UMD Intro to Theatre Reviews

I attended the preview showing of Dinner with Friends. It did not land far from my expectations. The production had few flaws. The thing that stuck out most in my mind was the acting.

These roles must have been rather challenging for the actors. They were forced to assume a middle aged role and a totally different life, still not experienced by any of the students. This is something that each actor was capable of. Of course the main issue in this play is a failing relationship. Each actor portrayed their disgust, humility, and grief over the issue very well.

The husband (Tom) who decides to leave his wife is floored that his wife’s side of the story was heard first. In explaining the divorce to his best friends he is obviously pained. His facial expressions showed a variety of emotion, most of which suggested that he was stuck between a rock and a hard place. Tom felt so trapped in his marriage. It had become and obligation to remain in his marriage. Brandon Mychal Roberts (Tom) does a great job of showing the mixed emotions of a happy new beginning and reluctance and pain in his explanation of the changes being made. We can obviously see that he doesn’t want to hurt anyone, but he does want out.

The divorced wife (Beth) shows a good amount of anger and confusion throughout the first act. Kinsey Diment (Beth) especially does a good job during the very beginning of the play. She obviously has something on her mind. Her trance of detachment easily shows especially in the presence of her enthusiastic friends. Kinsey does a good job of portraying the confusion in her low, blank gaze. Later her anger is impressively broadcasted between her yelling and shrill tone. Her husband is given little chance to explain and get on her good side.

Toms good friend Gabe was the most animated of all the characters. His part of the “trophy” husband was quite comparable to some husbands I have seen, though none were quite as enthusiastic as Gabes part in the opening scene. This scene was a whirl wind of excited story telling which greatly expressed Gabe’s zeal for the perks of his work. Jed Dixons portrayal of the trophy husband was great throughout the whole production. His enthusiastic attitude turns to shock after hearing the news, and then anger while talking to Tom. His anger with Tom was very convincing, and even more so when he insults Tom for not giving the marriage a chance.

Finally, Gabe’s wife Karen expressed a good amount of anger and not a speck of understanding after the news of divorce. Stacia Mckee was a very convincing wife between her hair and body language. Her acting was always more subtle as such a wife would be in attempting to keep her proper image. Karen stays composed around everyone but Tom.

Dinner with friends was a great production with an excellent cast. Its story is quite relevant. It touches on the main hurtles of marriage, and what happens when those hurtles are too high to clear.

I attended Dinner with Friends on wednesday night for a preview performance. The show was very well done, and incredibly moving. The show had great acting, beautiful scenery, and a wonderfully moving storyline.
The acting was some of the best I've seen at UMD so far. It was very believable. there was moments of intensity that weren't pushed. The actors really fell into their characters. The show was very well casted. Each person really seemed to fit there characters, and actually looked how you would think they might have looked.
The show was done in the Dudley theatre, which is a small black box. The set was done very well and was quit different form the set of Buried Lights, which was done in the same theatre. This particular set seemed a little more elaborate. There was a great amount of creativity that took place when it came to changing locations. The lighting really glowed on the set, which really complimented each scene.
The theme of marriage and divorce can get very intense, and is a issue that almost everyone can relate too. For some people it may be hard to talk about, but this play dove in head first and really opened up the issue for discussion. You have sympathy for every character in this play, and at first there were assigned roles of the protagonists and antagonists, which later were not so clear, Which always makes things more interesting.
Dinner with Friends was probably the best show I've seen so far this semester because it is something that so may different people can relate too, and it shows such a private relationship. I definitely recommend this show to everyone.

I attended the previews for "Dinner with Friends" and I thought it was just AWESOME. The acting was far from great. It was a kind of play that I've never seen before. All the anger and the action said a whole lot about the play. Knowing how hard it is to act with fury and keeping a straight face throughout the two hour performances I have to say, all the actors and actresses really, and I mean really pulled it off. Thumbs up and a pat on the back to the four of them!

"Dinner with Friends" was nothing like I pictured it or expected. Before even seeing the play I wasn't so much interested in it because the title didn't seem all that great. But as the saying goes "Don't judge a book by its cover." It's true I say!

The theatre space wasn't so good but that's not the point of it. The point is that the play was done and done well. It's unbelievable how great that play was. What can I say, it was spectacular! I highly recommend everyone to see this play!

I went to the preview of “Dinner with Friends” on Wednesday, November 28th. I liked the thrust stage set up with the audience on three sides, and enjoyed the closeness to the action that came with being in a small theatre.

The set was simple, but very sophisticated. It was successfully converted to Beth’s house just by adding a bed. But most of the time, the scenes were at Gabe and Karen’s house. The numerous doorways suggested that there was more to the house than what we saw. One of the doorways led to the porch, or balcony, where at one point the actors were standing. We couldn’t see the actors, but we could see their shadows on the screen and could hear their voices. I thought this was very magical, and set the mood of the beautiful sunset they were watching. Another doorway was the front door, and another was the door leading to the rest of the house.

The sound effects helped to visualize what was going on outside of the one room in which each scene was taking place. The kids’ voices came from some other room in the house where they were watching a movie, and this made me unconsciously imagine what the rest of the house looked like. These high-pitched voices added humor to the play as well, especially when their tape got fixed, produced a synchronized “Yay!” Also, the car noises when a character arrived or left helped to take one’s mind beyond what is seen on stage. I also enjoyed the flash of the headlights through the window when a car came or went.

The acting was very believable. I really got into the characters, and felt what they felt. Jeb Dixon as Gabe, Stacia McKee as Karen, Kinsey Diment as Beth, and Brandon Mychal Roberts as Tom were a great cast. Some of the scenes were really hard, especially the arguing scenes. The scene between Beth and Tom when he came home after he had left her was very well done. I actually felt the danger in the air. It is really hard for an actor to be angry enough to get the audience emotionally involved, but these actors succeeded. The timing of the acting throughout the play was very smooth and seemed just about right. A few of the blank stares of Gabe as he is thinking between scenes might have got a little long, but that’s the way day-to-day life is. Sometimes there are times when you just have to sit and stare into space.

The play did not make me happy, although there were many subtle jokes in the script that made me laugh. I walked out of the theatre kind of depressed. This was the mood that the play ended in, however, so I’m not complaining…just a warning to those of you who want your entertainment to be cheerful. If you don’t mind a dissatisfying ending, I would strongly recommend seeing this play. The acting is superb and the story is one that many of us can relate to.

On November 28, 2007 I attended the preview event of "Dinner With Friends" at UMD's Dudley Theater. I was amazed at the show. I came in, not knowing what the play would be about, who was in it, who directed it, basically I came in knowing nothing. Dinner With Friends was an excellent play. There were some very intense scenes from the disrupted couple Tom and Beth, to the best of friends Tom and Gabe, and Beth and Karen. Dinner With Friends was a play that showcased many reality issues between a married couple. I was attracted to every thing that was done in the production, from the sound effects to the brilliant performances by the actors and actresses.

The characters Tom and Beth were played by Brandon Mychal Roberts and Kinsey Diment. Both of these actors did an amazing job on their parts. I really felt connected to what was going on between them, what they were feeling. They brought both the characters and marriage to life. In the second scene of the first act, Tom comes back to Beth. Tom, who was unable to leave Beth due to bad weather, comes back to stay at their house. This particualr scene was very intense and in a way emotional. The argument between Tom and Beth was very powerful. In that scene, they showcased their emotions towards each other as well as a married couple in modern day life would. Their acting in that scene was very convincing. I felt as if they were really married to each other and had major problems. All of the actors indeed did a wonderful job.

The usage of sound effects in Dinner With Friends was well done. The sound designer did a incredible job at using different sounds to make the scenary of a scene come to life. Also in the first scene, I felt that they used the voices of Gabe and Karen's children to their full potential. I was amazed and surprised at what different sounds were used. On the other hand, the lighting was done magnificently by the lighting designer. The production was very colorful and it was shown on many materials, whether a scrim was use or not, the lighting showed many colorful things.

Overall Dinner With Friends was a successful play. I would definitely attend the show a second time. I encourage everyone to attend the play Dinner With Friends. You won't be dissappointed and just maybe, one will learn something about marriage.

Actors Jed Dixon, Stacia Mckee, Brandon Mychal Roberts, and Kinsey did an extraordinary job acting as older couples in the play Dinner with Friends. As one of the marriages is torn apart, the other couple helps their friends through it while questions their own love. These are very difficult roles for college students to play because of the age group of the people and what the characters are going through in the play. Although many college students have probably had parents go through divorce, few themselves have been divorced or had one of their friends divorce. You couldn’t tell that these actors hadn’t gone through that before; they fulfilled their roles so well.

Actor Brandon Mychal Roberts, who played Tom, was the man who was leaving his wife for another woman. When he comes back to his house his wife and him get into a large argument. Tom was able to make the audience believe he was so angry and frustrated that he could have killed his wife. In fact he even threatens to while they are fighting. His anger was so real that it got the audience emotionally involved.

Beth did an amazing job portraying a woman who was just left by her husband. The first scene when she is with the other couple and she is trying to hide from them the fact that Tom was leaving her. You could see the pain and the hurt she was going through. In her eyes, the way she reacted to their conversation, and even how she sat you could tell Beth was unhappy but trying to hold it in. Again the audience felt this and sided with her and felt her hurt. Divorce is something that many people have had friends and their own family go through. So this was real pain that they could relate to and see through Beth.

Gabe and Karen also did an excellent job at acting like a married couple and going through the struggles of their friends getting divorced. At the beginning of Act Two there is a flashback, and the two of them had just gotten married. They act just like newlyweds that are crazy for each other would do. Throughout the play after they found out about their friends getting divorced they talk a lot about marriage. Like there is in real conversation, on the stage they had some awkward long pauses. The actors didn’t let them go too long, but held them just long enough so they could get across the point that they didn’t know what to say or didn’t really want to talk. This happens when Karen gets very mad at Tom when he has an affair. Tom comes over to explain himself and Karen holds the silence so he knows she is not happy with him. At the very end Gabe and Karen have an argument and question their love for each other, but end up hanging to each other. They act like so many couples these days: uncertain of their relationship but clinging to each other because they have no one else.

Overall the acting couldn’t have gotten much better. Actors played their characters flawlessly. The audience could feel their pain, sorrow, happiness, and frustration through every scene. The title of the play is exactly right and it felt just like couples having Dinner with Friends.

Dinner with friends is really a coming of age story in every sense of the phrase. And the acting was a veritable clinic on realism. It’s the true-to-life tale of two couples Gabe and Karen, and Tom and Beth. These two couples have been best friends since college and watched their kids grow older. Basically one big family. Then a story takes a turn for the dramatic as it is revealed that Tom is having an affair. Tom and Beth’s marriage is over and this really hits home with Gabe and Karen. That’s really what the play shows you, but like in real life you can tell the actors on stage are thinking things. The displayed actions, and audible dialogue give hints to what the actors might be thinking, but when I watched them I could tell the exact moment Gabe and Karen really took an introspective look in to their marriage. That was the most impressive part of it all, watching the college-aged actors portraying middle-aged characters. After I watched the play I was very mindful to watch the mannerisms and listen to the voices of middle-aged people, just to get a sense of how the actors compared to the real thing. Since it was the real thing that they were trying to play. Not surprisingly the actors had it spot on. They really sold it.
Another part I really thought was a stroke of genius, was the scene changes. The actors made it look like they were cleaning up after dinner and blended that seamlessly in to getting things moved off stage. And the music during the changes was masterfully chosen. It makes me wonder weather whoever chose those songs had them in mind when they were picking songs or if they just listened to a ton of albums.

The director for Dinner with Friends talked to my Intro. To theatre class and discussed the play. He talked a good amount about the plays relevance to the current divorce figures in the US. Even without experiencing divorce firsthand, it is apparent that this is a huge issue for many Americans. It is not something that is contained within an immediate family. It is very complicated and often devastating for many people involved and related t the couple. Relationships and divorces occur in such varied ways. The play does a good job of presenting this idea to its audience.

Dinner with Friends is a great way of expressing and discussing this huge issue. The play brings up so many aspects of divorce that most people would not even consider. One of these strange things is the regret felt by the divorced couples’ friends (Karen and Gabe). The play throws this into the complicated mix and shows the viewer the emotions and regrets that can be felt outside of the family, and outside of sadness, anger, and confusion. Another thing that is sure to surprise many viewers is the continued sexual relations between the divorcing couple. This comes immediately after their first fight of the play. Adding to this is the confusion on Gabe’s part in seeing how they could continue with their sex life. He is very surprised by their actions and doesn’t get how such a thing would ever take place. This shows the great diversity in the workings of relationships. The play, as a whole, shows the viewer that a marriage takes a lot of work in order for it to stay afloat.

Another idea presented in the play is the bias that shows up between couples and the friends comprising couples. The prospering couple (Karen and Gabe) first hears of the divorce from Beth’s point of view, which is the side of the victim. This gives them some bias in favor of Beth. Knowing this was a possibility, Tom had asked her to wait on telling Karen and Gabe so the story would not be one sided. He knew that his actions would sound terrible to the couple. Later we see Karen and Gabe’s obvious biases favoring their friend of the same sex. Gabe is willing to hear Tom’s case and can somewhat identify with his argument, though he would never leave his wife for any reason. On the other hand, Karen won’t even talk to Tom after hearing the news. She sees him as a sex hungry slob. These biases just show the further complications that are thrown into a failing marriage. By the end of the play the issue, which seemed more black and white, has emerged as a confusing gray mess.

The playwright’s messages brought by this play are very useful to many who have little understanding of the issue. The play is very relevant, and is very fitting for its main audience. This play should open some people’s eyes to the seriousness of marriage and give a hint of the commitment it takes to keep one together. It is a production that is recommended to nearly anyone who appreciates good theatre and a message to leave with.

I think the realistic genre is quickly becoming my genre of choice. Thanks to plays like Dinner with Friends. What I found so fascinating about Dinner with Friends was getting to watch the characters go through such personal moments and discussions, as if I was a fly on the wall. I mean, this is stuff people only get to see if they live it. It made me sad for the characters, not for Beth and Tom, but for Karen and Gabe. All Karen and Gabe want to do is live their lives together and be happy. Tom and Beth are, in my mind, the sub plot to the real action, which is the slow descent in to an increasingly humdrum existence. This is epitomized at the end of the play when Gabe and Karen are in bed together. They simply go through the motions of a foreplay ritual with the look of hopelessness on their faces. I think they both realize their relationship has become routine and they both know they can never get back the spark, the excitement of being a young couple. All the while Tom and Beth move on with their lives and find new lovers. They almost rub the electricity of their new relationships in the faces of Gabe and Karen. This leaves Karen and Gabe in absolute awe of their lack of respect commitment to their twelve year relationship, not the mention the sense of total abandonment. In the end Gabe and Karen realize when Tom and Beth divorced each other, they’ve in a sense divorced themselves from their best friends.

The preview performance of, “Dinner with Friends” by Donald Margulies directed by, Joseph Price was an amazing display of talent. How hard it must have been for college students to play struggling married couples. I thought the actors would’ve had to have been through such trauma to have played these characters and situations so well, but whether they’ve experienced these hardships or not, every one of them had me believing they had. In the first scene, I knew immediately that something was bothering Beth (played by Kinsey Diment) from every tiny, little, awkward movement she made while Gabe (Jed Dixon) and Karen (Stacia McKee) kissed each other and laughed about their wonderful vacation. Beth finally cracked and drew me in so very well that I wanted to jump right on stage and hug her and tell her everything would be ok. This play had that affect on me. There were times when I felt like I was as involved in the conversations as the actors were!

For the first time in my life, I felt like I was just eavesdropping on these people’s personal life! I felt almost like I shouldn’t be there watching as these couples are being emotionally torn apart right before my eyes!

This play displays what happens when relationships lose their spark. We saw the initial spark of Gabe and Karen’s relationship in the beginning of Act 2. Here, they were just newly married and as happy and in love as any two could be. However, we also see when they have lost their spark or are beginning to, twelve years later while they perform their usual bedtime routine. The biggest symbol of Gabe and Karen’s loss of spark is when Gabe says in the beginning of the play, “Uh Oh…. It’s time… Time for me to scare you!” This is clearly an inside thing the two shared and when Gabe yelled, “Boo!” Karen jumped, shrieked and fell into Gabe’s arms in an extremely affectionate way. But when at the end of the play Gabe does this funny scaring thing that the two love so much, he lacks enthusiasm, and so did she as they stared blankly with a look of shear hopelessness on their faces.

Gabe and Karen’s relationship seemed to only be at it’s best when they were with Beth and Tom, eating dinner. Dinner was an excuse to be social, but it didn’t take long for dinner to be the only thing keeping everyone’s relationship together. When Beth and Tom’s relationship fell apart, they stopped eating dinner with Gabe and Karen. This made everyone’s relationship fall apart. Dinner was used in this play to symbolize the need for something, anything that would hold a relationship together. In this case, that something was a meal. But, Beth and Tom stopped eating dinner with Gabe and Karen, which caused Karen and Beth to stop eating dinner with each other, which caused Gabe and Tom to stop having dinner with each other. By the end of the play, almost every relationship that had once been full of life and happiness was now falling apart.

Michael Caine said that acting for theater is like surgery with a scalpel, but acting for cameras is like surgery with a laser. Well, I think these actors were so detailed, that they could’ve been filmed! They acted with “lasers” so to speak. I was completely impressed and in awe of how well the play was cast and performed. Every actor/actress did an absolutely amazing job at playing their character. The best acting I’ve ever seen.

On December 2, 2007 I attended the play Dinner With Friends at UMD's Dudley Experimental Theatre. I thought that the play was very well done and represented a lot of issues that many couples deal with but don't like to talk about.

The play was about two couples. At the beginning we find out that one of the couples, Tom and Beth, are getting divorced. Tom and Beth are friends with the other couple Karen and Gabe. As the characters deal with Beth and Tom's divorce, they find themselves questioning what they want in marriage and in life. They also find themselves questioning the friendship that they share between the four of them.

I think this play does a good job of displaying the good and bad sides of relationships. The play went back in time and showed newlywed Karen and Gabe giving each other infectious puppy love and Tom and Beth as they first met each other. Later the play shows Karen and Gabe discussing what has happened to their days of young love, and we witness Tom and Beth fighting. The play makes us all question what it is we really want, and also makes us ask what we can do to have the relationships in our lives pan out the way we want them to. In one respect, the play frightens the audience by waking us up to the issues in our lives that we inevitably have to face, but in another sense it gives us hope by helping us realize that there are issues in life that we have to face and we should be prepared to do so.

Overall I really enjoyed the production of Dinner With Friends. I thought it had the right blend of humor and deep topics to keep the audience entertained and thoughtful. It is a good play that I recommend for many people to see.

The Dudley experimental theatre is a good place for experimental plays. People who go see the shows in the Dudley don't expect to see a familiar show. This theatre gives directors and actors an opportunity to do shows that are not as well known, which is really intriguing to me. It gives the actors a chance to do a more obscure and challenging play. It gives the director a chance to get creative and pick any play, regardless of its popularity. Then it is the director's challenge make the play work.

"Dinner with Friends" isn't a very well-known play, so it was an experiment to try it... a very successful experiment. I think that this play should be done more often. It really digs deep into the evolution of married couples, and shows how important it is to try to stick it out with your spouse. The characters all can be related to, and the humor comes unexpectedly. This is one of the few plays that I've seen that was not predictable. I often can guess what will happen in a show halfway through, but "Dinner with Friends" kept me on the edge of my seat. I was surprised along with the other characters when the divorce came to the surface, and also when Beth said she had a new boyfriend. Even the ending was very unique and left me wanting more, which was exactly how Gabe and Karen felt at the end. They wanted more.

I think many couples that are going through rocky times would benefit from seeing this play. It shows that relationships can't always be exciting every day. In marriage, you have to accept the fact that there will be days that aren't as fun. I'm not married, but this play gave me some helpful tips to remember for the future.

I saw the December 2nd performance of Dinner with Friends. This was a very well done show in every aspect from the set, to the acting, to lighting and costumes. The whole show came together to make for a very entertaining, but especially thought provoking show. I had no trouble believing that these were two couples in their forties who had known each other for years. It was very easy to get connected to the characters and their plights because you could feel and sense the history in the relationships and sense the feelings of struggle and loss. It was interesting to watch the growth and change in the relationship between Karen and Gabe as they watched their best friends fall apart. As Karen brought to light, their whole sense of stability was shaken and you could see the honesty dawn on their relationship soon after the bomb of Beth and Tom’s separation and divorce was dropped and grow as they continued to open up about it. The final scene was very good at bringing together all of the feelings and emotions of each of the characters and in challenging the audience to exam their preconceived notions about life and love by allowing us to watch Gabe and Karen finally face their truths.
The costumes also aided in making the play as real as it was. The costumes seemed to fit each of the characters very well. Beth was shown in the beginning as downtrodden and almost as if she had given up (especially next to Karen). Her costumes were lifeless and the colors blah. This related well to how someone in her situation would most likely feel. Near the end when we find out that Beth has found new love, her costume has more sheen and shape; almost as if she had been brought back to life. Karen’s costumes also showed her personality. Her dresses were perfect and well fitting; they made her look like she had it all together.
Overall, this production was appealing and compelling. It made you think as well as entertained you. It was a good opportunity to talk outright about the changes we go through in life that we often avoid and how they may affect us in the future.

"Dinner with Friends" By Donald Margulies is a play where we watch the demise of one couple's marriage and see how it effects the marriage of the other couple. As we watch the couple of Beth(Kinsey Diment) and Tom(Brandon Mychal Roberts) we learn that their marriage has fallen apart becasue Tom has cheated on Beth. Beth,not knowing what to do inavertantly tells our other couple of Gabe(Jed Dixon) and Karen( Stacia McKee). Gabe and Karen feel responsible for the dissolusion of Gabe and Karens marriage becuase they are the ones who introduced Beth and Tom. The whole play is us watching the details of the marriage unfold.
Being a play of realism the actors must make the play as realistic as possible. The attempt was almost there but not quite. Gabe and Karen were picture perfect. They were the "perfect" couple and were so "perfect" and "cheesy" that it made me almost throw up. When you get that strong feeling from actors you know they are doing their job. On the other hand there was a lack of maturity. College students playing these complex 40 year old characters at a time in their life where it is complex and they are hurting. It might have been that I went and saw the preview peformnace and they were still working things out. The whole package was just not there.
The set looked like a modern day sushi bar but was very nice. It was very sleek and modern and was a nice place to set any scene weither it was a bedroom or a kitchen. Having two doors in the back to take the set on and off was a cleaver idea and was a unique twist to see scenery be taken on and off.
Overall, UMD's take on "Dinner with Friends" was a good attempt but was just not quite all the way there. The acting took away from the script. The script took away from the acting. After leaving a preview it left having an uneasy feeling that they were just something that were not quite there. However the parts of the show that were there were great.

I saw the Sunday performance of Dinner with Friends earlier today. I’d heard quite a bit about in my Intro to Theater class, and I must confess that the whole idea of the play didn’t sound very interesting – two middle-aged couples, one going through a divorce. I myself have never really been impacted by a divorce or watched one take place, and therefore felt as though I might not get as much from the performance, with divorce playing such a central role. Well, as it turns out, I was wrong.

The play’s subject is a topic that isn’t really pleasant for anybody. When people get married, nobody thinks, “I’ll get divorced in ten years,” they think it will last forever. But the statistics show that, although divorce rates in America are down, around 40% of first marriages will end in a divorce. Dinner with Friends grabs hold of this topic that, though it’s all around us, is ignored, and delves into it, showing that more than one divorce of sorts happens when a couple splits up.

This play follows the divorce of Beth and Tom, and the reactions of their close friends, married and “perfect” couple Gabe and Karen. Tom has been feeling as though dying in his marriage, and meets someone who he says makes him feel alive again. He can’t understand why his best friend Gabe doesn’t support his actions now that he’s happy again. Beth is portrayed as the carefree one, and after the divorce when she meets someone new, she can’t understand why her best friend Karen isn’t happy for her. Karen thinks that Beth is moving on too quickly. Gabe and Karen are frustrated; they were supposed to grow old together, the four of them. In a sense, when Beth and Tom get divorced, other divorces happen too. And in the end, we see that Gabe and Karen have their faults too, and aren’t the “perfect” couple initially portrayed. The play clearly shows that all the characters are flawed, and it is very difficult to pick out a protagonist and antagonist.

I have to say that the play was spectacular. The set and props weren’t too ornate but did what they needed to do. Actually consuming food on stage wasn’t something I’d ever seen before, but it definitely helped give the title, Dinner with Friends, more meaning and gave the audience something more interesting to look at other than several people just sitting talking. The lighting added to the mood of the story as well. I especially enjoyed it in the scene that took place in Martha’s Vineyard; the sunset where only the actors’ silhouettes were showing behind the screen was very cool indeed. Finally, the four actors themselves did a great job in portraying characters twice their age, and brought the story to life in a realistic way. I found myself feeling a bit anxious during the arguing scenes, uncomfortable during the awkward silences onstage, and sad at the end, which has never happened to me during any performance before. Though this play is excellent, it is not uplifting, and I actually walked out of it feeling a bit depressed. I may not have had any experience dealing with divorce in my own life, but this performance still touched me, and I recommend it to all.

On Sunday December 2, 2007 I attended a matinee performance of Dinner With Friends in UMD's Dudley Experimental Theatre. I thought that the production was very well done, and the actors that portrayed the characters did a good job of realistically displaying believable human characteristics.

The play Dinner With Friends is about two couples. One couple (Tom and Beth) are struggling through a divorce, and their friends Karen and Gabe are trying to sort through the reasons why they could be getting a divorce. The actors that played Karen and Gabe did a very good job of playing an innocent couple who finds themselves questioning the basis of their relationship and the relationships around them.

Jed Dixon played Gabe, the husband of Karen. In the play, Gabe is best friends with Tom who is divorcing his wife Beth. I believe that Jed did a fantastic job of displaying Gabe's true thoughts throughout the play. Gabe seems like the happy-go-lucky kind of guy that tries to stay optimistic most of the time. As optimistic as he tries to be, the audience also sees Gabe questioning the events that unfold during the play. Gabe doesn't understand Tom's rationale for leaving Beth, and feels torn between his friend and what he wants in his own life. I think Jed Dixon gave us a good first picture of who we thought Gabe was and then he clearly showed us the inner anguish that Gabe is faced with.

Another great actor in the play was the actress that played Gabe's wife Karen. The actress that played her was named Stacia McKee. Karen seemed like the type of person who thought she knew what was right and wrong at all times. Stacia did a good job of making a sweet little "know-it-all" seem endearing. Stacia also did a good job of letting the audience know that a lot of Karen's actions had to do with the fact that she usually took part in them to cover up her own fear and pain. I think that Stacia McKee did a very good job of playing Karen as a very guarded character who finally cracks in the end and realizes that she can't control everything in her world like she thought she could.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the production of Dinner With Friends. I thought it was well done, and I thought the acting brought the characters to life. The actors that played the characters made them seem believable and also made them seem real enough for the audience to relate to. I was very satisfied with all of their performances.

On December 28, I saw the preview of Dinner with Friends in the Dudley Theatre. The intention of the play seemed to be the connection between two married couples and the emotions intertwined with those relationships. I thought the play was very well done. It was interesting from the beginning and there was never a lull in the performance. It reflected situations that happen in real life and could be translated into our society today.
I thought the actors were incredible. They portrayed their characters fully and showed extreme emotion in some scenes. The setting of the play made me feel as if I were intruding on their personal lives. It was quiet in the theatre during some very intense conversations and arguments. It felt as if I were watching a real couple fighting in front of me. I saw Brandon Roberts in Buried Lights and I thought he was the strongest actor in that play. In this play, however, his talent was matched by the other actors. They all were believable as married couples going through an emotionally difficult time together. I thought the friendships between Gabe and Tom and Beth and Karen were very important to the feeling of the play. They had very loving moments, but also the judgmental and intrusive moments that all friends have when they care about one another. The scene when Beth and Karen are having lunch was one of those moments. Beth confides that she is in love with a man soon after her separation from Tom, and Karen immediately reprimands her for thinking she’s in love with a man so quickly. Beth feels defensive towards Karen, when all Karen is doing is looking out for her friend’s fragile feelings. It reflects a true friendship where emotional things can be misinterpreted. This is also shown in the scene when Gabe and Tom are having drinks in a bar. It is obvious that because of the separation between Beth and Tom, both of the friendships are compromised and they know things will never be the same.
The two most important sets were the kitchen and the bedrooms, where conversations between the two couples and all of them together happened. Those seem to be two places in a home that are very important for relationships. The costumes reflected the time and the ages of the characters. When the flashback occurred, the clothing changed to a different era and feel. I thought the lighting was well done as well. The lighting in the rooms reflected how a kitchen or bedroom is actually lit. I was also impressed with the car lights on the wall when Tom came to Gabe and Karen’s home late at night. That seems like a small detail that could be neglected, but when it was there, it added to the moment of intensity.
Overall, I thought the play was strong. There were a few things I think could have been done differently. The offstage voices of the kids were a little distracting, only because it was obvious they were a recording. I think it would have been more effective to have real voices backstage. Also, the music between the scenes was good, but I thought it was louder than it needed to be. I did think that having the music quietly in the background during a scene in the kitchen was strong because most people do have quiet dinner music. I thought that could have been carried through in more scenes. I though the play was amazing and was definitely worth attending.

I attended the preview performance of UMD theatre’s “Dinner With Friends,” and it was an interesting and well performed play. It was a very good play, though I personally feel like it wasn’t a play that is meant for the college audience. The show made you think very hard about whether or not settling down and having a family is right for everyone. It also pulls at the strings of being truly happy with what is expected of people in American society. The reason I believe it was better suited for an older audience is simply because college students typically have never been through these things, however, they can imagine what these events would be like.

The actual production of the play by the actors was phenomenal. I can not imagine the difficulty of acting like a middle aged adult being a college student. Gabe, the husband of the healthy relationship, I believe did the best job of this. Gabe gave a huge amount of enthusiasm in telling his stories to the other actors, and during his more straining conversations, did a fantastic job of adding in awkward silences, a large part of any strained adult conversation. Karen, Gabe’s husband also did a fantastic job of portraying the “trophy wife.”

Another reason I found the production interesting was the clear separation of the two families, and the way you naturally compare the two and relate to one or the other in some ways. Gabe and Karen portray the dream couple, going strong after 12+ years of marriage. Tom and Beth, however are the couple that want to be in the same boat, and act happy for 12 years, until one fight erupts into something that will change their lives forever. The separation of the two inevitably has an effect on Gabe and Karen, calling into question their own marriage at the end with Karen explaining her farfetched dream at the end. The play has a good ending on their part, I believe, because despite all their friends’ hardships, they decide that they’re going to be just fine, as long as they have each other and their family.

On Thursday, November 29th I attended the opening night of, “Dinner with Friends,” which was directed by Joseph Price. The play was AMAZING!!!! The thing that most stood out in my mind was the incredible acting done by Jed Dixon, Stacia Mckee, Kinsey Diment and Brandon Mychal Roberts.

At first I wasn’t quite sure what to expect being that college students had to play the roles of middle-aged, married couples with kids, and on top of all of that they had to face relationship issues and divorce. I thought that this would be incredibly hard to pull-off, but the actors did it remarkably well.

The part of Gabe, played by Jed Dixon, was very realistic. He totally pulled off the part of being a married guy with kids and the whole lot. One thing that made his part even more realistic was the chemistry he had with Stacia McKee, who played his wife Karen. They fit well together and made their marriage seem so realistic on the stage. It definitely seemed like they were an actual married couple who loved life and all it had to offer. Gabe seemed like the perfect loving husband who would do anything for his wife. The way they joked and showed their romantic involvement was hilarious at times. Gabe was an easy-going guy who had to face the facts that his best friends were breaking their marriage off. This took a toll on his relationship with Karen as well. McKee was so “bubbly” as playing the part of Karen. Her part made you want to laugh, and at times want to cry. Both parts made you feel as if you were right in the middle of this situation that they were encountering.

Also Tom, played by Brandon Mychal Roberts, was great as well. At first he kind of seemed like the evil, cheating husband when Beth, played by Kinsey Diment, told the other couple that he was leaving her for another woman. However once his character made an appearance on-stage it almost made you sympathize with what he felt and why their marriage was falling apart. Again, Brandon and Kinsey also had very good chemistry on stage. They really made an effort to show you what going through a divorce can actually be like. At times they made you want to cry, yet at other times they made you laugh. Beth (Kinsey) did a really good job at the beginning of the play when you could tell she was a little distracted. Gabe and Karen were all excited to tell her stories of their trip, but you could tell there was something on her mind. Kinsey did a wonderful job with her facial expressions throughout this scene. Also, the scene where Beth and Tom were fighting was very intense. Both parts seemed to be really passionate and the scene felt very real. The scene almost made you jump out of your seat it was so intense and crazy. You didn’t know what was going to happen and at the end they ended up on the bed, which made you wonder what was coming next being that you already knew they were getting a divorce.

The acting was definitely what made this play a “hit” in my mind. All the actors did such an amazing job and not only was I impressed, but I could tell the audience was impressed as well the night I attended. You can definitely tell they have been working really hard on this production and it certainly paid off! I would definitely recommend going to see this play while it’s still showing. Congrats to the wonderful acting!

On Wednesday night I went to see Dinner with Friends, which was presented by UMD Theatre. This play was put on in the Dudley Theater on the UMD campus, a theater that holds around 100 people. This play was directed by Joseph Price, who was a guest director who is from Kansas City. The playwright for Dinner with Friends was Donald Margulies. I think that the playwright is attempting a lot of different things in this play. One thing would be that this play is meant to be very intense and serious. This play is not made to make you laugh, although there are a couple times were you do. I believe that the director is attempting to do this play exactly how the playwright intended it to be. It is a more serious drama play that is about marriage and problems involved in marriage. This play was very intense, which I believe is what the playwright and director are attempting to do.

In this attempt that they are trying to do, I believe that the director and performers definitely brought the play to life the way the playwright intended. I think that the acting in this play was outstanding. It was a cast of four people, who I thought did a great job of making themselves the character. They didn’t seem like actors at all they just seemed like regular people and not like someone acting out a play. What was also intriguing was that they had running water on stage and that they had all real food and drink, which made it seem that much more real. So overall, I think that the attempt at this play was successful. This is a very good play to see if you like drama and a more serious type of play that relates to real life. So I encourage people to get out and see this play, I thought that it was good, the acting was phenomenal.

"Dinner With Friends" tried to show the ups and downs of marriage. This forces the actors to be able to act like they are in a marriage. The actors in this production did very well at becoming married couples. Since they are college students and have never been married, this is a very difficult task. They were able to overcome this and perform very well.
The roles of Karen and Gabe were acted out well. The two actors were able to pull off a certain type of chemistry that was needed for their relationship. It was easy to believe that they had been married for awhile and they had kids together. Gabe's emotions were acted out greatly. Many times he was left alone on stage at the end of an act. His emotions could be seen on his face every time. This allowed the audience to know what he was going through without saying it.
The actors for Tom and Beth were also very well casted. They had another type of chemistry that was needed. In the act where they first meet, it was noticeable that they were not right for each other. They were too different and did not work well together. Yet a sense of attraction was still there. While going through the divorce, a new type of interaction is present. They are able to act as if they are actually going through a divorce. Arguments and looks of anger and hate are believable.

First off, I have to say “Dinner with Friends” was phenomenal. This was actually the first play I have ever seen in the Dudley Theater. I think that they utilized the space very well and it felt very intimate. The two couples Tom and Beth, played by Brandon Mychal Roberts and Kinsey Diment, along with Gabe and Karren, played by Jed Dixion and Stacia McKee, all really connected. When the director Joe Price came and talked to our class he said that they were having a hard time trying to act like they were middle aged adults who were married. I think that for college students they all did a very nice job. It frustrated me that Tom was giving up on his marriage to be with another women. It is really hard to confront your spouse that you want to get divorced. That is one thing I fear and not having really gone trough that the actors/actresses just amazed me.

It was sad watching the two couples being drawn apart from Tom and Beth’s relationship. It shows how closely tied their friendships were. The biggest fighting and talking area was the kitchen and the bedroom. Which is true in real life if you think about it. This play really opened my eyes and I felt like I was in the middle of everything. The one thing I really did not care for where the recorded children’s voices. I don’t know if you could have done it any different but it just seemed to put you out of context and remind you that you were watching a play. I like to feel like I am a part of things but that almost pushed me back.

All in all I think that everything came together nicely. I really enjoyed that Joe Price took time to come talk to our class. I feel like I walked in knowing about what to expect from the play, which is nice. Plus getting his view on how things were going from the director. It would be very hard to only have four actors/actresses to keep the plot going and keep the audience interested but I truly enjoyed every moment.

I had not seen a play in the Dudley Theater earlier this year, so I was excited to find out that Dinner With Friends was being performed there. I really liked the theater space and how it made the performance seem so much more intimate. When I found out that the play only had four characters, I wasn’t sure how much I was going to enjoy it. For some reason I thought that I would get bored. This was definitely not the case. The four actors were amazing!

Everything about the play was so believable. I felt as if I was spying on someone’s personal life. The scene that really caught my attention was in Tom and Beth’s bedroom. I could literally feel my stomach tightening with the increasing amount of tension. I wanted to jump out of my seat and join in the argument! It seemed to me like everything was extremely precise. Every tone, glance, and even the slightest movement made this scene very convincing.

My favorite part of the play was the ending. I loved how this play left me questioning different aspects of my life. It made me think about the aspects of life in general that are pretty much inevitable. Gabe and Karen could not have done any better if they tried! I could sense the feelings of grief and sorrow that they were experiencing as they realized that their youth was gone.

Overall, the acting in this play was incredible! Everyone involved in this production did a fantastic job and I strongly encourage anyone who hasn’t seen this play to go see it!

I saw Dinner With Friends on its preview performance night, Wednesday November 28th. I didn’t know quite what to expect even though the director, Joe Price, had come to discuss the play in my Intro to Theatre Arts class. He had talked about the premise of the show and generally what it was about, but when I actually saw it being acted out on stage it was a lot more intense. The relationships between these four people were so real. Price had mentioned that for the four student actors, these roles were difficult to master. Being that they had to play characters that we 20 years older than themselves, the director said that they had trouble capturing the feeling of being 40+ years old. Given these things, I thought that the cast did a wonderful job, Watching them I had forgotten that they were twenty-somethings and actually believe that they theses forty-somethings. But it was interesting to see the relationships of these two couples, one as having the perfect marriage, and the other having a collapsing marriage, seeing how they react off each other.

Some of the scenes were pretty intense and it felt like I wasn’t supposed to be there. Which means the actors were doing very well. For example the scene with Tom and Beth in their bedroom, when they’re in this enormous argument and you think that something terrible is going to happen and it doesn’t, they start kissing. That threw me off a bit. And then the scene right after that with Gabe and Karen, when they are arguing about Tom and Beth and who’s in the right or wrong. They sort of start to question their own marriage in comparison. These are the types of conversations that you never get to watch, that if you hear them, then you're involved in it.

The most interesting part of the show was the relationships between just the women or just the men. Both pairs considered themselves best friends, but each pair disagreed with each other a lot and they were both so different. When Beth said to Karen that Karen fed off of her unhappiness, I thought that was one of the most profound moments in the entire show, because it was true, and it was also kind of true for Gabe and Tom, which is probably why Karen and Gabe stopped being friends with Tom and Beth.

But ultimately I was very impressed with the acting skills from these four students. The situations that were presented to them would be difficult for actors of their age because it would be hard to show the correct type of emotions without having been through those experiences. And they did the best that they could. I also loved the set, the way that they used convertible pieces was very clever. Overall the I loved the show, though some of the lines from the perfect married couple were a little cheesy. I would definitely recommend seeing this before its run is over.

I attended the theatre preview of "Dinner with Friends" on Wednesday Dec. 28th.

I thought that the set was very simple but worked very well. And the way the kitchen island doubled as the bar was great for space management.

The sounds of traffic and kids really brought out the scenes as well. I especially like how the spotlight was used as headlights pulling up the driveway. It almost feeled like there actually was a car behind me.

Overall great job. I would see it again, as well as recommend it to others.

While watching "Dinner With Friends," the audience experienced those "awkward pauses" that are unexpected of a play. Plays are scripted so that each line flows smoothly. This show however, was slightly different. The first time the audience was exposed to a pause, I could feel everyone get tense. For awhile, they probably thought someone had forgotten a line, but just when everyone was getting blue in the face from holding their breath, Karen spoke up. These pauses occurred many times during the show, and were done perfectly. This really made one feel like he or she was in the presence of real conversations. Everyone experiences awkward pauses in everyday conversations, and the fact that these pauses were incorporated into the play really made the situations believable.

Every time there was a tense pause in the show, whoever started talking again would start with small talk. While Beth and Karen were eating together in one scene, the conversation grew to an aggressive spot, and when the two of them paused, Karen started up a new conversation by saying, "So how are the boys?" Obviously, she was trying to change the subject and avoid tension. The conversations in "Dinner With Friends" are what made the show as good as it was.

The more pauses that happened between the couples, the farther apart they were growing. These breaks symbolized each characters failing relationships. By the end of the play, one was left to wonder if there was any hope for any of the characters in the play. This play addressed such tense subjects, but divorce and tension are things that everyone deals with in their life whether first hand or through a loved one. Unfortunately, these things happen and when this play addressed these head on and without watering them down, the audience respected that. I know I did. Don't be afraid to see such harsh issues right before your eyes. By all means, I highly recommend seeing "Dinner With Friends."

"Dinner With Friends" was a production done in a realistic style. It examined how divorces can change many relationships, not just that of the former husband and wife. "Dinner" was all about how a divorce changes the dynamics of relationships. The spine of the play was like an onion in that throughout the play, details and confessions were revealed to the audience layer by layer. As each layer was peeled back, we all got a better understanding of where each character was getting his or emotion. This had a powerful effect, because after the first act, everyone in the audience was aware of several different driving forces in each of the characters' heads. "Dinner" was all about bringing the audience into the home and life of two couples struggling with a difficult situation.

In my opinion, the production was done very well. Every bit of conflict and resolution was realistic, and the relationships of the characters were very believable. All of the actors did a good job of portraying internal conflict, and I think this was the key element to making the play as realistic as it was. The sets were simple, but they did their job, and I forgot that I was in a black box theatre on numerous occasions. The actors had a difficult job because they had a lot of business to do on stage while they were acting. They handled it very well and their actions never got in the way of their acting.

Realistic plays like "Dinner With Friends" will always be popular, and are effective because they can reach out to so many different audience members. There are so many people that have been effected by divorce that a production like this can easily relate to almost everyone in the audience. Most popular TV shows on these days are either reality shows, or shows about real people. This production goes along with the popular reality trend that pop culture enjoys right now, and is definitely worth doing.

I went to see Dinner with Friends Sunday the 2nd. When I entered the Dudley theater I was very surprised seeing how the arrangement of the seats and how the set looked. I couldn’t even recognize the theater from the first time I’d seen it when we went as a class. The seats were moved almost all the way around the stage, and the set looked professional yet very simple.

The performance was fabulous, and I enjoyed it very much. I thought the acting of the student actors/actresses was incredible. It is extremely difficult for young actors to play roles of middle age parents, certainly with the matter of divorce. It was very believable and powerful to watch. For instance, during times when there were long pauses of silence, I could understand and relate to those awkward silences while eating. I remember Joe Price say how difficult it was for the actors to do that and make it seem believable for the audience.

In the second act when Kinsey Diment, played Beth and Tom, played by Brandon Roberts start to show how their relationship really is like, I was alarmed seeing the strong yelling and fighting. However, listening to them argue I felt the same way Kinsey’s character Beth was feeling, annoyed by Tom’s deliberated questions. There was great chemistry and connections with the actors, both as the four of them as best friends and as two couples. When there is good chemistry between the actors in a play it makes the performance more realistic and enjoyable for the audience.

There was also lighthearted humor in Dinner with Friends that set the mood more at ease from the depressing confrontations. For instance, when we hear the kids yelling down to the parents about fixing the tape.

Dinner with Friends is about the issues that come with relationships, like divorce, cheating, separation, which many of us can relate to in some way. I walked away from this performance thinking about those issues. That they are simply part of life and can be thrown at us unexpectedly, but eventually we recover.

Another aspect of the play “Dinner with Friends,” which was extremely remarkable was the scenic, costume, lighting, and sound design. The set really made you feel “at home” with the production.

First of all the scenic design, done by Steve Theis was awesome. The background was really cool in the way that it made it took like a living room, bedroom, patio, and their house at Martha’s Vineyard. It looked very casual and classy. The props weren’t overdone at all. For the kitchen they just had an “island” type of counter with very simple stools, and that was nice because it was a very big stage so it didn’t overcrowd the actors. Also the way it was set up made it very easy for scene changes and the doors for them to leave was perfectly set-up in a way that you couldn’t see them when they left or entered right away. This made you imagine what the rest of the house might look like.

The lighting and sound was brilliant. The lighting designer was Alex Flinner and the sound designer was Mariya Hawks. The lighting was perfect in every scene. When it was dim it made it look very classy and when it was brighter it really focused on the characters. It was also really cool when they had the light to mimic a headlight on a car. That was a really good touch to make it all the more realistic. There was also a part in the play where they all go out to the deck to see the sunset. This was really cool because the actors were behind a wall, but you could see their silhouettes. The sound was also very good. It was nice when they played the tape of the kids wanting Gabe to put in a movie. That made it very realistic and also when Tom left their house it was a nice touch to hear him start his vehicle. It made you feel as if you were right there.

The costume design was done by Sarah Worley. The costumes were very modern and casual. Gabe and Karen seemed to really fit together in the fact that their outfits were sort of alike in the style and they both looked really classy. Beth seemed to always be a little bit more vibrant with a lot of patterns. Tom at first was very casual, but he got more dressed up as the play went on. The outfits just seemed to really fit in with the play and the character’s personalities.

This play was very creative and all aspects of it were done remarkably well. The scenic design, costume design, lighting and sound design really made the play what it was along with the wonderful acting. It truly all fit together really well and flowed really nicely.

I attended the preview performance of Dinner with friends last wednesday. The thing that was so incredible about this show was how intimate the discussions were. The topic of marriage is such a public thing that is so common today and everyone feels obligated to do. Divorce however, the exact opposite of marriage, is just as common, yet so private. To reveal the dialogue that may happen between two people getting a divorce is uncommon to see, and yet makes you more educated when the show is over. It brings light on the topic of divorce, and lets people know its ok to talk about it, and not only talk about it, but watch the most intimate moments of peoples lives happen right in front of you. I recommend this show to everyone.

Dinner with Friends is a wonderful drama that “wow’s” it’s audience. It was my understanding that it was a bit of a challenge for the actors/actresses to portray the energy of a couple of couples. Everything from the set, to the costume, down to the acting made me believe I was looking into a regular family’s front window. I think the audience also felt, by instinct that maybe we shouldn’t be seeing this couples personal moments. :D

I’m not really a drama lover but I was deeply taken aback from the very beginning of this production. The costume and makeup of these couples really set their characters and overall set how the audience felt about how believable each of them was. When the characters first came on stage I felt like they were pretty hip yet very domesticated. Karen’s (Stacia McKee) hair was in a sophisticated hairstyle that just set her facial structure back a couple of decades that really set her character in the right age range. Even without the presents of children actors Stacia’s performance was very much a motherly performance. Yet she still had the stage presence of being really into the sophisticated lifestyle she was living with the wine drinking, cooking, and travels to Italy. Her stage husband Gabe (Jed Dixon) was a perfect complement to her and the overall feel of their “coupleness”. Gabe has a very mature looking face and defiantly fits the age range of a seasoned married couple. His acting was that of a wonderful loving husband and really completed the believability of the two. The audience can really get a feel for this couple and actually believe that they are together. Overall these two did a wonderful job stepping up to such a hard task of creating character maybe two times their ages.

Just because of the energy and the portrayal of such difficult characters it was a very enjoyable performance for the audience and this is very important for any good performance.

After seeing the play and doing my first blog I felt really unsettled about how I felt about the show. I was not sure if I liked it or if I did not like it. I decided to talk to my friends which some are theater major and some are not. Everyone I talked to liked it and did not have a whole lot bad to say about "Dinner with Friends". Why? I asked them. Why did they think that this play was really good. They said that the characters really brought a sense of reality to the characters. They could really see the pain that the characters were going through. For me, I had trouble seeing that in some characters. I remeber Mark, my into to theatre teacher saying that the actors were really struggling with the play. I can see how they did have such a hard time with it. They are trying to play someone possibly twice as old as them at one of the hardest times in these characters life. With all these emotions and objectives and feelings coming into play. I think that the actors did a job well done with sorting all of these out. It is not easy bringing emotions and feeling that you have never felt before into a character. My parents are still together, which is a rare commodity nowadays. To me this play did not have that great of effect on me, because my parents are still together. For those whoes parents a no longer together I am sure that this play was really hard for them to watch and it hit a lot closer to home. Thinking back, the actors did do a good job with this play. I think I was looking for a little more intensity with some of the scenes and I do feel it was becuase I was at a preview performance. During the performances over the weekend it definately showed up and was proven. Ms. Diment was nominated for an Irene Ryan award and she deserves it, good for her.

I attended the play "Dinner With Friends" and I found it to be an excellent play. I enjoyed the play for many reasons, but I found the relationship between the characters to be the most interesting.
This play showed how a couple can fall in love, and then after many years of marriage, fall right of love. The play did a very good job using the proper scenes to show each characters struggles. It is often forgotten how divorce can affect so many different people, and change other people's lives as well. Their friends were affected more than one would consider. Before the couples regularly had dinner; now dinners are split and awkward. This situation shows how divorce affects more people than a person would normally think.
The other part that I really found interesting was the struggle to take sides. Usually in a divorce, there is a side to be taken. This is proven, as Karen and Gabe argue over whose to blame for the failed marriage, Tom or Beth? Ultimately, no one was to blame; both Tom and Beth were headed on a different path with different intention. The play showed that it is not always one of the spouses fault, but simply their feelings of love have faded.
The play was a great success and I would recommend anyone to go see it. The actors did a great job playing their parts very well. Their situation was sad, but at the same time reminded the audience that their situation occurs in real life. Ultimately, Dinner With Friends was a great play.

"Dinner with Friends" is about a problem between these couple which had them ended breaking up in the end. But it wasn't just a break up between them but also a break up with the two best friends that revolved around them.
The performance was outstanding, especially the acting that was put on by Tom played by Brandon Mychal Roberts and Beth played by Kinsey Diment. All the anger and the attitude that Brandon Mychal Roberts and Kinsey Diment really affected what I thought about the play. I've never attended any play that had to do with couples fighting, this was the first and it didn't seem cheesy at all. It wasn't pleasant to watch them fight just like how it is not pleasant to watch anyone fight at all but this was all an act and it seemed all so real.
I believe Brandon Mychal Roberts and Kinsey Diment are really great actors. Even though this was just a play, the effort and attitude that they put in this play was really well done. I applaud them because even though the fury and anger was not present, they put it there and they did a really good job of putting it there. And as one of the audience sitting out there watching every movement of their performance, it actually made me believe that they were really a couple who really had problems. When Diment smacked Mychal Roberts, I was quite proud of her to have such guts.
The performance and the play was great! I really recommend it to the public to see. It's a shocking piece of play I would have to say. I went in not knowing what was going to happen; simply thinking that it would just be a play of friends having a nice dinner together. But it was totally the opposite of what I thought. Instead of it being a nice peaceful dinner with friends, it ended up with fights, problems, and issues that happen all around the world all the time. It was nothing like I pictured and expected that's why it was such an excellent play. Irony makes it all the more better, more interesting to watch, and more shocking as it goes deeper into the play.

On Sunday December 2, 2007 I attended the play Dinner With Friends in the Dudley Experimental Theatre at UMD. I thought that this production was very well done. The play was really worth attending because of many aspects, but one such aspect was its costumes.

The play had costumes that were very well made and fit the character's personalities well. The costumes were very modern and not overly flashy. As opposed to things like a musical, the costumes seemed very ordinary, which was a good thing in the case of this play. The play needed to seem realistic and believable, and the costumes did just that. The costumes matched the character's personalities as well. The couple Karen and Gabe in the play were two people that loved to cook and review food. They always seemed on top of everything and were very organized. Their costumes reflected that. Karen always had a nice dress on that usually was one solid color and had jewelry to match. Gabe always wore a sweater and nice khaki pants. The other couple Beth and Tom were more the type of people that had free spirits and opinions. Beth always had free flowing clothes that were floral or colorful, and Tom had more casual and laid back clothes that were lighter in color.

All of the costumes in the play helped define the characters. Although they were ordinary in a lot of respects to what they audience sees in everyday life, they helped illustrate the message of the play and the characters clearly. The costumes helped display the frightening message of the play because they made the subject matter of the play seem likely to happen to the audience (which sadly it is likely).

I really recommend that people attend Dinner With Friends. It is well put together and directed, and its costumes help tell the story to the audience.

I saw this play on it's preview night. Dinner With Friends is an amazingly real play. Watching the actors on stage made me feel like I was watching actual people in a normal house. Karen to me was an amazingly played part. I felt like she was a really person, a real newly wed and a real mother. Her movements and words were like a real person. All of the people in this play were amazing. Gabe to me seems like a real father figure. His emotions are very well displayed. As for
Beth, I really felt like she was the crazy aunt that every child loves to have. She gives off the vibe that everything is fun and enjoyable in her life. But she is also so surreal because a lot of people lately have been getting divorces. She protraid the situation very well. Tom was also a very good actor. He played the part of the husband who was leaving his wife very well. I felt as if there really was a marriage and there really was trouble in it. Overall I thought this play was amazing and would tell everyone to watch it!

I would also like to address Dinner with Friend’s set and scene changes. We’ve always been told first impressions mean the most. It is said that humans will have an opinion on someone/something within the first 30 second of seeing it. Dinner with Friend’s set was a very impressive sight to see immediately walking into the performing center. The style of flats used to set up the home of Karen and Gabe (and also Beth and Tom’s) was a very sophisticated twist that enhanced the mood and feeling of the couple’s homes. The flats were very ascetically pleasing to the eyes of the audience. Also another part that really made the performance believable was the kitchen island that was used. Just subtle things like having actual running water on set, eating real food, and actually drinking wine made the audience feel as if we could just walk up, grab a glass of wine, and have a normal conversation with the couples. Another thing that really enhances the believability of the play was where in one of the scene the couple was enjoying a view of the sunset outside. Instead of just having the couples walk of stage unseen there was a shadow casting effect that was used on a couple of the flats to show what was going on “outside”.

Another thing that was a very impressive was the scene changes within this performance. Even when the lights went down on the set the characters were still acting. They moved across the set as if they were continuing their lives even in the dark. There seemed to have flow to the scene changes also and I had never seen scene changes done quite this professionally before in my life. The scene changes were almost a choreographed dance within itself and continued the performance even though the lights were down. This was extremely enjoyable for the audience to watch the continuation of the show even between the scenes. Overall the scene changes within this performance were amazingly professional and I congratulate the cast and crew for this.

This past Sunday I had the opportunity to see a performance of Dinner with Friends in the Dudely Experimental Theater here at UMD. I was touched be this play. It hit quite close to home on many occasions since I have divorced parents and know many divorced couples. I found myself knowing that I was supposed to laugh but the subject matter took me back in such a way that I couldn't bring myself to do so. This cast of 4 was phenomenal. They brought me right into their living rooms and kitchens for 2 hours. The cast played roles of characters who were several years older than themselves. I really could believe that these were two couples. that The set design was well done. It was classy and convincing to act as the inside of multiple rooms in 2 homes with little set change. The way that the kids were portrayed off stage was also particularly convincing. I think that was a creative and effective way to incorporate the element of kids into the performance. This play really opens the audience's eyes to a hard situation between 2 couples. It also shows the real results of a divorce on both the couple and the people around them.

In our world with the divorce rate being so high I think the subject matter of this play is very appropriate for audiences. I am glad that UMD decided to produce this play. I think this is a situation that young people should be exposed and this play is an excellent was to do so. It is also a great to lay bare the reality of married life and divorce. It is also a revealing to those who have watched a divorce from a distance to get an inside feel of what it was like for those people in our life. This play is all about perspective. It does a great job of giving and setting a perspective to it's audience.

Forgive me for writing in the first person, but I just got back from "Dinner with Friends," and I must say that it was my favorite experience with theater thus far- not in a happy-go-lucky sort of way, but in a powerful and thought provoking one.
There is so much to this production, and the writing is incredibly insightful. The use of food as both a medium for conversation and metaphor, the flashback scene, and a lot of tasteful foreshadowing combined with humor and true to life dialog kept my focus glued the entire time.
The acting was for the most part very convincing, and to think that these are college students close in age to me, portraying men and women in their forties is impressive. Stacia McKee's character really reminded me of my own mother in a startling way.
The costumes were clever, and the subtleties such as the changes to Beth's hairstyle as she aged added to the effectiveness.
The set was not extravagant but very good I thought, and the choices of music hit just the right chord (no pun intended.)
I for one was very satisfied with the ending, because reality would not allow for both couples to experience a fairy tale ending. The realistic element of "Dinner with Friends" is what makes it worthwhile and may even evoke a few tears.
A moment which dutifully capitalized on the theme of the play was in act two, scene three, when Gabe and Tom meet in a bar to catch up, and Gabe realizes that his friend is not the man he once knew, and as he described, he could feel himself becoming more and more detached from this new man as the conversation wore on..
What struck me the most during the production, as I sat by myself amid many couples, was a quiet sense of fear that someday I would be as one of the women in the play. I could see myself, like Karen, trying to comfort a close friend who is undergoing a divorce, or perhaps even a Beth myself. The sad fact is that one of these scenarios will be likely unavoidable, as the statistics in the program handout reminded us. Can life be boiled down to the fact that, as Tom suggests in the bar, "misery loves company?" Should we regret love gone bad?
Only time, and each individual, can answer this question.

The play Dinner with friends was very well done. When i first arrived i absolutely loved the set. It was such a transformation for the little black box theater that is the Dudley. It looked like a totally different room, not to mention no longer a box or small. The stage was higher up and was almost level from where i was sitting. It really gave a connection between the actors and the audience. The props were very simple and there really wasn't much to it. Just a couple walls and doorways, and for the different rooms an kitchen counter, couches for a living room and of course a bed for a bedroom. There were few pieces apart of this play, but it looked great.

One other thing i really enjoyed was the music before the show started, in between scenes, and in the ending. It gave it just the right ambiance and made me feel more comfortable and at home. Also, some of the songs set the mood for the next scene, or the one that just passed.

The actors, I thought, were very good. They all fit the characters very well, and portrayed and older person, even if they did not look it. Personally I did not like the character of Beth. At first she seems to be the victim and you feel sorry for her. But, as the play unravels toward the end you figure out that she is the one that was the bad guy first, not her husband. At the same time, though, I questioned why Tom would get married and keep going through it if he knew he didn't want to and especially after Beth's affair. The actors, Kinsey Diment and Brandon Mychal Roberts, do a great job at arguing and showing the different emotions a person would actually go through during a hard time like that.

When i sat down in the Dudley theater i was expecting a humorous play about divorce, and that's it. I definitely did not expect it to be as deep as it was. I was pleasantly surprised though. It dealt with a topic that many people go through in life and how it effects others around you. I think it was very well done and I applaud the cast and crew.

As I said in my first blog, I thought the set was very creative and professional. It worked perfectly for a small black box theater like the Dudley because of the simplicity it was easy to change scenes. When I watched the scenes change I wondered if, for instance the bedroom scenes, needed alittle more furniture like an end table or a lamp. Although, I didn’t think it was necessary to add more furnishings because just by having a bed on the stage the audience still recognizes it as a bedroom.

Also the lighting on the stage was fantastic. It was interesting to see lights lit behind the walls, still keeping it simple, and yet creating a warm and inviting setting. As well as the spotlight passing through the room from the car made it seem very real.

The choice in music I thought too was really good. Some of the songs I already knew and love.

What I also thought was interesting at the performance was there were two interpreters signing the entire play for two women in the audience. I heard there were also interpreters at the preview night, so I wondered if they were there every night for people who needed the assistance or what. It made me really curious watching them sign to these women because it seemed so difficult to follow the interpreters as well as the actors. On the other hand, it was really neat to watch them because they seemed like they were acting out the play to the two women. Not only were they using their hands, but I also noticed them show facial expressions to help understand the play more. There was even a spotlight on them. However, I didn’t think it was distracting at all, but it was just very interesting to see Dinner with Friends performed and interpreted at the same time.

I would like to comment on someone else’s blog about the sound of the play, and the stage setup of the play. Dinner with Friends was a great play as most people have tended to say. To comment on the sound, I definitely think that they did a great job on the sound of the play. One thing that I really enjoyed was the way they did the sound of the kids yelling from upstairs. It really sounded good, however they did that to make the voices seem like they were coming from the upstairs of a house, it was excellent. They could have just had someone offstage yelling, but that wouldn’t have sounded the same. Also, there were a couple times that there was noise offstage to make it sound like they were just in another room of the house doing something. I thought this was great, and that the sound effects overall was great. Another thing is that I think they had good choice of songs throughout the play. In between scene changes they played music. I think that the songs they chose definitely were good for the type of play that it is.
The other thing that I mentioned was the comment someone made about the setup of the stage. I also thought that it was a great setup. What I really liked was that the audience was right on top of the play. The audience was very close to the actors, and I believe that helps the interaction between the characters and the audience. This makes for a better play in my opinion. The audience was able to see all the facial expressions very well, and there was never a problem of being able to hear the actors because of how close you are to the action. So overall, I think that the setup of this play was great, along with the sound.

“Dinner with Friends,” directed by Joseph Price and performed at the Dudley Experimental Theatre on the UMD campus was a wonderful production.

The director really got his point across with how he wanted this play to be. In the director’s notes he mentions looking up divorce on Google, which seemed quite interesting to me. It was very comical that you could find do-it-yourself divorce kits and such, yet nothing like that came up when he typed in happiness! This just shows you what’s in store for the production. This is a play that can affect anyone and everyone. Many people are in relationships; many people have experienced a divorce, or know people who have had one. Not only does this play hit home to many, but it kind of makes you look at your relationship and evaluate those happy and rough patches.

I have saw the film, “Dinner with Friends,” starring Dennis Quaid, Andie MacDowell, Greg Kinnear, and Toni Collette. Some things in the play really reminded me of the film in ways that they were similar. However Joseph Price really made this production his own in the fact that it wasn’t copied to something that was previously done. It was nice to see it done differently. However Price still addressed what Donald Margulies was expressing when he wrote it. Normally you see the typical play or film about divorce and people end up taking sides. However this is a little different. At first you hear Beth’s side of the story so you get that notion in your head that Tom cheated by the way she makes it sound. Karen, trying to stick up for her friend can’t believe this. Gabe on the other hand says sorry, but doesn’t say much else. Tom is furious that Beth would tell their best friends without him. Tom later goes over there and it’s a bit awkward for the couple to understand how something like this happens. This is where the directing really did a good job. At first you feel sympathetic for Beth, but then you realize no one is to blame in this situation. This play shows that there doesn’t have to be a “bad guy,” sometimes things aren’t what they are cut out to be. This play gives you the classic idea that there are always two sides to every story. It’s also nice to see how divorce affects the people around you. Karen and Gabe had introduced Beth and Tom twelve years before and it was almost like when you found out they were getting a divorce, they were also divorcing their “couple-ness” with their friends.

Even though this play was dramatic and had a depressing story, it had a lot of comic relief and was hilarious. You felt so many emotions throughout the play, it was truly heartfelt. This play was full of energy! You should definitely see this play if you get a chance!

Last night I attended UMD’s performance of “Dinner with Friends” written by Donald Margulies. Before I went, I had some different thoughts about the play, due to the fact that the director, Joseph Price came to talk with our theater class. I was thinking that it would be difficult for the actors to portray an age that had to be close to 10 years older than themselves. Surprisingly, while watching the play I didn’t think of the age at all. The acting was incredible; they all did a fantastic job of making the play seem real. I think that because of this, many of the married couples that attended the play were really touched by the performance. At the end of the play, the couple in front of me cuddled together and held hands. Needless to say, it was a really touching play. Even though I have never been married, I could see that the performance really hit home to some people in the audience. But the play wasn’t all serious; Jed Dixon did a great job of keeping comedy in it. Even in some of the most serious parts, I found myself laughing out loud because of some small line, or facial expression he would make. He did a wonderful job as Gabe. It was a great play, and I would recommend it to any UMD student regardless of their relationship status.

As I look back on the play, I realize how much I really liked the set. I think it was very well done and perfect for this play. The thrust stage was perfect for this play and there wasn't one bad seat in the whole theater. None of the different set stages were disproportionate; the furniture fit the stage very well. The set was realistic and this supported the realistic plot of the play. Over all, I really found the set to be well presented.

Also, the play was very realistic so this kept the interest of the audience very well. Realistic plays allow the audience to connect their own lives to the play. Not only does the reality make the play entertaining, but it also gives the audience something to think about throughout the play. While a comedy is more meaningless, Dinner With Friends had a very meaningful theme with great appeal. Ultimately, I found the realistic theme of the play to make it successful play.

Finally, I feel that the success of this play was greatly helped by taking place in the small theater. The small theater gives a warm feel and allows the audience to feel closer to the cast. The Dudley Theatre may not be the perfect place for every play, but was actually perfect for Dinner With Friends. Also, the smaller theater works really well with a small cast. There were not too many characters to remember so being close was definitely more personal. Since the play was realistic, the audience could the feel like they were experiencing the events along with the cast. The Dudley Theatre helped to make Dinner With Friends a great production.

In conclusion, I really enjoyed Dinner With Friends. I loved the stage set-up, the realistic theme was great, and location in the Dudley Theatre completed the whole production. Over all, this play was a great hit and I would definitely see it again!

"Dinner With Friends" was done in a realistic style, and must have presented many challenges to the actors and actresses that were characters in the play. Despite this tough style of acting being necessary for the success of the play, everyone that took part did a great job. The result was an effect that made it seem like we were third parties in someone's house watching their life unfold.

One of the most impressive aspects of the performance was the amount of business the actors and actresses carried out on stage. There was hardly a moment when a character wasn't preparing food, moving things around, or drinking. The characters drank so much wine in fact, that I am sure it must have been fake or they all would have been fairly buzzed by the end of the show! This business contributed greatly to the realism that was achieved onstage. They did these actions in such a way that I didn't think twice about what they were doing, it just seemed normal for them to be doing it. This must have taken a lot of time and effort to perfect.

In hockey, what you do when you don't have the puck is just as important as when you do. You are able to set up passes and goals by putting yourself in a position to do so while the action of the game is taking place somewhere else. I found this idea to be very similar to the silent internal conflict that all of the characters in "Dinner" displayed when they didn't have any lines. I thought that Jed Dixon as Gabe was the best at this technique. His face and body were never static. I kept looking at him when the action was somewhere else, trying to catch him out of character. This never happened! His facial expressions and body language were constantly portraying his inner conflicts throughout the entire production, and I thought this was very impressive. It made his character seem a lot deeper, because I knew what he was feeling about something before he even had any lines about it.

In Dinner with Friends the playwright was trying to convey the seriousness of marriage. In today’s culture they words, “I love you,” are said a lot. This can be seen as both a good and bad thing. Many people just think they love each other and sort of force the marriage. It may be fine in the beginning, but in the end the people realize they never truly loved each other. Tom and Beth go through this in the play. They are introduced by some friends and end up getting married, but as soon as Beth finds out Tom was having an affair a ton of other problems start to surface. Soon enough they are getting a divorce and this can be seen in many people’s lives today. Marriage is taken too lightly and when it hits a rough spot they have a few options: give up or cling to each other. Through the couple that is still together the playwright shows how easily love can be questioned. After hearing the news about Beth and Tom they themselves get mad at each other. They question their intentions and if their own marriage will continue to work. In the end they realize it’s not worth the trouble and just end up clinging to each other for comfort and the love they needed. Even the director, Joe Price commented on the end of the play on a talk show. He said, “ (The play) doesn’t end it in a complete gloom and doom…We’re all in a world where we face impermanence on a daily basis and what we have maybe is one another to cling to the hopes that we can ride out storms.” The play shows how easily couples can question each other and how lightly marriage it being taken. People cling to what they have and are afraid to lose it. This is why the words, “I love you” are said a lot and people often rush into marriage. The playwright was trying to get the audience to think more about how relationships are taking place in contemporary times.

Having the good fortune of attending the opening night for Dinner with Friends, I was impressed by the refined energy of the actors. They showed the level of maturity expected of them seeing as they were upper classmen in the theatre department. Brandon Mychal Roberts portrayal of Tom was especially convincing.

The most difficult part for the players of a Realism play involves the ability to become one with the characters to ensure that the audience gravitates into the plot itself. If they fail at this than the performance can take a serious hit and be rather dull. The four players of this performance did no such thing! On the contrary, all four presented their characters with a grace unlike that which I have ever seen. Jed Dixon's performance as Gabe, the highly intellectual but rather droll when it came to socializing with others, was as clear a portrayal as I have ever seen. Especially on the topic of relationships and women, though he showed a surprising level of ethical faithfulness which unfortunately bordered on the obligatory. But, for one to have loyalty to one's spouse is preferable to one who does not.

Both Stacia McKee and Kinsey Diment's performances were just as compelling and believable. The women reacted with both their strengths and vices, sharpening the already razor-like edge of the play's realistic nature.

I felt as though I had been witnessing personal events of four close friends; I truly felt that I was viewing something which I had no business doing. There were times I was uncomfortable, confused, elated and disturbed; and when the play was finished, it took me a moment to return to my own reality. This is how I commend the actors for their abilities as players.

I would like to add to something others have commented on. The program notes mentioned as well the fact that there were "no villains" in this play. One can muse over whether things were Beth's fault or Tom's fault and so on, but the fact is that they both shared the blame in the break down of the marriage. Real people make both good and bad decisions with varying ramifications in their relationships, marriages, and day to day decisions. This brings up another aspect of the play that I liked, namely that each person had a good deal of depth to them and in no way was a stock character.
One question: Does anyone know why in act two, scene one, what was going on in the moment that Tom leaned forward and brushed back some of Karen's hair in a seemingly inappropriate way? I may have missed something, but that appeared to come out of no where and left me wondering if something had happened with those two in the past, etc. I can only imagine how much more that would complicate the friendships between the four of them! Nevertheless and even with this question still hanging in my mind, I loved and recommend the play to all who have not seen it.

After reading some other comments on the play I realized that I didn’t talk very much about the sound and design of the play which was also phenomenal. One of the sound aspects that really added to the dynamic of the play was the music that was played in between scenes. When the mood was light and happy, the music was cheerful. On the other hand, when a scene ended with a lot of tension, the music became more somber. Another aspect of the sound that helped improve the believability of the play was the screams of the children. The way that Gabe and Karen interacted with them really made that scene even more convincing. I also thought that the costumes helped enhance the personalities of each of the characters. During the scene that took place twelve years earlier I thought that the difference in Karen and Beth’s clothing did a very good job showing that they were different people. Karen’s clothes seemed to be more proper, and Beth’s clothes had a very unique style which showed her artistic side. Also, Beth’s hair was always much looser than Karen’s. As Karen’s age changed her hair changed with it.

I think that sometimes these aspects of a play are taken for granted. Without the sound and setup of this play I do not believe it would have had the same effect on the audience as it did.

I had the opportunity of viewing Dinner with Friends on Wednesday November 5th. I am in the Intro to Theatre Arts course and from all of the plays that we have seen this fall; Dinner with Friends is by far my favorite. Between the scenery, costumes, characters, actors, and the plot of the play it was all beautifully done. The plot of the play is very realistic and relatable.

The thing that stuck most was the relationships and the dynamic within them. Gabe and Karen and Tom and Beth were both realistic and credible couples. It was almost scary how real interactions were between the two couples. Both anger and happiness was portrayed wonderfully from all actors.

Gabe, who was played by Jed Dixons was a very animated character. I felt as though he was the easiest and hardest person to read as a character. Although he was the trophy husband, I perceived that there was more to his story. He portrayed this aspect very well (assuming that was what they were looking for). Tom, played by Mychal Roberts, acted the part of the divorced husband who has found new love and a new life. I think this situation is very realistic and he acted it well. His want to just be heard is something a lot of people look for while getting a divorce. His emotions of all kinds were acted were all very credible and explained true feelings of someone who is going through something like this.

Kinsey Diment (Beth) showed good confusion and anger in her scenes both with Gabe and Karen and also with Tom. Beth and Tom’s scene in their bedroom in Act I was very, very realistic and was acted out very well. Beth’s anger and emotional waves were very realistic and controlled where it was intriguing to watch. Finally Karen, played by Stacia Mckee was the typical housewife in the play. Although she was the housewife, her thoughts about her husband and the things around her were acted very well. Her contemplation of her life and the lives around her is something many women worry about and it felt genuine on stage. Her reaction to Beth and Tom’s divorce was realistic and her shock and anger was well portrayed.

Although the play had a negative tone and feeling to it, I enjoyed it very much. I thought the acting (along with all other aspects of the play) was fantastically done. The realistic portrayal of how couples actually are was refreshing and fun to watch on a live stage instead of a television or movies.

I want to touch on another thing Joe Price talked about being an issue. Throughout the play, there were many, many instances in which there would be an extremely awkward silence. These instances would be very hard to create on stage because everyone knows the feeling, but it would be terribly difficult to act. The “Dinner” crew created these situations perfectly. These situations are usually caused by one jaw-dropping comment, in which all four members of the cast made.
Another difficult part of these silences is that if not done flawlessly, the audience is completely lost in the situation. If done correctly, however, they engage the audience so much, that they themselves feel that tension in the stomach by the awkwardness of the situation. Every one of these instances in “Dinner” was performed flawlessly to the point you could have missed the entire conversation and still picked up on the situation. Kudos to the actors for nailing their performance.

From reading the other reviews it looks like a lot of people are talking about the effectiveness of confronting the audience with very personal one-on-one conversations. This “fly-on-the-wall” perspective allows the audience to be completely informed of the real feelings that each of the characters are experiencing. The playwright and actors are not held back by the judgments of other people but are free to be completely and fully real. The difference is clear between the first and second scenes. In the first scene Beth receives a set of placemats from Karen. She seems happy to receive them, almost excited. In the second scene when Beth and Tom are alone in their bedroom the audience learns what Beth really thinks of the little gifts that Karen brings back to her. This is the first clue to the resentment that Beth really holds toward Karen. Another example of this is the conversation between Tom and Gabe in the kitchen. Although Gabe continues to defend Tom to Karen, he comes down hard on Tom and tells him how he really feels about the way he has chosen to change and live his life. Allowing the audience to witness very intense and emotional situations is a very effect way to tell a story and make and relay a purpose.

Review by Christopher Glancy
The play, Dinner with Friends, was put on by members of the UMD THEATRE Department last week and I had the opportunity to attend. The production only involves four actors and the sets are relatively simple, leaving the burden of quality truly on the shoulders of its performers.
The sets consisted of a couple of beds and a modest living room scene. The style of dress was contemporary. Music that sounded like a theatrical score opened while the set remained in the dark. I kept waiting for the credits to roll by. They used this technique after the intermission as well; Effective mood setting. The timing between scene changes was adequate. And so began the emotional rollercoaster.
The play involves two couples that share life’s moments over the years. When the audience enters their lives, one couple is enjoying a successful relationship and the other has just encountered difficult times. Beth, played by Kinsey Diment, and Tom, played by Brandon Michael Roberts have been invited over for dinner at Gabe, played by Jed Dixon, and Karen’s, played by Stacia McKee, home for dinner. Tom hasn’t come and Beth begins making excuses for him but soon breaks down and reveals that Tom is having an affair. The rest of the play examines the dynamic between friends, husbands, and wives and their struggle to hang on to what’s important or at least make sense of it. There is a sidebar of interest involving their interest in gourmet cooking but it’s merely icing.
The writer, Donald Margulies, brings his audience deep into the private lives of these two couples, including several scenes in their bedrooms. Very intimate. Being married for over a decade, the conversations that these two couples had could’ve come right out of my own life. During intermission, I heard other couples say the same thing. Strange how similar we all are when it comes down to it.
I’m a guy so too much discussion of emotions makes me feel like I just downed a stein full of 40 weight motor oil but I survived. The actors did a convincing job of playing these couples but I had just one problem. Jed Dixon and Stacia McKee just didn’t seem like they would ever be a couple in real life. Something there struck me as a lie. If I questioned them with intense scrutiny over a matter of national security and they insisted that they were husband and wife, I would’ve continued to extract their teeth with a solid pair of Craftsman pliers. Casting stumbled on this one. I think that if the director, Joseph Price would’ve even shuffled the partners around, it would’ve seemed more authentic. Overall, it was a good piece of art, even if I had to hurry home afterwards, throw on a Steelers jersey, and watch Hamburger Hill while munching down an entire pack of bacon. I needed to find myself.

I attended the wednesday night performance of dinner with friends. The play was not at all what i had expected.To be honest when hearing about it in calss i thought great we have to go to a play about divorce. The performance was done so well it truely was a plesant surprise. I thought the acotrs did a really good job with playing such passionate roles. For instance the fight between Tom and Beth was so passionate and they pulled it off so well. They really made you believe that what was happening was real. The best thing is when you go to a play and you get so caught up in it you forget at times its acting. I found myself feeling that at times.
I liked this play in the dudley theater, it was a good play for a close personal audience. I also thought that it was neat how they used the lights to make it look as if a car had pulled up. The set and costumes were wonderful and I believe that they used the amount of space they had well.
Overall i thought i was a wonderfull performance and would recommend it to anyone.

I had the privilege of attending Dinner with Friends Saturday evening. The show was originally sold out, however due to the extreme weather conditions I was able to get a seat. The production was made up of four actors; all which got into their parts and were able to easily convince the audience of the relationships and feelings formed.
The first couple introduced is Karen and Gabe. They were played by Stacia McKee and Jed Dixon. Right away the audience gets a sense of their relationship and chemistry. Their vivid description of the food and trip to Italy draw the attention of the viewers. One of the attributes that McKee and Dixon portrayed in the relationship was the authentic feeling of their communication. While telling their story’s to Beth, the two would get wrapped up in it and there would be some slight resentment towards who was telling most of the details of the story. Both actors would bounce their disapproving facial reactions back and forth. Body language also played a big role in their communication just like it would in reality. Their relationship, although strong, never seemed too unrealistic y perfect.
Beth, played by Kinsey Diment, seemed to have one of the more difficult roles. She had to expose a personality that was unique and inventive, yet at the same time portray the vulnerable and hurt feelings from her broken marriage. When Diment was first on stage, she kept the audience intrigued with her body language and distant vibe she was giving off. It was obvious something was off, and viewers wanted to know what. When the moment came to spill her guts, it appeared somewhat awkward. However, this may be due to the awkwardness of the situation. The last scene with Diment and McKee was most enjoyable. They played off each other quite brilliantly, especially with the uncomfortable silences.
Tom, played by Brandon Mychal Roberts had the “bad guy” role. The first time the audience really hears about him is when Diment is spilling her guts on the break-up. Roberts has a relaxed way about himself onstage. He seemed to have an at ease confidence with who he was, and displayed the lack of guilt his character had for leaving his wife. One part that was slightly bothersome was the scene where he was playing twenty questions with Diment. There was question after question. However, this bothersome feeling was more likely purposeful, in that the viewers were able to see better into Diment’s feelings in the relationship.
Although the audience was smaller in an already intimate space due to the weather, the actors projected and sold their personalities just as if it had been a sold out show. That was evident by the laughter and attentive faces found in viewers. Dinner with Friends was a treat to see and the actors left one pondering different aspects in their own relationships.

On this past Wednesday, I got the chance to see Dinner with Friends in the Dudley Experimental Theatre. I had previously seen Buried Lights in this performance space and enjoyed it, so I was very excited to see what this play had to offer.

The first thing that I noticed when walking in the theatre was the audience’s set-up. I automatically fell in love with it. I liked how it surrounded the stage, making it feel more intimate. Throughout the play, I felt more connected with the actors and actresses, which was due to the closer setting. I also loved the lighting. I think that it complemented each scene perfectly, and made everyone look great. The lighting seemed to bring out their personalities more. At the beginning, I always seemed to see a glow from Gabe and Karen, which would be appropriate as they were the “perfect couple”.

The second thing was the timing of the play. I found myself so into the play that I didn’t even worry about when the intermission was, or when I was going to get out of the theatre. Normally, I think about things I have to do, or I get distracted by little imperfections on the stage, but for this play I had none of those. The story was so personal and real that it was hard to think of anything else.

Lastly, the cast was great. The story seemed real, as if they were actually going through these things themselves. I fell in love with Gabe, played by Jed Dixon. He was so authentic, and the biggest sweetheart. He also had this smart-ass side which was hilarious. I felt it was the perfect balance. The scenes that ended with him sitting alone staring off had the most impact on me. You could see the confusion and sadness pouring out of him. I could feel nothing but sympathy.

Congratulations to the cast and crew. It was a very successful performance and I would definitely recommend people to catch the last show on Sunday.

Dinner with friends was an overall enjoyable show. It was a real life play with events that are possible in real life. It was a very intimate setting with only four actors on stage you felt much closer to the cast and their relationships. I felt that the play slightly uncomfortable only because of the old women sitting next to me who were appalled by the couple wrestling in their bedroom and the use of language. Audience does indeed affect the show I believe.
The character Tom was overwhelming, I think the actor overplayed his part and overpowered the scenes that he was in. When he would come in it seemed he would take over the scene. I really didn’t sympathize for him when he stated his case for why he cheated. I don’t know something about his character made me not like him and I don’t know if that’s how the play was intended to be.
I did like the smooth transition form scene to scene. They had a unique use of props for example the bed that transitioned into the couch. It was a very modern set, the running water in the kitchen scene was very impressive. I also enjoyed the sunset scene of how you could see the silhouettes of the characters. I thought that was really cool how they set the mood for that scene.

One can’t reflect on the production Dinner with Friends without looking at its social perspective. The Playwright, Donald Margulies, did a fabulous job with depicting dialogue in relationships as well as keeping things humorous and interesting.

There was comedy found through most of the play. Laughter came out of common family stress issues such as the kids screaming for “dad” to put in a video. The issues husbands and wives have to deal with on a daily basis also cause laughter in the audience. These common stressful issues were considered laughable because of the great dialogue written and the actors who carried it out.

Not only was there comedy going on, but there were serious themes that were brought up throughout the play. People in all types of relationships were able to get something out of being in the audience. While Tom and Beth showed more of the stress and letting go side of things, Karen and Gabe showed the side of sharing the simple joys and commitment to one another. Even if one was to watch the production that wasn’t in a romantic relationship, they would be able to connect with the friendship issues between the two couples. There, the concept of friendship drifting apart could be found due to different circumstances.

Not only was there humorous dialogue and great themes for the audience to connect with, but Margulies left the element of surprise in the plot as well. The first place he catches the audience off guard was right at the beginning where right after fun storytelling dialogue between Karen and Gabe takes place, the shock of Beth and Tom comes about. Another twist in story was during the flashback when Troy decides to try and get close to Gabe’s wife Karen. That part in the plot enhanced the storyline even more, and kept the audience more intrigued.

Dinner with Friends was a delight to watch. The laughter, thought provoking subject matter, and twists in the plot captivated the audience right from the start, and kept their attention the entire time.

I would have to say that I agree with Angela about Toms character. I dont know if it was intended for us to be kinda drawn away from him but that is how i felt. I felt at times he may have been tryin to hard to portray certain emotions.The one shocking point in the play that at least I did not see coming was that earlier on Beth had cheated on Tom that was an intresting twist that I kind of liked. It almost made me feel bad for Tom.
One thing that really impressed me with this play was the use of props. I remember thinking to myself how neat the running water was from the sink. The props they used were also very versitile like the kitchen sink and counter. Overall i was impressed with how well everything came together I was very impressed with how well the actors did on a play that had to do with such serious and real subjects.Well done!

I would like to comment on the opinion someone had about the actors and actresses. I would agree that the acting in this play was very well done. I think that all of the actors and actresses did a very good job of being the person. It really seemed like the story was happening in real life. One thing that makes a good actor would be being able to be the part, and make it seem as if they are the character they are in real life. In my opinion, I think that my favorite actor in this play would have to be Brandon Roberts, who played Tom in Dinner with Friends. He is a very good actor, and especially good as guy who is kind of the bad guy of the play. He is the one who is having the affair, and does a very good job at his role. He also played a similar type role in another UMD play, Buried Lights.

One of my favorite scenes would be when Tom and Beth were having there fight in the bedroom. They both did a very good job of making this scene feel real and as if you were watching this fight as if it were in a real home. Another thing that I realized was that these actors and actresses were very comfortable with each other. They were very good at making it seem as if they were actually married. Gabe and Karen were very close, and Jed and Stacia, who played those roles, did a very good job of interacting with each other. These actors and actresses may not have been the ages of the characters, but they did a very nice job of making it seem like they were. So overall, I think that the acting in this play was very well done. This was a very intense play because of how well the actors and actresses did of being the part that they were.

Another thing I would like to comment about is the scene changes. Normally you would just see people in black running out and changing while the lights were out, but this play had a little spunk to the scene changes. There still were people coming out to take the different things off stage but you did not really notice them. Once the lights dimmed to have the changes made, the actors would stay in character. One time Beth and Karen walked around the stage and talked to themselves like someone would if they were shopping with their best friend. Your eyes would naturally follow them instead of the crew changing scenes. I thought this was very well done and is an amazing way to change the scenes!

The set, props, and lighting for the performance “Dinner with Friends” were excellent. The play took place in UMD’s black box theater, the Dudley Experimental Theater, and those involved definitely did a good job in making the most of what the theater had to offer. The moveable seats were arranged so that the stage was in one corner and the seats on two sides of it – not quite a thrust stage, but not a proscenium stage either, and the layout worked quite well. I was sitting on the top in the corner, yet I was still able to see everything that happened onstage quite clearly.

The set was simple yet effective. The backdrop looked modern, and consisted of a whitish, semi-opaque material criss-crossed with wood. This look worked as a background for all the major places in the play – a bedroom, a kitchen, the outside of a restaurant, a living room, and a bar. A couple other objects in the play had multiple uses as well. For example, a couch in one scene was quickly converted into a bed for the next. The kitchen island was a very important part of the play, as all characters spent a lot of time in the kitchen, eating, talking about food, and talking about each other. Having a kitchen island was a great way to make the play seem that much more realistic, but it was simple enough that it could be moved offstage when not in use. Finally, the food itself was a great way to add an interesting aspect to the play; it is much different to see women conversing over salads as opposed to conversing while in a living room.

I also found myself paying attention to the lighting for this show a bit more than the other performances I saw over the semester, and there was a lot of variety as to how lighting designer Alex Flinner chose to light the stage. During certain parts, the actors would perform in near-darkness. Other times, it would be bright, such as when the two women were sitting outside eating lunch, or gradually dimming, as in the very last scene. However, the thing that especially stood out was a part during the flashback to Martha’s Vineyard when Beth and Tom first met. Those two, plus newlyweds Karen and Gabe, were outside watching the sun set. The four friends were “outside”, behind the backdrop, which was lit from behind. Their moving shadows were seen on the backdrop as well as the lights of the sunset, a very cool way to show the scene.

Though limited by the small size of the black box theater, those involved in “Dinner with Friends” were nevertheless able to make the most of it, resulting in a superb performance.

I must say that the Dudley Theater was the perfect setting for a play such as this. The intimate setting of the Dudley amplified the tense dialogue between the couples and friends. This play was unbelievably real; the playwright Donald Margulies portrayed the language and atmosphere that people in close relationships would use. I think this sort of style in which the playwright tries to capture the real conversations of people no matter how mundane or moving they can be. I have seen this style used in a few movies that have recently been released. I think this sort of style has come as a response to the way people enjoy blogging and reading others blogs. This technique seems to capture the informal and seems to dive into the characters personal relationships with people and on what kind of relationship they have with that person. I also liked that the set and lighting design was relatively simple this helped in drawing more attention to the actual dialogue in the play. The actors in this production did a stellar job in portraying characters that are much older than them and that are experiencing something that not many if any people in our age bracket have ever experienced first hand. I did like that the play was not necessarily about the couple whose relationship was failing, but rather the repercussions surrounding the failing relationship and how this decision affected more than the two people that were getting a divorce. This play was a portrayal of a very real situation that unfortunately happens to many people all over, and an experience that I hope that I never face.

I agree with what Kara said about how the Dudley made the experience more intense and moving. It is nice to more up front and close to the characters. I felt more like I was a part of the show rather than a member of the audience. Some times it got a little intense and too much when the scenes got heated, like I was an innocent by stander in the middle of a fight, which is one of the most awkward positions for me to be in but in this case I kind of liked that feeling since in reality I knew it was just a play. It was easier to sense emotions when I get a better view of peoples facial expression and in the Dudley I feel like it’s more like a film type acting instead of theater because it’s more of the laser technique. So overall I really liked the choice in theater and how it made it a more intimate setting really improved the play. I don’t think I would have liked it as much or gained as much emotion from it if it were at another stage.

I attended the play “Dinner With Friends” last Wednesday night. The Dudley Theater was set up perfectly for the way the stage was put together. Although, there was still a flaw with the seating arrangements. The seats on the ends were sometimes in a bad position for seeing the actors on stage. The actors back was often facing the audience which made it hard to hear what they were saying. The overall acting was phenomenal. They were all college students, playing roles of middle aged married couples. They made it seem like they were the married couples which really made the entire play seem believable.
Gabe and Karen were the couple that introduced Tom and Beth which later didn’t work out. The couples raised a family together, hanging out steadily. It was a shock to Gabe and Karen when Beth told them that Tom was leaving her for another woman. They didn’t know whose side to take, Karen’s best friend or Gabe’s. In most cases, that I am aware of, normally the guy takes his friends’ side and the girl takes hers but in this play it seemed to be different. Both Karen and Gabe seemed to be taking Beth’s side because of what Tom did. The break up of Beth and Tom also affected Karen and Gabe. Their lives were so close that things between them would never be the same.
The order in which the story of the characters lives unraveled was great. The way they go back when Tom and Beth first met was a cool way to do it. The play starts out with the current problems with Tom and Beth, then went back to when they first met, and then went several months later into their separate lives. When they are several months after the break up, Beth has a new boyfriend and wants to get married and Tom is still with the woman he left Beth for. Karen wasn’t very happy about Beth wanting to get married again so soon and Tom was telling Gabe that the whole time he and Beth were together he was just being a good sport and tagging along everywhere. That made Gabe thinks differently of Tom. Tom told him they would have to get together soon but Gabe didn’t seem like he really wanted to.
Overall it was a great play with awesome acting skills. The way the early twenty year olds were playing middle aged married couples and making the characters believable, was what made the production work.

“Dinner with Friends" was a splendid performance. It was enjoyable on every level. The issues in this play were divorce and friendships. These are really big things in our society. The playwright did a wonderful job with the dialogue between the characters. The things that really stick out are the scenery and the acting. This was only a four character play and the actors fit their characters well. This play had to be hard to relate to for the actors seeing as they weren’t middle aged or had never been divorced. Gabe and Karen, played by Jed Dixon and Stacia McKee were the most believable. Karen, (Mckee) plays an over chatty house wife who has the perfect marriage. She nailed this performance. Everything down to her looks fit this part. She really engaged the audience. Also, her husband Gabe (Dixon) played his part very well. They had chemistry on stage. The characters costumes were fitting.
The stage was put together well for being such a small place to work with. The kitchen and bedrooms were simple but nothing more was needed. Even running water was used, which gave the performance a feeling of reality. The lighting was also a cool effect. The lighting used to create the sunset was amazing. The use of lighting to create headlights was a unique part of the play.
In the end when Gabe and Karen were reflecting on their own marriage was a very sad ending. They are focused so much on keeping their family together then loving each other. They seemed like such a happy couple in the beginning and when their best friends said they were getting a divorce they were so worried about how their friends were going to end up. It turned out that they ended up being the unhappy ones.
This play was a must see. It addresses very important issues and those issues were performed well.

After taking a step back from the play and re-evaluating the play I still think that this was a wonderful play. There are a few aspects that stood out for me in particular. These pieces include scenery, props, and the use of props by the characters themselves.

The size of the Dudley Experimental Theatre was the perfect size theatre for this very personal show. It really allowed you to feel with each character yet have your own thoughts and contemplations. You could really see and read the individual character’s emotions and thoughts. I have never had this type of experience and I believe the plot of the play helped with this as well.

The scenery in Dinner with Friends was great and supported the play very well. The background was simple yet recognizable as a house was put together thoughtfully. I felt as though the furniture was chosen brilliantly. The kitchen, living room, and bedroom were all simplex but exactly what was needed to act out the play effectively.

Another unique aspect to this play was the use of props throughout the show. I was impressed and happy to see that the character’s use of props was very realistic. The eating of the food, drinking of drinks, actually laying in bed, changing, etc. was fantastic and really gave Dinner with Friends much credibility. I am sure eating and drinking while acting is not simple (especially on stage) and took a lot of practice and coordination, which makes this aspect of the play even more impressive.

UMD’s latest theatre performance, “Dinner with Friends”, prevails as a bitter- sweet examination of family values, marriage and divorce.

Two couples raising their children together, over many years of amazing dinners and summer vacations. Gabe and Karen (UMD’S Jed Dixon and Stacia McKee) are the couple that has everything, including the love that lasts a lifetime. Beth and Tom, (UMD’s Brandon Roberts and Kinsey Diment) are the couple Gabe and Karen set up one Summer 12 years ago at Martha’s Vineyard. Now, Gabe and Karen are shocked by Beth’s post-dinner breakdown, that Tom is leaving her for another woman. After Beth pleas her side of the story, she is consoled by Gabe’s lemon- almond polenta.

Later that night after Tom’s flight to visit his girlfriend is cancelled, Beth and Tom fight about the pending divorce, displaying the reality of rage, sorrow and denial. The fight scene between Beth and Tom is acted and choreographed so well, is makes anyone who has experienced a situation like this flashback to it. Tom, after raging about how Beth, “got to them first” with her side of the story, drives to Karen and Gabe’s in the middle of the night in desperation to not loose his friendship with Gabe. Irrationally, Tom interrupts the late evening conversation about divorce between Gabe and Karen. Tom then precedes to plea his case, leaving Gabe and Karen in the middle. Tom and Beth continue to defend themselves and make the other look like the bad guy, as is the case with most divorces.

The acting done by the 4 cast members in this intimate, emotional and very real story was done perfectly. The set, designed by Steve Theis, was perfectly simple and very appropriate for the age and dispositions of the 2 couples. The lighting also complemented the set very well.

Overall this play was done perfectly, and I wouldn’t have wanted to change anything.

"Dinner With Friends" on Friday night at the Dudley Experimental Theater was a great performance within an exceptional venue. Due to the intimate nature of the play, the Dudley was a great place to showcase this play because of its close proximity. Imagining this type of play in any other larger venue would not do this play any justice. The almost compact Proscenium stage was used quite effectively by only changing the props such as the tables and chairs to create a new environment. Also to compliment this change, the lighting changed which only helped push the idea of environments changing. The costumes were also a great compliment to the characters themselves. Beth's costume with it's more bohemian accents represented her free-spirited personality and artist tendencies. Also Gabe's wardrobe effectively represented his more traditional and reserved character with a sweater vest and button-up shirt. These elements such as costume and stage design only complimented the exceptional performances of the actors and actresses themselves.

Overall the actor's and actresses performances were quite believable. The performance did not seem like a play at all, but it was like you were viewing a normal conversation. Even though the subject matter was difficult and emotionally saturated at times, the performers delivered their lines in a comfortable matter that made the play quite believable. The anger, love and frustration was all left on stage at the end of the performance and nothing was left to question for the viewer.

"Dinner With Friends" was an excellent play due to the combination of effective lighting and stage design, with an unbelievable performance from the performers. The Playwrights main message must have been "it is never too late to be happy." It was effectively carried out with the pacing of the play that led up to a humorous, but sad climax at the end. This play was definitely worth producing and attending because of the level of professionalism is was carried out in.

The cast of Dinner With Friends had very tough roles, but played them very well. This performance brought up many questions about marriage, friendship, and life. There were a few instances during the performance that made me view marriage and friendship very differently. When Karen didn’t want to speak to Tom after hearing what happened, it made the audience think about the two couples and their friendship with each other. If Karen and Gabe were not such good friends with them as a couple, they would have been sympathetic to Tom as he was going through a hard time. Since they were just as good of friends with Beth, they could not take sides. If this type of situation has never happened to someone before, it would really open his or her eyes to the possibility of it happening after seeing this performance.

Divorce is currently a big issue, and seeing this play makes a person understand why. Although Tom has done a horrible thing by having an affair, he goes into detail explaining his justification for it. He claimed that Beth had not been giving him much attention. Even though it is never okay to have an affair, he makes the audience understand him and why he pulled away from his marriage. In a way, this makes the audience feel torn between Tom and Beth, the same way Gabe and Karen are torn.

Karen stayed better friends with Beth, while Gabe stayed better friends with Tom, but they were obviously hurt by the whole situation. Even after months had passed, Karen could not believe that Beth was happy in her new relationship. This production provided an intriguing insight into the issue of divorce. It makes the audience look at divorce from the best friends’ point of view. This way, it is easy to see the effects that a break up can have on your peers. It even made Gabe and Karen question themselves in the end.

In all, the students of UMD did a great job with this performance. It raises questions about divorce and friendship that many people have not thought about, and the cast did it in a way that appealed to all types of audiences. If this play were still running, I would recommend it to others who are looking for a thought-provoking play going experience!

Referring back to Angela Spleiss's post, I would have to disagree with her comments made on Brandon Mychal Roberts' performance. I believe that Brandon did an excellent job acting and performing, especially during the intense scene with him and his ex-wife, Beth. Roberts portrayed a husband that didn't want to stay in a marriage with Beth because of lost feelings for one another. But during the third scene when Tom was informing Gabe of his issues and why he chose not to stay with Beth, I really felt his pain. During that scene, I thought Roberts did incredible acting. He told Gabe about his feelings and during that one particular scene, I felt the loneliness Tom was going through. Roberts, in my view, didn't overpower any of his performance and didn't overwhelm other actors. Although I disagree with other people's comments on Roberts' performance, I would have to agree with Rachel Krambeer's description of Brandon Mychal Roberts. During "Dinner With Friends," Roberts looked confident in playing his character. He accepted the character and acted it out to perfection. That was what I liked the most about Roberts' acting.

After taking a few days and thinking more about the play “Dinner With Friends” I really liked the way there was comedy put into a pretty serious play. Divorce and staying close to both the people involved in a divorce is not really a laughing matter, but the producer made the play funny considering what the play is about.
First off, divorce is a factor that happens to often in the United States. In nearly every divorce there are also friends that are hurt, in the case of the play, Gabe and Karen are hurt because they were the ones to introduce Tom and Beth. The two families raised there families together and Gabe and Karen had trouble comprehending that that was over. The divorce is not something that is normally considered funny and I don’t think making a serious play about divorce would be very effective, so I think it was a great idea to bring humor into a serious play.
Secondly, the play is also about keeping friends with the people you are close to no matter what happens. When Gabe and Karen find out that their best friends were getting a divorce, immediately they both took a side. Karen went with her friend and Gabe went with his. When Tom comes over to explain his side of the break up, Karen wanted nothing to with him. On the other hand Gabe came to him with open arms.
Later on in the play, when it is several months after the divorce, Gabe starts to realize how much Tom has changed and kind of understands how Tom has a different life and isn’t going to be around as much as he use to. The friendship has lost its strength and the last time they talk it didn’t seem as if they were going to see each other anytime soon.
Overall it was great and thoughtful play. Making a serious matter funny and something that would be enjoyable to watch.

Dinner With Friends was a very good production put on by the UMD Theater department. The play was done at UMD’s Dudley Theater, which is a small black box theater. The theater was set up much different from the previous play I attended there, Buried Lights. In this small intimate environment it was very easy to pick up on the acting details, which this cast was wonderful at portraying. The cast was able to embody their characters very well, especially considering they were playing middle-aged married couples, which is quite a stretch from their current lives. The acting was phenomenal, and in the intimate setting you were able to see the pain, frustration, and intense feelings this play brings out. The cast was very successful at creating the type of atmosphere this play intended.
The set for this play, while overshadowed by the acting, was very effective yet simple. The set used lighting techniques very well, I was impressed with the use of shadows and silhouettes as it was the first time I have seen some of the techniques used. The cast members were able to transition through the set very easily and this ease in which they traversed made it believable that they were very familiar with the set. Overall the set was very well designed and lighting designer did a very good job to accent the set with the needed feeling.
Dinner With Friends was a wonderful production with very strong acting in an intimate setting. The audience is able to get into the lives of these strangers and leave feeling for every character. This was by far the best realism play I have seen, I left very impressed with the UMD Theater department and all who helped make this production happen. I would highly recommend this play to anyone, and would like to see it again to see what a difference a different cast would bring to this play.

I attended the preview performance of Dinner With Friends on Wednesday night. First off I expected the performance to be unique considering these younger actors were attempting to portray middle aged characters. In my opinion they did a wonderful job of acting and building these characters throughout the performance, i was very impressed.

The play brought up many issues with life over all and marriage. It made me really think about my relationships and helped me to realize just how important they are and also to be careful with what relationships i get into. It involved a man leaving his wife and him talking to to his friends at dinner concerning this.

Even though it is never ok to have an affair the audience seemed torn between the characters Tom and Beth because even though Tom was in the wrong, i found myself starting to see his side and the reasoning behind him leaving his wife. I didn't sympathize with him, but i saw his point, which was a sad thought in itself. You could definitely tell that it pained him to talk about the situation but i didn't feel sorry for him at the same time because i felt so bad for his wife.

The playwright did a wonderful job with dialog between characters, i was never bored even though there wasn't much action throughout the play. The characters themselves did a fabulous job of sticking to their character. I was never bored while watching. The dialog was very witty and although its a sad story there was comic relief at the right times.

The scenery and how the stage was set was also very unique and kept my attention throughout the whole play. I always had something to look at.

The costumes were well put together and believable. I noticed myself keeping an eye on the lighting aspect and i thought they did a great job setting the mood and capturing important moments on scene.

Over all i think it was a great performance and i was very impressed with the actors who pulled it off with class and style, even though it must have been extremely difficult to do. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

(First off I would like to apologize for referring to Tom as “Troy” in one of my earlier blogs; I’m horrific with names.)
After further reflection on the character Tom, and knowing more about the actor’s intent of how he wanted to be portrayed, there are a couple thoughts that come to mind.
There would be much difficulty in getting sympathy from the audience playing Tom as Brandon Mychal Roberts had to do. Reason being, Beth’s side of the story was heard right off the bat. With that in mind, all the audience knew about Tom is that he was leaving his wife, supposedly for another woman and all because Beth was getting to be a bore. Sounds like a great guy.
Were there sympathetic feelings in the audience toward Tom by the end of the show? That question can only be answered by each individual audience member. This would be due to the different sets of morals, values, or experiences people have. Someone who has been through a divorce might see it differently than someone who’s been married for the past 50 years. However, it might have been interesting to see Tom played more as vulnerable or helpless in the situation. This may not have been possible to carryout though, seeing how the script cannot be tampered with.
Speaking personally if I may, by the end of the show, empathy wasn’t felt towards Tom. However, the same goes to say about Beth. Going back to the flashback scene at the Vineyard, there was a sense of rushing into the whole relationship on both parts. Yes, Karen and Gabe were happily married, but being married doesn’t automatically equal happiness. It appeared as though Tom and Beth saw their happy friends and longed for that type of joy or “completeness” in life. Without qualities that Karen and Gabe had such as good communication and commitment, Tom and Beth were just a train wreck waiting to happen. This was evident even in their early years of marriage when the audience finds out about Beth and her romantic feelings toward an acquaintance of Tom’s. Thusly, feelings of empathy weren’t felt for either person because of the divorce, but possibly rather for their naïve minds going into the marriage.
Again it needs to be stated that the acting was wonderful. Putting aside the debate whether the characters were likeable or not, audience members were able to walk away with stimulating thoughts about commitment in marriage and friendships.

After looking at some of the comments that people had made about the performance, I realized that I too had been confused in Act Two, Scene One. The way that Tom brushes Karen’s hair was such a surprise. I expected there to be some kind of story behind it that would have been previously explained, or something following it that would have added to the suspense. I had said before that I wasn’t very distracted by anything when watching the play, but this was definitely something that stuck with me until the end. It left me wondering what had exactly happened between those two before, or if more had happened between all four of them.

Another thing that I didn’t include in my last blog was the awkward silences that were utilized throughout the play. As some people have mentioned, at dinner, with one little comment, these situations were created. I thought that it only added to the authenticity of the story. In the audience, I felt as if I were sitting at that table, feeling as awkward as they were. It was almost like I had made that comment. It always felt tense when the cast sat down at dinner because everyone knew that one of those comments was going to pop up sometime. As Andy mentioned, if it is done correctly, it can engage the audience and create that tension. With this play, it was so “real” that it almost always created that tension within me.

Without these things, the performance would not have been such an impact on the audience. Once again, kudos to the cast and crew for bringing that emotion to the stage.

"Dinner With Friends" was a very realistic production. The cast did a great job of portraying inner conflict, as well as interacting with each other in a realistic way. The final element that made the production very believable was the scenic design.

Steve Theis did a great job designing a set that the cast could block around easily. The set design was simple, but it served it's purpose well. The Dudley Theatre is a small black box theatre space, so the set has limitations on how complex it can be. The problem of the limitations was solved with a flat-like backdrop that served as the background for every scene. Despite the flat never being changed, it didn't take away from the performance. It fit in every location where the action was taking place. The flat also had sliding doors that allowed easy access to backstage so that elements of the set could be moved in and out between scenes.

The set in "Dinner With Friends" was very effective. It was simple, realistic, and allowed the cast to move around in a believable way.

I have to agree that Dinner with Friends was a good way to discuss the issues of divorce. There are a lot of people who have witnessed a divorce or been through one, but some people haven’t. For me, I thought this play was interesting. I have never been through a divorce or even witnessed one. I know that sounds crazy but it’s true. This play really opened my eyes to divorce and the issues that surround it. Not many people think about the divorced couples friends and what they are going through. It has to be a though thing and this play proved that. Karen and Gabe had a really hard time coping with the divorce of their friends for a long time. It almost seemed like they were affected the most. In the end, Beth and Tom were happy about how their lives were turning out and Karen and Gabe were still miserable. Dinner with friends was a great play that had a real connection to society. It was a must see!

In reference to Stacey Prodaniuk's previous blog on December 11, one might have to disagree with her comment, "The Dudley Theatre is a small black box theatre space, so the set has limitations on how complex it can be." Some may say that with the small space that the production team had to deal with, they made the set design fairly complex by simplifying the environments to their most basic elements such as a kitchen, or setting area. As a graphic designer, refining your ideas to the most basic idea or message can be the most difficult part of the creative process.

I do agree when she says however that the set design did not take away from the play. The transitions and sets themselves were created so seamlessly that the pacing of the play let the audience know that the environment was going to change. The simplicity of the set design really helps the viewer focus on the actors themselves and also the overall message of the play.
I do agree when she says however that the set design did not take away from the play. The transitions and sets themselves were created so seamlessly that the pacing of the play let the audience know that the environment was going to change. The simplicity of the set design really helps the viewer focus on the actors themselves and also the overall message of the play.

I do now realize that my concluding statement was a contradicting to a majority of my first review, but I do feel that the acting was really great! But some of the lines that Karen and Gabe had to recite were a little cheesy but those cheesy lines are very realistic to couples that have that level of love in their lives, and are in the "Honeymoon" stage. They still showed that they still had some of the "Honeymoon" feeling left in them after twelve years. So That's where the cheesy comment came from but the acting was still very good. Another thing that I thought was a good contributing factor was the tapes of the children were actually pretty good, perfect amount of whining! But yes, there was not a whole lot of bad things that I could say that I didn't like about this show, it got very intense and I got really into to it and afterwards I wanted to know what happened to these people and their relationships. Which is a definite sign of a good performance

Dinner with Friends was much more about relationships in general than it was about married life. The play explored the relationship between friends in as much depth as the relationship between the married couples. Certainly, the relationship between the males was like a marriage of sorts and when the play finished and the two men said good-bye it had the feeling of an intimate couple mourning the loss of a valuable relationship.
When the couples were cast, the chemistry between Dixon and McKee should’ve received more consideration. It just wasn’t there. How does anyone put the explanation for a lack of chemistry into words? Chemistry is some kind of magical spark between people. It just wasn’t there. Perhaps, subconsciously, the fact that she moved like someone with an athletic background and he moved like someone that enjoyed a good game of chess had something to do with it. Maybe details like that stole credibility from the pairing. Anyone can force an answer in order to give one but I know what I saw. An awkward pairing that lacked authenticity and it didn’t come from the acting.

This past Sunday I attend the final performance of Dinner With Friends, and I thought it was excellent! This was personally my favorite play that I've been to this year.

This play has won awards in the past and it is obvious why it did. The story of the play was amazing, it kept the audience interested the entire play. It was very intriguing for me just because I could see how this is a very realistic drama. It was the story of two couples who were close friends and how they dealt with one of them getting a divorce and their feelings throughout this whole incident. This could very easily happen in the real world and it helped show how people may feel during this tough time. Another way the play kept the audience into it was the humor throughout the play. The humor was surprising and unexpected, it came at very serious, and tense times and also came at very relaxed moments throughout the play. It was a different kind of humor as well because most of the time it would be one line that made everyone laugh and it would go back to the seriousness of the conversation.

The reason that this humor worked so well was because of the actors. They did an excellent job, it was the best acting in the four plays that I've been to. They were very fluent with there lines and very confident in them. None of the actors showed even the slightest sign of any weakness throughout the play. Everyone could hear every line they said even when their backs were turned to the audience or when they were behind the screen on the "porch" in the vineyard.

Overall the play was fantastic, the actors did an amazing job with a great story line and made this play very enjoyable to watch! I wish I could have seen it again!

I went to the matinée show on Sunday to see the play Dinner With Friends. I am going to agree with Kenny Wolleat about the set design. The Dudley theater is the smallest theater I have ever been to and I thought Buried Lights set design was great. The seating for Buried Lights was all on the left side of the wall after walking in through the entrance. The seating for Dinner With Friends was more of a thrust stage with three-quarter seating. The stage was surrounded on three sides by the audience which gave everyone a great view of the stage. There was easy access for set items to be moved around. Most of this play took place in a kitchen, living room, or bedroom except a scene in the bar. For each of these scenes the audience had a perfect view of the entire set design. That element made Dinner With Friends a much more enjoyable play than Buried Lights.

Although it has been a number of weeks since I had the pleasure of attending Diner with Friends, I was impressed to such a degree that I don't believe I will forget the performance any time soon. And it is with this said that I would like to iterate my views of opposition with what Christopher Glancy stated above.

I believe the complete opposite of Glancy's dissapproving outlook towards the casting for Gabe and Karen. Both Mckee and Dixon are players with at the very least a slight amount of acting experience. I believe this was shown in their ability to portray these complex characters as I've stated in my above blog.

I do, however agree with his analogies towards Dixon appearing as "someone that enjoyed a good game of chess" but I believe that was the reasoning behind his casting. Such as when Gabe was speaking of how Tom would always steal the women he had fallen for, he was the sort of "nerdy", reserved individual who could only really let out his feelings when it came to discussing food.

Karen was the opposing necessity to Gabe's persona; she balanced his inability to express himself on more personal matters by speaking her own mind, which usually (and I use usually in a very loose fashion) consistent with his feelings. I believe she moved with not so much as an "athlete" but more towards a determined woman, self-confident to be sure.

When I attended UMD’s production of Donald Margulies’ “Dinner with Friends”, I noticed a few things about the set. Right when I got there I noticed the way the seats were set up. I really liked how they set the up so everywhere in the small theater was a good seat. They had it so the seats wrapped around 2 sides of the stage. I don’t know what it is about the Dudley theater, but I have always had a good experience there. I think it has a lot to do with the size, it seems like you are right in the middle of the production. It really is a great place to see a play. The scenery consisted of one corner of tile surrounded by white walls with wood trim. This made for the scene changes relatively simple. They would just wheel or carry out deferent props, and set pieces. The one thing that bothered me was how, in the first scene they used the counter as a kitchen counter. Then, a few scenes later as an actual bar. However, there was a large faucet sticking out of the top, so it got to be slightly distracting when they started talking. But other than that one small distraction, the production went by seamlessly. The acting was superb, and the play is really touching. I would recommend it to anyone.

I saw "Dinner with Friends" on the last showing, Sunday the 9th. This show was a huge surprise considering of there had been talk of the actors having trouble taking on the persona's of forty year old individuals.

The seating was great for this show. The stage was almost setup like a thrust. There was seating arranged like a partial semi-circle. As compared with the "Buried Lights" arrangement, this was easier for the audience to get a good view of what was happening in the play. There was only one area where the entire play was held. Everything on the stage was movable which made it easy for a transition to different locations. Nothing was too overdone or extravagant, but it wasn't too simple. It was perfect for this show because there was a small cast of actors and there wasn't a need for a giant stage or complexity in it.

Perhaps the best quality of the show was how the actors were able to pull off acting as though they were living twenty years into the future of their lives. Although no one was near the age that they played everything was very believable. Brandon Roberts and Kinsey Diment played the feuding couple in this play and really had the arguments down. Just as someone would see in the movies, the arguments were there. They were real and they used the kind of language that you would expect a fighting couple to use.

This play, if I could take a guess, would be based off of first hand experience. Don Margulies might have been through a situation like this in his life. Hence the reason he would write a play of this caliber.

I got the chance to see “Dinner with Friends” during the matinee showing last Sunday. Lucky enough to even see the show, I was truly taken back by the whole experience. Having the play take place in a very small theater, with a thrust stage, it was easy for the audience to feel like they are right there in the action.

Since being so close to all the drama, fighting and disclosure of very intimate details, it made me feel very uncomfortable. I felt like I was in a situation that wasn’t supposed to be in and afraid to get caught. However, watching the actors really get into character and see them truly pour their heart out was almost a guilty pleasure. Being able to personally feel the emotions they conveyed was not hard whatsoever.

The scene where it was obvious that the audience really connected with what was going on and got emotional was when Tom, Brandon Roberts, gets into a large argument with his wife. He had decided to leave his wife, Beth, for another woman. At this time, he even threatened to kill his wife, which really appalled me, but at the same time, the extent of his anger was so high that it didn’t seem that shocking.

Although, “Dinner with Friends” showed an honest outlook on how a marriage can be, this play was very depressing and it gave me a negative outlook on married couples. This play reminded me a lot of another play that came out in September named Chapter 2. And for that reason, I wish UMD would have decided to show a play with a different plot.

My previous blogs have been regarding the content of the play and how well it was done. But now I attempt to answer the three questions every critic attempts to ask.
First up, what is being attempted? The play was a commentary on the modern marriage with a focus of divorce. For the general audience, which consists mostly of students, this is not a concern. The real objective of the production must have been practice. Well, the actors in the play are students who are in fact being trained to be actors. And this play provides an excellent exercise for stepping out of normal character. The student actors are pushed to leave the conventional drama in the sense of over acting things to project emotions to the audience from the stage. The phrase “hit the cheap seats” shouldn’t be taken literally in this play. That’s what I think the real test was for the actors, to stop acting and mimic real people. I saw some overacting during the fight scenes between Tom and Beth, also at the beginning when Gabe and Karen are describing their vacation. I’ve never seen people so excited by a vacation. So, to finally answer the question. The play was to train actors, and I think it really made each player step into a role which stretched their abilities.
The second question was not asked but it was answered in the above paragraph. How well was the attempt succeeded? Well it was obvious to any viewer playing the characters was good practice for each actor because of the difficult roles. But what about the people who aren’t seen? It must take careful planning and several trials and an equal number of errors to create a space which can facilitate all the action. The lights need to convey mood and the music between scene changes generates a tone of things to come, or reinforces the impact of what just happened.
Lastly, was the attempt worth making? I believe the play was a great selection to get everyone involved experience creating something fake that is supposed to pass for real. Doesn’t sound easy, and I’ll bet it wasn’t. I think all parts of the play, stage design, acting, music, lighting, etcetera, came together to build one memorable performance. I went to the preview, which is sort of the finished product, but still a work in progress, and left reflecting on the action for hours. That is my proof for stating the play was defiantly worth producing.

Dinner with Friends put on by UMD in the Dudley Theatre was an interesting play experience. There were many aspects of this show that caught me by surprise, one of them being the overall theme of the play.
Most productions that I’ve seen don’t deal with reality in as serious of a manner. Dinner with friends was different for me because unlike most plays I’ve seen, this one had a very serious topic that hits home for many people. Having to go through divorce has become a very common thing for Americans today. Usually, you can’t even find someone who doesn’t know someone that has gone through a divorce. This play did a very good job of getting the message through to the audience that a situation like this is not a laughing matter. Even though there were a few mildly humorous lines thrown in here and there, the overall mood of the production was disappointment. Disappointment because we’re used to seeing the characters overcome this kind of hurtle, and everything ends up OK in the end. However, in Dinner with Friends, this was not the case.
It was an eye opener to me because this play did such a good job of making you feel what it was like to go through this type of situation. Overall, I would say that this was not the type of production that I would normally go to, but I’m glad I did because it expanded my horizon.

I want to start my review by saying that I thought that "Dinner with Friends" was done really well! The play was about two couples who have been through pretty much everything together for 12 years; one of the couples decides to break up. Tom (one of the husbands) is leaving Beth for another women. The actors and actresses all did very good concidering the curcomstances. They all had to play an older role and swing there emotions up and down throughout the whole play. When I heard what this play was about I didn't think there was going to be any comedy involved, but I was wrong. Throughout the whole play there were times of comic relief. The realism of the play was very accurate to what most people would think a divorce would actually be like. A comment from above talked about the awkward silences at the dinner table; for this type of situation the awkward silences were well placed and it was a good touch that the play write/director added, it gave a realistic feel of how a conversation in real life would have gone. Divorce is a very interesting idea for a play and they pulled it off.

Dinner With Friends was refreshingly realistic. I was very very impressed with the acting in this production. The actors that played the couple Beth and Tom were very believable. I thought the acting was particularily impressive because these actors and actresses are college students playing couples in their forties. These actors and actresses really have nothing to go off of because none of them were married themselves. They made you feel like you were really present in the living rooms and bedrooms of these couples. The play had a really nice flow to it. Divorce is a very complex issue and this production really captured the essence of that. There was no real happy ending to this production, which I have to admit was unsettling because in reality there isnt always a happy ending. At first I felt a little irked by this, but the more and more i have thought about it, the more I appreciate the realism in this work. Overall, I think that in terms of acting this is the best production i have seen at UMD this year. I was very impressed!

I also believe that Dinner With Friend was very realistic for many reasons. The first being it portrays a situation that is becoming more familiar to most people. This is because people today are getting divorced more than ever before. This means many people are able to relate to the play. The Second reason this play seems to be realistic is the way the friends interact with each other. For example the relationship between Gabe and Tom once Gabe finds out about the divorce, Gabe tries to give Tom advice about what he should do to make everything better and to get Tom and Beth back together. Gabe does this even though Tom tells him he doesn't want to try to fix it. Almost everyone knows someone, whether its a friend, teacher, or family member, that will give advise whether the person they are giving it to wants it or not. The final reason is the way divorces can destroy the relationships between friends. In the play the two couples are best friends with each other and throughout the play we slowly see the relationships start getting more and more distant, because of the divorce. This happens in real life when people get divorced. Over all Dinner With Friends is a very realistic play that many people can relate to.

Being a small production, Dinner With Friends had to do everything on a smaller scale than other plays I have seen this year. With such a restricted area, the set could only handle having a few props on stage at a time. It was interesting to see something like this so close up and personal. It was so close that it seemed at times that the audience felt a bit uncomfortable given the themes in this performance. Giving the audience an uncomfortable feeling like this is the kind of thing that works perfectly with this production.

Most of the play took place in the kitchen or bedroom. These are places in a house that are precious to a family. Because the play takes place in these rooms, the audience is invited into the home of the characters. A setting in a home like this keeps people involved in the play for the entire show. It also keeps the audience’s attention because with such limited space on stage, there are less things going on. In larger productions, there are sometimes many things going on at a time on stage, which may distract the viewer. Dinner With Friends keeps your attention on a single action throughout the entire play.

Although the stage and scenery were done very well, the costumes cannot go without being praised. The style of the costumes supported the style of the production perfectly. The four characters wear things that normal couples would wear every day whether it be out to lunch, in the house, or to bed. The costumes really complimented the characters and their traits. One example of this is in the very first scene before Beth breaks the news to Gabe and Karen about her split with Tom. She appears to be happy by her facial expressions, but she fusses with her extremely large sweater for the whole scene indicating that something is wrong. The fact that her sweater is too big for her emphasizes that she not alright. On the other hand, Gabe and Karen are dressed in clothes that fit them nice, and look pleasant on them. This indicates that their relationship is working. When the audience notices that the clothes fit the character’s personality in a play, then the costume design was a success!

When I showed up at the Dudley Theather to see Dinner With Friends my first thought was wow, for such a small space and no where to hide anything the stage set up was put together very well and it was done in a creative manner. The transitions between scenes were able to flow really well with the help of the lighting. In saying this, the lights really helped the audience to follow the transitions from scene to scene without confusing anyone as well. The idea of the kitchen island was very creative and was a great focal point for this play since it revolved so much around food and conversation. It made the play very realistic and easy to relate to because most people do tend to have more serious conversations in the kitchen around the table. The costumes for this production fit well with each character because they were supposed to be middle-aged, but yet in the present time. This was accomplished without making the actors look frumpy and dull, which would be a very hard task seeing as that is how a lot of middle-aged people are viewed. One last thing about this play was the amazing acting. Every person in this play was able to get into character and make it believable without having anything to base being middle-age on since they all are college students. I was pleasantly surprised by this and have to admit that in the beginning I was kind of nervous as to how well they would be able to portray the characters. Their facial expressions really helped the audience to understand what each character was going through and it was incredibly believeable. Altogether it was a very well put together play that greatly exceeded my expectations.

The Dudley Theater's production of "Dinner With Friends" was excellent, and I said that in my first post on this play but I forgot to mention a few things.

This was the second play that I saw in the Dudley Theater and I thought that this play used the space much better than the production of "Buried Lights." Just like Karre' said, I thought they were very creative with the space they had and they made is seem like they had a lot more room. I also thought that the transitions between scenes went really smoothly, everyone knew what they were doing and where they were going. It was bang, bang and off to the next scene.

Another thing I forgot to mention was the lighting during the play. The lights always play a much bigger role than people think. They can make or break a play and in this show the lights helped make it a great play. The lights were always an indicator of what the mood was of the play. In the first scene the lights are bright while they are enjoying themselves around the kitchen and talking, but as soon as you see Beth going to the side to cry the lights start to dim and it isn't a joyful or happy presence anymore but a sad and depressing one. That is just one part during the play but it was like this throughout it, and it was done very nicely!

In my first post I talked about how good the acting was and I just wanted to agree with Karre' again about that. I also think they did a great job acting like they were middle age with kids without having any background on the subject. They did a really great job!

After reading through some of the reviews, a few people spoke about the content or plot of the show. Dinner with Friends touches on issues within real relationships. I have not seen many plays that depict real lifestyles, real relationships, and real struggles.

I liked the change in time periods in the play. Starting in the now, going back in time to when Tim and Beth met, and then jumping forward in time after the couple has split up. It gave a great detail yet leaving a lot to the imagination. Through intuitive thinking I was able to figure out things that were not acted out or said. Nothing in the play was ever final, there was still something more to be acted or said. I would not have expected the play to end like it did. Most realistic or depressing plays still end on either a positive note or a climatic finish. This one supported neither of my hypotheses. Although I was wrong, it was refreshing to see a show end in a different way, and I felt it worked perfectly for this one.

I would have liked to see more about Gabe and Karen’s relationship because it was easy to feel the tension and anxiety between them. It left a lot to the imagination but I would have loved to see additional interaction between just the two of them. Their relationship seemed more complicated than Tom and Beth’s at times. Some people say staying together is easier than breaking up, and I felt a little of that feeling within the couple.

Overall, again, I loved the play. It was well acted with a good intimate stage. I would not hesitate to see it again if I had the opportunity.

Dinner with friends was an excellent play which I enjoyed not only the acting but also all of the technical elements as well.

Walking in to the theatre I first noticed the set and was initially thrilled to see how nice just that looked. The design of the "house" that they were in was perfect. It had just enough stuff in it to make it look roomy and like a house. Having the shoe on the floor to show that they had kids, the sink in the kitchen and just all of those small elements of the scene really made it seem more like a family house. As for the sink as an island, I guess it just made it more like home for me, because it was similar in design as to my house. Having a set that looked as well as this, really seems to keep the audience more thrilled by the performance. One thing that having a set like this really does is make for a quicker scene change. It was not an overly extensive set with a lot of detail, but instead a simple set that was easy to move, but still looked perfect for the situation.

I really enjoyed the quick transitions of scenes. Having the wall in the back being able to open and close made these generally long boring scene changes seem to be a blink of the eye.

As for all of the technical elements in this play, I was surely satisfied to say the least. From the roomy house to the quick scene changes, nice job!

On Sunday I attended Dinner with Friends, directed by guest director, Joe Price. I have never seen any other productions by Joe Price, but I like his simple style for Dinner with Friends. The story is about 2 marriages, one perfect, the other about to end.

Most of the story is set at Gabe and Karen’s home. The set was modern, simple, stylish and versatile. In the first scene, we are in Gabe and Karen’s kitchen, which is nice, clean and quite appropriate for a middle aged, well off family. The lighting used behind the transparent panels also worked perfectly for setting the various moods in the story. Multiple entrances and hallways make the set appear very homey. The sounds of kids screaming “dad fix the tape!” coming from what sounded like the upstairs of the home was a fantastic touch. The setting of the Dudley worked very well around the stage, allowing for a great view from most seats.

The next scene was converted to Beth and Tom’s bedroom, by removing the counter and adding a bed. Again the set worked really well for this middle aged, family bedroom. The fight scene that took place in this scene between Beth and Tom was choreographed very well within this space. Seats on all side could see and feel the rage, humility and sadness of this couples live action quarrel.

The same scenery also worked for the scene in Martha’s Vineyard, 12 years earlier, as well as a brief patio and bar scene. The bar scene, if that’s what it was, was a bit confusing. I could not tell where Gabe and Tom were supposed to be when they were talking. This setting could have been clearer. The patio setting was done very well with the sun light effect and bird sounds, giving a great illusion of being outside on a nice spring day.

The quick set changes are always appreciated and the music playing before and after the play was really nice. The technical aspects of this production were done very well and the acting was perfect, I mean, perfect in my opinion.

Dinner with Friends is a play not intended for the faint of heart. It was not intended for those who wanted to escape reality, which is definitely what most do when they go to a play. The play was performed in the Dudley Theater and it was a great location for this show. The story was extremely intense and personal, and when the audience was sitting so close to the actors that they could hear every breath, the performance became even more powerful. Dinner with Friends was not as friendly as the title may make it sound, but it was definitely a breathtaking display of talent among the actors and actresses. Kinsey Diment who played Beth pulled at the audience’s heartstrings while she noticeably struggled to conceal her emotions in the first scene. As Sara O’Donnell wrote, Beth wore an oversized sweater in the first scene showing her anguish, while Karen and Gabe (played by Stacia McKee and Jed Dixon) wore nice, well-fitting clothes as they laughed and told stories of their wonderful vacation. The character’s clothing throughout this play matched the actor or actresses emotions at that time. When Beth had found a new love, she wore a nice bright blouse symbolizing that she was happy. Whenever one picks out what he or she is to wear that day, it is a reflection upon their mood at that moment, which is obviously what Sarah Worley (the costume designer for this show) put into consideration for this play.

I would like to touch again on the lighting of the show. Alex Finner was the lighting designer for Dinner with Friends and I praise his work in this show. Whatever the mood of the scene was, the lights reflected upon that throughout the whole performance. During scene 1 of Act 2 where Karen and Gabe were newlyweds and they were introducing Tom (played by Brandon Michal Roberts) to Beth, the lights were really bright and yellow, which brought the illusion of sunshine and happiness to this joyous scene. However, in scene 2 of Act 1 when Tom and Beth were fighting in their bedroom, the lights were noticeably darker. This showed not only that it was nighttime, but it also set the atmosphere for Tom and Beth’s quarreling.

I really enjoyed this production. The intensity of it’s content kept me intrigued throughout the whole show. This play addressed the issue of couples falling out of love, and the dedication it takes to keep a healthy relationship going. Not everyone wants to go see a play with such depressing themes, but when one wants to see amazing acting, Dinner with Friends is the show to see!

I was reading other reviews and I noticed comments on how the play relates to people. I totally agree with this. The play is a great example of i'm sure thousands of families in the U.S today. Many people go through a divorce whether it's a spouse, a child, a parent, or a friend, everyone is affected by it. It not only showed what happens in the divorce itself, but their best friends who brought them together in the first place. You see Gabe and Karen think about what they could have done to keep it from happening, or where and when it went wrong, and even blaming themselves for bringing them together in the first place. This is really easy to relate to because I know friends that have blamed themselves for a parents divorce or for not trying to fix things. This play hit very close to home for many people and it made it a very interesting and though provoking play.

One thing I enjoyed about this play was the variety. It started out in the here and now, but suddenly went to when Tom and Beth met and it was really cool to see. I do wish, though, that they could have included a "flash back" to a time in the marriage when they were happy to see and compare the two situations.

One of the best and most believable scenes in the play was when Tom and his wife Beth got into a huge fight. This scene was so believable and emotional the even the audience was drawn back. Tom's acting was amazing; he was suppose to be angry, real angry, and he threatened to kill his wife because of all the rage he had towards her. Of course there's no way he would have actually killed her but he definitely had the audience believing that he would have. The play was very accurate to how friends are affected by the decisions you make as a person. As Tom and his wife began breaking up it affected Gabe and his wife as well.

The seating set up was perfect for this type of play because it brought the audience up close and personal to the actors. The seats were placed to the left and right of the stage and pulled real close. From reading some of the blogs above you can tell that everyone agreed that the acting was superb. Although this wasn't my favorite play of the year the acting in it was my favorite! Well done all!

The set design of "Dinner With Friends" worked well for this production. The small stage helped to provide a more intimate atmosphere which was perfect for this play. It helped the audience connect with the actors. The way the wall in the back opened helped a lot with scene changes. Since they were cooking or eating in a majority of the play, there were many big props used. The back wall helped move these on and off of the stage. Another thing that worked well was the multi-purpose props. The kitchen counter soon turned into a bar and a couch into a bed. This could help to save money and time.
The costume design did well to turn four college students into married couples with children. The designer took the time to find clothes that made them look older. One also could get a sense of what each character was like but looking at their clothing. In the scene where Tom in Beth fist meet, it is noticeable how different they are by their clothes. Beth, more of a wild child in her long flowing skirt. Tom, more up tight in his suit. The costumes helped the audience get a sense of who the characters were.

Dinner with Friends was a show unlike any others that I’d seen before. The main reason it was so different was the type of acting involved. Instead of the actors and actresses portraying somewhat fictional characters, they were portraying what seemed like real, down-to-earth, ordinary people. That kind of acting must have been challenging, and they did a great job with it. I actually felt like I was eavesdropping on a conversation rather than watching a play being performed.
The affection that Gabe and Karen showed towards each other seemed genuine; just like how a married couple is supposed to act towards one another. The conflicts and heated arguments that Tom and Beth had seemed almost too real. One scene that was done particularly well was the bedroom fight. It was so real to me that I actually found myself siding with Beth and wanting to yell back at Tom for being so ridiculous. Other scenes that were done well were the kitchen scenes where all the characters are sitting around sipping wine and acting totally casual. It couldn’t have been easy to act so laid back when you know you’re performing in front of a bunch of people that you don’t know.
Dinner with Friends was a challenge to the people involved I’m sure, but they did a great job with it. Whatever hurtles there may have been concerning the unique acting, they overcame it and delivered a good show.

Once again, another well done performance in the Dudley theatre.

Some people don't seem to realize the difficulty of pretending to be a different age, especially when the actor has not reached that age yet. It may sound easy when people think about it. How hard could it be? All the actor has do is to imitate his/her parents or guardians. Simple? Not exactly. People forget that human beings are complex. When an actor plays a character, that actor has to create a completely different person. When age becomes a factor in a character without the actor experiencing that age, it can be quite a challenge. Every cast member did a great job overcoming this played their roles very convincingly. It must have taken some hard core work.

The Dudley theatre was a great place for this show because the whole audience was close enough to see clear facial expressions from the actors. In a show like Dinner with Friends, facial expressions are important for the audience to see so it was a great thing that the show was not performed in the Marshall theatre where the audience would be further away.

As many have mentioned before, the lighting was terrific. The mood was shown through the colors of the lights and the level of dimness from the lights.
The costumes were believable as well. They were clothes that people today would wear.

This show was easy to relate to because most people have experienced divorce on some level. Whether a person experienced it with their own parents, or maybe a friend or relative has experienced it. It is a touchy subject that can't be overlooked.

Great show, put together with hard work. Who could ask for anything more?

I am going to talk about one particular scene in the play Dinner With Friends and how Brandon Mychal Roberts and Kinsey Diment did a fantastic job of showing emotions and providing very realistic characters. Obviously when a couple is going through a divorce there are going to be fights. Brandon Mychal Roberts(Tom) the husband who is leaving Beth for another women was great at showing mixed emotions of a happiness and a new start without trying to cause pain that he felt with Beth. He wants to leave without hurting his friends or causing them any suffering. And for a women going through a divorce where the man wants to leave you for another woman could possible be one of the hardest things to go through. Kinsey Diment (Beth) was brilliant at playing heart broken and showing stress and anger her intensity was great throughout the entire play. For someone to play that kind of a role and do well at it is very impressive. Both actors did a great job in showing and making a realistic fight between each other.

The actors in “Dinner with Friends” did a phenomenal job in portraying middle-aged men and women. They also didn’t have a problem making the play seem realistic, even though the main issue in the play dealt with divorce, which most college students presumably have not gone through themselves. The play itself dealt with two couples, Karen and Gabe and Tom and Beth, who did everything together… until Karen and Gabe learned that the other two were getting a divorce, which was confusing and poignant for all parties involved.

Tom and Beth were happily married for a while, and then things started to fall apart. He became dissatisfied with the way Beth treated him, saying she never ever touched him, even in laying a hand on his back. He met someone new, was elated, and didn’t understand why everyone treated him as the bad guy. Brandon Roberts (Tom) played a similar role in Joshua Hinke’s “Buried Lights”, where he played an unsatisfied husband. He did a good job in that play, and a great job in “Dinner with Friends” as well. The scene in Tom and Beth’s bedroom with the two of them arguing was very good. Roberts knew just the right amount of anger and shouting to use to make the audience uncomfortable with how realistic it all was.

Kinsey Diment, who played Tom’s wife Beth, did a great job as well in this argument scene. The looks on her face clearly indicated she was very uncomfortable with Tom being there, and wanted him to just go away above all else. Another scene that stood out was in the very beginning where she was in Karen and Gabe’s kitchen. It was obvious she had something on her mind. She stared blankly into space, didn’t say a whole lot, and fidgeted. Diment did this perfectly, and so it was easy to believe there really was something on her mind.

In Karen and Gabe’s relationship, Karen seemed to “wear the pants”, but genuinely cared about her husband and children and wanted the best for them. Actress Stacia McKee seemed to portray Karen as a bit too air headed at first, but soon it was apparent that this was simply the character’s personality – to be outgoing, and to show support for her friend Beth no matter what. Karen’s husband, Gabe, was the perfect trophy husband, and Jed Dixon did well in playing the role. When comic relief came around, it was generally Gabe, or him and his wife, who provided it. The last scene in the play, with the two of them holding each other in bed uncertainly, was one of their stronger moments. It summed up one of the messages in the performance very well – hold on, because you never know what the future could bring.

The uses with sound in Dinner with Friends were really interesting and worked really well, adding to the play's realism. For instance, the yelling of the children from upstairs was a reinforced sound. This gives the audience the image of an upper level and the kids actually being up there watching a movie. There was also reproduction of sound. When Beth and Karen were talking over lunch outside, there were sounds of birds chriping in the background. The audience then has a better feel of what kind of day it is outside.

Having the set be as simple as it was I thought was very effective. Even the main screens which were light and remained on stage looked very elegant and professional. Also breaking up the space on stage and creating entryways for the actors the enter and exit. If there were more furniture on stage, I don't really think it would have been worth the added time moving them. I thought the amount of time between scene changes was just enough. Something else during the scene changes which was different, when the actors left the stage they didn't just run off stage to get ready for the next scene, but continued to act or socialize with each other as they existed. It made for easier, more smoother transistions.

The last thing I must comment on for this play is the many, many subtleties that make a great show what it is. Especially considering the actors- things such as the youthfulness showed early on with Karen and Gabe in probably their first years of marriage, totally in love, and just kind of goofing around. This contrasted well the more seasoned feel of the scenes in the present, when they are in their forties. It is a fact that even if a marriage does stay intact and a couple together, people get older, feelings change, and rough patches and insecurities that might come from watching your best friends go through a divorce must be met with patience and good communication. The actors, who did not age much at all during the actual time of the production of course, did a great job with mannerisms, facial expressions, and conveying the emotions that accompany these different seasons of life. Not to mention the good choices of music and costumes that gave one scene a 1980's feel and the next a more current one.
On the other side of it, the bar scene with Tom and Gabe also showed how the two characters had aged and more importantly changed as they both likely realize how life has taken them in different directions throughout the dialog that they share.
Excellence is found in the details, and the cast and crew of Dinner with Friends certainly proved this to be true.

The play "Dinner With Friends" was a very emotional topic for the contemporary society. Through the familiarity of clothing, a person could find parts of themselves, or an archtype, in every character. The topic of divorce is so highly subjective, and often clouded by the actions that caused the demise rather than the thoughts. In "Dinner With Friends," it is clear to the viewers that the divorce effects all of the life. It is clear in the play that the agitating mental notes of a relationship in the contemperary life is very multifaceted and internal.

The personal perspective of the play has left the viewer contemplating. It isn't so easy to discern what would make a marriage successful, when all of the predictable successes in existence could be a available to draw from. The audience finds themselves participating in the will and devotion to the ideals of a working marriage, or relationship. It is the hope that one would not experience the turmoil of going through divorce. It is apparent in seeing Karen and Gabe evaluate the forces of inertia, quietly and introspectively.

Beth and Tom are an example of a predictable story, but told in way of realism. The most difficult part of seeing Beth in this place of distress, is that she is the contemperary, literary, independent and cultured woman that many women look forward to being as an adult. The one who succeeds at marriage is the woman who has given into the appeals of the successful husband and has kept a low profile in a casual and middle upper class life. The viewer is left to question their place in relationships, success, and life. If the acting wasn't so incredible, the audience would have been lost in the spiderwebs of their own thoughts. The play "Dinner With Friends" was a great commentary on growing and learning, the struggle of the fight to remain steady in a life, and also the ease at which one could detach quickly but so often everyone, including friends, feels the pangs of a relationship ending.

As is think back to my memory of the Dudley Theater for the production of Dinner with Friends I have a clear image of the set and the characters interacting in the space. That strikes me as a well done successful set design. It was a cozy atmosphere. The seats where close to the stage and the stage was raised to be about the level of the audience. It was a modern living room, kitchen, family room, bar, courtyard. The set transformed seamlessly without much scenery change. The play was about two couples but the focus or the thread that held them all together was food. That is why it was a smart choice by the designer to make the center island so realistic prominent to the set. It was almost the interaction of the characters with the island that told the story.
This set was very clean, and Swedish in design. I find this contradictory in retrospect. This play is about a messy divorce and a messy rifting away of friends but the set is clean lines and shapes. A little funny if you think about it. But at the time I was experiencing the play I thought the set messed beautifully with the story. Interesting how that works. Maybe it is because we all want divorces to come in these neat little boxes like Ikea furniture. Or maybe it is because it looks so modern and in the modern world divorce is a nasty reality that we all will encounter more than once in one way or another. So in accordance with good set design the set helped tell the story and made a believable space in which the characters told the story.

Thankfully, I got to catch the preview of Dinner With Friends. It was worth going through the little troubles to watch it. Like Scrooge, this play has such a good moral and its so touching. I love how this play makes you think about where you stand in your own life. The way this play was put together can make the audience really relate the situation to their own lives. I think this is what really draws the audiences attention into the play. The actors and actresses did a really great job of presenting their character. While I was watching it, I could understand each of their perspectives. What really touched me was the character, Beth. Just because I've known people in her situation, I felt I could relate to her the most. However, after watching the play I could understand more from the opposite end of the situation. As for the play as a whole, I'm glad there are still plays like that made because there are so many people who are going through the same or similar problemes.

I would like to respond to Megan Mizuko’s comments concerning the relationships between the same gender characters. First off, I’d have to agree with the profound effect Beth’s words to Karen at their lunch had on the audience. However, I would have to disagree on the truthfulness of what Beth said. This is not to say that there are not relationships that are functioning in such a way, but rather that in this certain situation, what Beth said, was said with a skewed mindset on the whole situation.
I don’t say these things because I felt more for Karen’s character, or that she wouldn’t be capable of such an act, but rather due to evidence shown in the play.
Karen and Gabe didn’t live bitterly; they lived off the joys in life and wanted to share them. This was evident in several places; first being how they communicated in their relationships. During conversation, they shared their experiences in travel and how much they enjoyed it. Karen and Gabe never fished for the troubles with Tom and Beth; the problems arose when Beth brought them up abruptly.
Another piece of evidence was the fact that Beth and Tom came together because of Karen and Gabe. They sought to reach out to both Tom and Beth and introduce them; not because they wanted credit, but because they truly cared for their friends’ happiness. It could even be noticed how carefully Karen went about introducing them. She didn’t want it referred to as a “blind date” as to try and make things less awkward for Tom and Beth. A friend that “fed off” of their friend’s troubles wouldn’t bother to reach out. After Tom and Beth appeared to be happy together, Karen and Gabe found happiness in spending time with them at the vineyard.
It seemed as though Beth had more resentment towards Karen because Beth in her mind, was always comparing her happiness to her friend’s. Karen’s focus was on sharing her happiness, but Beth took it the wrong way.
If Karen and Gabe hadn’t truly cared for the betterment of their friends, they would have just sat back and listened. Instead they spoke up, not to try and worsen the situation, but to try and help their friends make sure they were acting in their right minds. It wasn’t as though Karen and Gabe were aware of the troubles building up before the news of the spilt was dropped on them.
Karen wasn’t happy because Beth wasn’t; rather it appeared Beth wasn’t happy because Karen was.

Dinner with Friends is one of those plays that most people who are in a relationship would probably prefer not to see. This was a very intense show that revolved around the concept of divorce and how that affects those around you. During a part of the play, Beth and Tom get so mad at each other that Tom threatens to kill Beth. This gets reconciled at a point in the fight because Beth and Tom still have some feelings for each other and begin to get intimate. This just shows one of the many paradoxes that can happen in a relationship setting. Hate and love occurring in the same instance.

Another interesting aspect was that the whole time Karen and Gabe didn't believe that this would phase them locally...up until the end. Gabe would stand up and stand up for Karen. At a point in the bar when Tom tells Gabe his whole story, Gabe says that he clings to Karen. This is where the playwright is just trying to show that love can exist, and it will exist even though some individuals can fall in and out of thinking like this.

Another interesting part, staying on the topic of relationships, is the fact that it all boils down and hits Karen and Gabe towards the end. The strong couple breaks down at the end to discuss their views on what can happen to love. It is incredible that so much effort was put into keeping this relationship alive for Karen and Gabe that they just let it go towards the end.

The playwright hits on a very interesting concept when he turns his attention to a prior affair. This brings forth new questions and brings doubt to the solidarity of Beth for the whole play. It is interesting how the playwright shows that these two people, who at one time were so in love now both have dark secrets to be told and Karen and Gabe believe that it is better to just stay away.

“Dinner With Friends” was a production worth doing. In all aspects of criticism this one passes.

Theatre in the United States is very diverse. Theatre is the Twin Ports is really quite diverse as well. “Dinner With Friends” added to this diversity on a similar level as “Night Mother”, (produced earlier this year at the Playground). It is a story based from a very common event in every family in the United States today, divorce. This play forces its viewers to experience the emotionally negative aspects of divorce. Perhaps by seeing this play, and reading the director’s notes, Duluthian's will think longer and harder about their marriages. Maybe by seeing this play, divorce rates in the area will drop, (unlikely I know, but it is a nice thought).

This play went through many of the emotional stages of divorce as experienced by the friends, separately and together, as well as the divorcees. Anyone who has experienced a “messy” divorce could recognize easily the emotional stages and awkward positions the friends are put into. As a product of divorce, I can say this demonstration of the sequence of emotions one goes through was very accurate. Blame, denial, rage, sadness and loneliness are some of these stages.

Taking a look at our relationships (of all kinds) through a visual, emotional experience, like the Theater, is a valuable tool. Seeing the social commentary of humanistic daily experiences, in live theatre is something that movies and television cannot provide. It will show you things about yourself that either you forgot or have faded away. Theatre of all varieties is a valuable resource to our society.

"Dinner With Friends" is a play that doesn't care about the normal taboos of society in the United States. People don't like to talk about divorce, affairs, and anything related to these subjects and this play tackles these. This play was about one of the most common things in America, divorce. Beth, the wife, is crushed by the news that Tom has been cheating on her and now wants a divorce. She confides in the couples best friends, Karen and Gabe. As soon as Beth tells them the news Karen and Gabe are clearly bothered by it and started asking questions. They couldn't believe that it happened to someone they were that close to, and wanted to make it better. One of the first things that Karen and Gabe asked about was what was going to happen to the kids. All of these feelings and questions are common among people getting divorces. It doesn't only affect the two going through the divorce but just about everyone in their lives, and it could be tough to handle for anyone. This plays does a good job in showing how hard it really is on people and it doesn't try to hide anything that might make people uncomfortable. This play shows the truth and it does it in a very affective way that gets through to the people and makes them think about this in real life. It may be hard for people to watch this play who have been close to a divorce because it would hit pretty close to home. This play did a great job of showing how people acted during this tough time in their lives and what kind of feelings they have. This was a great play that I would recommend to anyone!

The playwright of "Dinner With Friends" was attempting to show what relationships are like and how they change over time. He uses two different married couples as examples of how love changes. For Tom and Beth, love ends. For Karen and Gabe, love changes. He also shows how friendship can end. The four friends found it hard to keep up with each other because of the recent divorce between Beth and Tom. The playwright did well at showing the difficulties that marriages go through.
This play was worth attending. It is important for everyone to understand the struggles of marriage. The story of these four friends shows this as well as the struggles of friendship.

Dinner with Friends was a production that made do with the minimum, but still managed to pull it off. Usually, plays are extravagant, and they use whatever they can to bring attention to the show. Things like props, costumes, and stage scenery all help to captivate the audience and draw them in. In Dinner with Friends, they did a lot with a little.
The stage was very simple, yet it set the mood for the show making you feel like you were in an actual home. The props were very realistic, yet few. They had real food and dishes, but there wasn’t anything on stage that was there for show, everything was used. And the costumes were everyday outfits that many of the actors and actresses probably had in their very own wardrobes. All of this simplicity would expect things to be a little dull. Thankfully, the people who put this show together knew what they were doing. Things fit together just right so that it drew attention and interest in what was happening on stage. It can’t be easy to design a set like that, especially in the Dudley theatre, but they did it well.

We use all five of our senses every day. Unfortunately, theatre is limited in what senses it can appeal to. We can't touch, smell, or taste the action on stage. What we're left with are things that appeal to our eyes and ears. The lighting and sound designers of "Dinner with Friends" did a good job bringing the audience into the home of the main characters by appealing to these two senses.

Although I was not familiar with any of the songs that were played during the show, most of them were about love. The tracks were played just before the show, sometimes between scene changes, and at the end of the show. They were pretty mellow easy listening songs. The songs' general theme was love, and it fit well with the play even though it was about a divorce. Some of the songs had a nostalgic feeling, and it made me think about the love lost between Beth and Tom. The sound effects for the play helped to make it more realistic. The children's voices, the car pulling in and out of the driveway, and the environmental sounds, all added another dimension of realism to the production.

Alex Flinner, the lighting designer did a great job. For most of the production, the lighting stayed the same while the action was taking place because it was inside the characters' homes. There were however, subtle changes when Gabe and Tom were at the bar, as well as when Karen and Beth were eating outside. The headlights from Tom's car flooding into the living room of Gabe and Karen's home was a very cool effect. This lighting technique, coupled with the sounds effects, resulted in a very realistic sequence of events. I found one other lighting technique very effective in portraying the inner conflict that characters were feeling. At the end of particular scenes, there was not a total blackout. A sort of eerie blue light was cast onstage at the end of certain scenes. The characters that ended the scene remained onstage motionless, and you could see them obviously thinking about the situation that had just taken place onstage. Sometimes this was also coupled with a song, which added to the drama of the effect. I felt that it really connected the audience with how the characters were feeling.

“Dinner with Friends” was a very well written play. The play discusses the theme of love and marriage in current society and what happens to couples in difficult times. “Dinner with Friends” specifically deals with an affair in marriage and what goes on when a couple splits up. In this play Tom and Beth, who are married with kids, are going through difficult times. Tom has been having an affair, and wants a divorce from Beth. Beth is unsure how to deal with this betrayal and confides in the couples best friends Karen and Gabe. The play focuses around the relationships between the two couples, as well as the changing relationships between the couples themselves. It gives a good look at the way divorce can affect peoples’ lives and in our society where divorce is commonplace most people can relate to this play. The playwright discusses the problem of children during a divorce, as well as the hurt and betrayal that Beth feels. This production, which was even more emotional because of the phenomenal performance given by the cast, is very emotional and leaves the audience thinking about their own relationships in their lives.

This play gave a very good example of what divorce/separation does to a the couple as well as the family as a whole. It focused mainly on the couple and was very well written. The dialouge was very accurate and realistic.

This play gives the audience sometinhg to think about. It shows the reality of a divorce as well as its effects. a must-see for couples.

Having to post one more blog for my intro to theatre class I thought to myself, which play that I have seen over the semester would I like to blog about again? I can back to dinner with friends to see what other people had said about the show. I noticed that there were 120 blogs when I looked. I know that the blog set-up was to get people talking about shows that they have seen. I really think that is has worked really well. I know that I have a lot to say after I see a show and I think this is a great way to do so and I plan to do it even after the show is over. However, going through the blogs and seeing who posted them I noticed that there were no blogs entered from the people who actually worked on the show. I know that is really intimidating reading 120 blogs critiquing your performance. I would be scared to read them if I was doing the show. I would like to see what they have to say about their performance. You can read and read the opinion of people who have seen the show but seeing things through a different perspective would be a nice change. I was reading through the comments that were posted and a comment that she said is that she would have liked to see more about the relationship between Gabe and Karen. She says that staying together is easier than breaking up. Staying to together might be easier in some sense but in other senses it is not. It might be easier just to break up and not have to deal with working on the marriage. I think this is a point the playwright was trying to make. He has two exact opposites in a show. These are nice complements to each other because how interesting would it be to see a show that both couples are going through the same thing. I was wondering why Gabe and Karen were so cheesy and so happily married. It is because the opposite is needed to make the show work. In the end they are sitting on a bed just staring off into space. It took me awhile to get this moment. I have a feeling that they were just thinking how it would be if they had just broken it off when things got rough or if what would have happened if they would have never introduced Tom and Karen. This show has a lot of sub text and I think that just seeing this show was not enough. I need to see this show another time and I am excited to do so. I think it will clear some of the plot up and will help me understand the show more.

"Dinner with Friends" is an amazing produced play. All the scenes were put together perfectly. Some plays seem really choppy, but this one felt like I was actually watching a movie. With this play, it touches many people. In today’s world divorce is an extremely common thing to happen to families. People never really think about this topic to much, it never is really discussed. This play makes you really think about divorce and how it really affects people’s lives. If divorce has never happened in your life this play really shows how it affects not only the couple involved but the friends and family. People that have known each other for a long time think they know you, when in reality everyone lives differently at home. This play is an extremely emotional play and most emotional plays are very difficult to produce perfectly. But the actors in this play pulled it off as if they really were adults in this particular situation. This play is probably my favorite one I have seen this whole year. Amazing job to everyone in the cast and crew!

There were a lot of strengths and few weaknesses in the production of Dinner With Friends. The team of actors and actresses did a great job with their character traits. When Karen and Gabe heard the news about Beth and Tom’s split, their facial expressions and actions proved that they were truly hurt. The actors were not just going through the actions, they were really feeling the effects of Tom and Beth’s breakup.

Another strength of the production was the realness of the characters. The audience could relate to the way the characters were acting. The little jokes like when Gabe scares Karen helps the audience relate to the characters. Since the viewers relate to them from the very beginning of the play, it is easy for them to see themselves in each of the character’s shoes. This fact might make the play hard to accept because of a 12 year marriage ending. According to the statistics, half of the audience can relate to an ending marriage, and half will consider that it could happen to anyone.

The only weakness of the play, if you can call this a weakness, was that the characters are college aged people acting as older married couples. Also, the play is performed at a college where there is a younger audience. A lot of college-aged students cannot relate to an ending marriage because they have not experienced it. Other than that, the performance was well done, and the characters were portrayed appropriately.

One aspect of Dinner With Friends that was done really well scenic, costume, and sound.
First the scenic design was done really well. Even with being in the experimental theater and not able to do major scene changes they were able to make it feel like you were in a kitchen with the working faucet, or in a bed room using a futon as the bed and putting a board up for the back rest. Even though they never changed the background, it always seemed to be different when they change some of the props. like when they changed from the kitchen to the vineyard when you could see their shadows of the wall.
Next the costumes they used made them seem much older than 21 or 22, because they were almost always wearing dressier clothes and not many twenty year olds wear a shirt and tie often.
Finally the sound in between scenes also helped it seem like it was a play involving middle aged couples because all the songs were soft and slow, unlike most of the music you hear today thats more faster paced and more heavier.
The way the scene, costumes, and sound were put together really supported the play and made it come together.

The play “Dinner with Friends” is probably the most thought provoking type of theatre I have ever experienced. It leaves the audience questioning different parts of their lives. I believe that this was the main intention of the playwright.

After Joseph Price came and talked to our class about the play I was expecting most of the play to be centered on the divorce of Tom and Beth. Obviously, this was the not the case. As Price says in his director’s notes, “it (the play) also explores how all relationships are tested over time, including friendships.” This was shown as Beth and Karen, and Gabe and Tom friendships became more distant after the divorce was final.

Another thing that Price talked about in his director’s notes was about happiness in our relationships. He says that there is not easy road to happiness in our relationships. When Gabe and Karen sat in their beds and sorrowfully held each other, it made this statement evident. The fact that this scene was the ending of the play also made this point much more apparent to the audience.

I think that Price did a very good job approaching this play. The playwright’s intention was fulfilled and it gave a lot of insight to one of today’s most prominent issues.

"Dinner with Friends" was a casual, yet serious, representation of relationship realities that really do affect our lives. Beth, a free-spirited and somewhat selfish character, who wears printed flowing skirts that whirl around almost as much as her heart. For years, she avoids doing what she wants, and becomes victim to an ideal that could never be her own.
Then there is Karen, who is the essence of the ideal but who fits it well. Her well groomed, middle class appearance and her bold smile become so attractive, and seem so delicate and simple. But this is what Karen wanted, Beth only thought that she wanted a life like Karen's.

Their husbands, and for Beth- now ex-husband, were a cutout of the kind, supportive husband. Polo shirts and college dreams padded their perceptions of what life should be.

In response to O'Keefe's comment, Thursday night's audience was primarily non-college aged people- they were community members, perhaps alumni. Nonetheless, they were older, and mostly married. Their response and reactions to much of the married life humor in the play was relieving and enlightening, as they deemed it to be true. Their response was an expression of honesty and understanding.

Dinner With Friends was the type of performance that required the actors and actresses to provide believable characters. Since the performers were college-aged people, they had to make sure that every little thing they did would be something an older couple would do.

The first way that the performers provided believable characters was by their costumes. They wore longer skirts, and more sophisticated button-up shirts. Their hair was also done in a way that their parents would probably wear it. Also, high heels were worn by the women, which is something that not a lot of college students would wear.

There were a lot of times where Gabe and Karen would talk to, or about their children. The fact that children’s voices were in the play made it more believable. If they had just mentioned that they had kids it would have been one thing, but they were yelling back and forth in a way that was humorous, but true to the way that parents would yell to their kids in another part of the house.

Finally, their topics of conversation throughout the play emphasized the age of the performers. They would talk about their children, vacations overseas, and how they all met. They talked about these things over a glass of wine. It would not have been as believable if they had been talking about things that the majority of college-aged students could relate to more. They did a great job!

Dinner with friends discusses a major social norm in today's society; divorce. I was especially moved to go see this play at UMD because of two things that the guest director Joseph Price brough up when he visited our Intro to Theater class a few weeks back. He asked for every one in the class who had been affected by a divorce to raise their hand and the whole class raised their hands. That was very powerful to me, that I wasn't part of a select part of society. Being a kid of divorced parents you have a different look in the world. It shapes a lot of how you look at the world and families. This play really related to society that has been infected by divorce. For those who have experienced a divorce first hand they can tell you that this play was very realistic. Dinner with friends is a a play that a lot of people can relate to. Obviously, according to my previous comment about the number of raised hands, a lot of college students have been affected by divorce and the fear of going through the same thing is in our minds as we get closer to marriage ourselves. I think the play taught the audience about what married life it really about, the parts that people wont tell you and you have to learn for your self mostly.

The other thing that Mr. Price brought up was that he was a newlywed, this I thought was interesting. For a man who is just heading down the road of marriage to direct such an excellent play about divorce was amazing. I think that Mr. Price did a very good job at directing this play to be very realistic and relate able. In conclusion, I believe that Dinner with Friends was a touching and very well done production.

When I saw UMD’s production of “Dinner with Friends”, I noticed some really great acting by all 4 students involved. The play revolves around 2 couples, Tom and Beth, and Gabe and Karen. whose friendship seems life-long. However, the friendship that seems more like a family for the couples is soon broken up by a divorce between Tom and Beth. Brandon Mychal Roberts, and Beth is played by Kinsey Diment. The two do a great job playing the couple whose relationship deteriorates. Tom seems to have excepted the fact that the marriage isn’t going to work, but Beth feels infuriated from the fact that Tom has found another woman. The other couple; Gabe played by Jed Dixon, and Karen played by Stacia Mckee, is one whose relationship seems indestructible. They were the two who actually set up Beth and Tom, so when they separate, the feel partially responsible. The play is a roller coaster ride of the emotions involved in both intimate and social relationships. It is extremely well acted, and although the context may not be something the college crowd may be interested in, I think it is definitely worth seeing and Joe Price does a great time directing it.

In the play Dinner with Friends I believe that the playwright's intention was to show how people who are best friend can one day find out how much they really know about them. For example Gabe and Tom were best friend all the way through college and in the play after Tom had been married to Beth for over ten years, Gabe just found out that Tom was miserable. After know each other for so long one would think that they would be able to tell when one of them was "dying inside" as Tom put it. Another example is Beth and Tom's perception of Karen and Gabe's relationship. They think that Karen and Gabe talk about everything in their relationship, but in actuality they talk about everything except their relationship.

In having the chance to have a class interview with the director of this show, I was given a basic outline of what this play would be about. Price had told the class that one of the hardest aspects of directing this particular show would be to get college ages students to play the parts of married couples. In many parts of this show we were given the chance to see how hard this struggle would be to overcome. Price also expressed that this performance goes beyond just the relationships of a struggling couple like Tom and Beth, but also goes into friendships and relationships of a successful marriage as is the case for Gabe and Karen.
Portraying the divorce in such a manor I can not even understand how they did it. Many times when an actor is given a chance at performing a role they must first pretend that they are actually in that situation, however, as to my knowledge not one of those actors have ever been in any situations like the ones shown. To be able to do this was absolutly phenominal and each of the actors/actresses deserve credit for their skills!
This play really shows just how relationships can go. In both the good and in the bad. On a downside of this performance, is the fact that it was shown on a college campus. It frightens me just a little, at the perception of marriage that some may take away from this show. But, despite that minor detail this performance was absolutely amazing!

In having the chance to have a class interview with the director of this show, I was given a basic outline of what this play would be about. Price had told the class that one of the hardest aspects of directing this particular show would be to get college ages students to play the parts of married couples. In many parts of this show we were given the chance to see how hard this struggle would be to overcome. Price also expressed that this performance goes beyond just the relationships of a struggling couple like Tom and Beth, but also goes into friendships and relationships of a successful marriage as is the case for Gabe and Karen.
Portraying the divorce in such a manor I can not even understand how they did it. Many times when an actor is given a chance at performing a role they must first pretend that they are actually in that situation, however, as to my knowledge not one of those actors have ever been in any situations like the ones shown. To be able to do this was absolutly phenominal and each of the actors/actresses deserve credit for their skills!
This play really shows just how relationships can go. In both the good and in the bad. On a downside of this performance, is the fact that it was shown on a college campus. It frightens me just a little, at the perception of marriage that some may take away from this show. But, despite that minor detail this performance was absolutely amazing!

Dinner with Friends was such a “real” performance that it really hit the heart. I think anyone watching the play would agree that the couples had faults and successes in the same way any couple living in the world today has.

First off, Gabe and Karen give the feeling that they are the perfect couple. In today’s society, the perfect couple does exist, but few and far between. I think that many of the audience members knew that their relationship was going to change and head towards a different direction, just like every relationship does. It was the idea of them being able to make it through that kept it interesting.

The second thing that was really realistic was the hurt that Gabe and Karen felt after hearing of Tom and Beth’s split. Many people have commented on their facial expressions. Instead of them being actors and portraying the emotion they needed to, they actually felt the sadness. It helped the audience to experience the sadness as well. In a way, it made the whole theatre’s atmosphere feel the hurt and pain.

I thought that the effects were great. When Tom’s car arrived in the driveway, instead of narrowing my mind to the set, I could picture Gabe looking out the non-existent window. One effect that was a weak point of the show was the children’s voices. When Gabe and Karen had the yelling match with them, the voices seemed a bit too fake, as if they were coming off of a cartoon tape.

Thank you for providing the Duluth-Superior community with a very “real” play. It was a very interesting and personal experience.

The play Dinner With Friends is a realistic play. It deals with a serious and common subject in todays society. This play almost reminds me of a soap opera. Its two married couples that have been good friends for years and one of the couples is getting a divorce. The playwrights intension's of this play were to give the audience some realism. The play was pretty accurate to the emotions and struggles of a divorce. It provided a insight to those who have never gone through or been apart of a divorce and how serious it can be. Tom and Beth are the couple in the play that get divorced. Tom played by Brandon Mychal Roberts divorces Beth for another woman. He gives the audience an idea of how an unhappy marriage is and how Tom deals with it. He doesn't want to hurt Beth or his friends Gabe and Karen, but him and Beth do get into a few heated battles. Kinsey Diment who plays Beth is an emotional wreck through the play she shows anger, frustration, and sadness while dealing with the divorce. This play shows a social perspective of realism and how divorce is a problem in today society.

In this play there are two types of relationships that are coming to an end, a friendship and a marriage. I found the part where the friendship between the two men in the story is ending. I found this part of the story to be more interesting than the part of the marriage ending. It was interesting to see what two people go through when ending a close friendship, and how it resembles the same things people going through in a divorce. The whole thing seemed to crumble just because of one person's decision. Seeing Beth, and the way that her whole world was falling apart in front of her was very saddening. The fact that she was losing her relationship with her husband, and that her friendship with Gabe and Karen was becoming rather distant; for one to deal with this kind of emotional strain must be overwhelming. I thought that the actress playing Beth portrayed this pain exquisitely. She portrayed both what was going on with the character literally and subconsciously. You could read the actress's body language and tell that the character was going through a great deal of pain. This play was really well written is the aspect of creating a subconscious level in each one of the characters so that they became very dynamic, and made powerful emotions portrayed really feel genuine for the audience.

Besides the great acting, there was also a great team of designers in the show as well.
I’d have to agree with the great set design. It was multi purposeful with the back drop working for kitchens and bedrooms alike. The translucent walls also made the shadows effect work.
The bed that turned into a couch was not only budget friendly but also creative and neat to see.
I did take note of the center island; it truly is something this generation utilizes for a lot of things.
Even the smallest props such as the shoe on the kitchen floor at the start of the show helped create interest and clues to who lived there.
The costumes helped the audience know the time of year. This was helpful in creating the flashbacks more believable. There was summer and winter clothing.
Time and time again, UMD Theater proves itself to be of high quality.