal of everyone else, which was quite a modern notion in 1961. 

In the comic book series, Reed Richards, who has oodles of money, provides the team with its own building complete with laboratory, research facility, and space launch pad in the middle of Manhattan. This made The Fantastic Four more real to me than Superman who lived in Metropolis (which really seemed to be more like a fictional version of Chicago than New York City), or Batman, who lived in the fictional Gotham (which seemed to be a more factual version of New York City), or the Disney characters who lived in far distant California. Just like Ed Koch in Greenwich Village, or Robert DeNiro in Tribeca, the Fantastic Four in a skyscraper in Manhattan seemed as if they were just part of the neighborhood. Just like the TV commercial, you can imagine seeing The Thing having a meal not at his favorite restaurant, but yours, since he is a local. By choosing to live in New York City, they were able to walk the streets of Manhattan without being bothered by admirers and were able to live the lives of ordinary citizens. They kept their names and individualities along with their strengths and weaknesses. Breaking convention with other comic book archetypes of the time, The Fantastic Four favored celebrity status over anonymity or secret identities.

In contrast, in the movie, after saving Earth from extinction, in place of doing military missions, the team asked the military to give them their own facility in which to work. While it was explicit the team no longer works for the military, it is implied that if asked to save the world from evil in the future, they will consent for the sake of humanity. They dubbed the new facility the Franklin Strong Research Center (formally named Central City). They now live in isolation from the world, no longer a part of humanity or the local neighborhood. They chose fame over community instead of having both.  

In the movie, Reed Richards, Ben Grimm and the Strong siblings are all about the same age. Reed Richards is recruited by Professor Franklin Strong, who is impressed by his achievements at an Oyster Bay High School Science Fair. Professor Strong offers him a full scholarship to the Baxter Institute, a government-sponsored school for young prodigies, which has already been doing research into interdimensional teleportation without complete success. Left unexplained is why Richards' partner Grimm is not also offered a scholarship to the Institute. The visuals in the movie are not coordinated at times because we see Manhattan from the New Jersey side of the Hudson River, and not from where we are supposed to be in the script. 

Both Richards and Grimm were disqualified from the Science Fair for doing "magic tricks" because their science teacher was too dense to fully understand what he had just observed. Reed Richards and Ben Grimm built their device in Reed's garage using items from a junk yard and spent only a few thousand dollars, while researchers at the Baxter Institute were unable to accomplish the same feat despite spending millions of dollars over a course of many years. At first Reed Richards thought he was teleporting items to somewhere else on the planet instead of into another dimension. But after we got to see Planet Zero in the movie, it certainly looked like a real place and not just Earth in another dimension, but then again, who knows what another dimension would look like.

In the comic book universe, Doctor Doom pioneered a new version of the "mad scientist" as a full-fledged villain with various powers. Like Hercules, he is a kind of demigod having both mystical and human origins. Unlike other comic book villains, he often exhibits empathy and compassion and even does occasional good and patriotic deeds for his own reasons. At no point did he ever have a personal relationship with any of The Fantastic Four in contrast with the young Superman, who knew Lex Luthor as a friend. In this current movie re-launch, the effort is made to depict young Victor Von Doom as a moody James Dean type trying to find himself but the effort is entirely unsuccessful. There is a suggestion that Doom is interested in Sue Strong but this plot line is never effectively developed. Sue is clueless that Doom has a thing for her.   

Each of the Fantastic Four characters have familial issues unlike the original comic book launch where they all seem to come from traditional two-parent families. The original Marvel Comics in the day broke cultural barriers by having strong black and female characters but in the movie, political correctness and the blind desire for diversity is taken to an irrelevant extreme that does not add to the story. Johnny Strong is now black and his white sister is an orphan adopted from Kosovo. Reed feels disconnected from his parents, mother and step-father, who tolerate his scientific research but don't understand anything he is working on. Ben is the son of a junkyard owner who lived in an abusive home environment. Sue doesn't know who her real parents are and her brother has a strained relationship for unknown reasons with his father. You would think the elements are in place to drive the characters to adopt each other as the family they never had, but if that is the case, it ends up becoming a very dysfunctional family indeed, with infighting, jealousy

In the movie, Miles Teller plays Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic), Jamie Bell is Ben Grimm (The Thing), Michael B. Jordan appears as Johnny Storm (The Human Torch), and Kate Mara is his sister Sue Storm (the Invisible Woman). They coalesce together as a team to fight Victor Von Doom (the villain known as Doctor Doom, born in Latveria, who emerges in future issues of the comic book series Fantastic Four). Victor, who was a protege of Professor Franklin Strong, is left behind on Planet Zero and later believes he has the moral obligation to destroy the Earth to protect Planet Zero and the rest of the universe from its inhabitants. He correctly believes the military has every intention to use the mysteriously conscious energy on Planet Zero to subdue and dominate the Earth. The Fantastic Four, of course, win for now but Professor Strong ends up being killed by Victor. His dying wish is for Johnny and Sue to look after each other. Our superheroes assume the name The Fantastic Four because they intend to use their superpowers to vanquish evil and protect humanity from its enemies. How they come up with their name is lamely depicted.

The movie is one long trudge before we get to the climax. Director Josh Trank takes his time as well as our time through a long exposition before we get to the all too brief action scenes. We are not given enough time to appreciate how villainous Doom has become before he is put down. In order to have great heroes, you need to have great villains, and this we do not have. 

In the comic book universe, the characters are flawed individuals with strengths and weaknesses that make them all the more human and believable. Even Doctor Doom has a good side as the people of Latveria accept him as a caring monarch who looks after them. The world is made a better place by The Fantastic Four and their nemesis Doctor Doom. In the cinematic version, all of the characters are one-dimensional, cardboard cut-ups, ill-portrayed by the actors who fail to bring them to life. There is no chemistry between the actors and their characters; no real love or hate; we don't care.

Who is responsible for this disaster? A perfect storm of bad writing, bad acting, bad directing and bad editing did in Fantastic Four. The producers, the actors, the writer, and the director have been successful in other enterprises; instead of their synergy making the film better than what they could have individually achieved, the exact opposite was the result. This should have been a release on home video, skipping the movie release altogether in order to minimize the damage to the franchise. Some have suggested Twentieth Century Fox produced this loser in order to fulfill a legal obligation to Marvel so it could keep the franchise. In fact, everyone involved appears to have leaked a story trying to explain away their own contribution to this turkey, which never got off the ground and certainly couldn't fly.

Why do we have relaunches? The culture changes, so how characters are portrayed also has to change. Part of the reason is that every generation gets the superheroes it deserves and expects. I wouldn't be surprised if in the next Fantastic Four movie, the characters tweet and have their own Facebook Page, posting selfies on Instagram. The actors who portray them in movies and cartoons also influence the way the superheroes are perceived by each new generation. Sometimes, new story lines are needed; other story lines have had their day; or no longer work.  

Relaunches can save or doom well-established hero franchises. Superman and Batman were successfully relaunched as vulnerable, multidimensional  human beings who have experienced success and failure, have been scarred by their adventures, and have striven to become better people instead of simply being used for comic relief. Timothy Dalton almost did in the James Bond franchise, while Daniel Craig gave it new life. When the Whiteman's Africa came to an end, so did Tarzan but the reincarnated Phantom, the oldest superhero franchise of all, manages to soldier on. The Fantastic Four are just teenagers with new powers and shiny toys who have not become better people in the process. You cannot identify with them and it is very difficult to like them. Sadly, this franchise, which needed no reboot, got one it did not deserve.