I was going to be all "let's talk about reviews" but that should just tip you off right there that I (we) got a bad review because nobody talks about the general concept of reviews when they got a good one -- they just say "The Cincinnati Herald says we roxx0r!" So let's pull the band-aid off fast and note that Jack Helbig says we suxx0r in the Reader today.
Which is very confusing, because it was a good show, both in terms of what we trying to accomplish with our use of [doc/mock]umentary techniques and from a pure-entertainment-value perspective. Of course I'm biased, but I think I'm telling it straight. Between you and me and the other guy who reads this site (hi Don!) I'll tell you that the cast thinks that Nina Metz' review of the show last week in the Tribune was fair -- it was a lack-luster show. This week was, in our collective opinion, not lack-luster. In fact it was rather lustrous. Shiny, even.
So you've got one more chance to see us at the reasonable hour of 10:30 pm, before we start our odd little run of every-other-week-at-midnight as part of DSI's Afterparty slots at the Playground. Please do come.