LOU'S VIEWS: Two coaches face off in Actors Theatre's 'Rounding Third'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Lou Harry

Is “good enough” good enough when it comes to live theater?

I don’t ask that question facetiously. When it comes to movies, we are all used to good enough. On the average trip to the multiplex, we don’t have expectations that what we are going to see on the big screen is going to be life-altering or paradigm-shifting. Sometimes we are in the mood for a good-enough romantic comedy and it seems like, on any given week, Jennifer Aniston is willing to give us one. When we need a good-enough action movie, well, here comes another with a handsome star on the poster wielding a firearm.

And, with the exception of the Beatles, there are few music groups from whom we ever expected an album filled with nothing but outstanding work (and, even then, there was “Taxman.”) The album and disc generation was happy with a few really good songs surrounded by a lot of good enough.

Theater hasn’t always been a high-expectation proposition. So called “boulevard comedies”—ones that were not intended for posterity and appealed to mass audiences rather than serious theatergoers—were as big a part of the golden days of theater as Eugene O’Neill and Arthur Miller were.

But just as rock-and-roll knocked Broadway standards off the charts, so, too, did television largely usurp boulevard comedies. When we want forgettable laughs, TV offers plenty. And we don’t have to dress up or plop down money for a ticket.

The play "Rounding Third" at the Actor's Theater Roger Ortman and Nick Carpenter play conflicting Little League coaches in Richard Dresser’s “Rounding Third” at the Carmel Community Playhouse. (Photo Courtesy Actors Theatre of Indiana)

Still, the good-enough comedy has managed to survive—even if such shows are rarely found on Broadway, where there used to be dozens a season. Local case in point, Richard Dresser’s “Rounding Third,” currently seen in a good-enough production staged by Actors Theatre of Indiana (through Sept. 26 at the Carmel Community Playhouse at Clay Terrace).

The 2002 play, which has been produced all over the country (including a run in Chicago with George Wendt), concerns a seemingly hard-nosed Little League coach who is teamed with an assistant with a very different philosophy about the game. With that information, you can probably write much of the play in your head. Therein lies the show’s appeal and its Achilles’ heel.

You won’t be surprised to hear that the duo sends mixed messages to the team. You won’t be surprised that the tough guy reveals a soft center and that the “we’re all winners” guy has a secret competitive streak. And you won’t be surprised that both have issues at home.

Neil Simon, in his heyday the master of the popular comedy, would have surrounded these two with a small world of characters to bounce off of. We would have met the coach’s wife and, perhaps, the sons of both players. The laughs would have been stronger because Simon would throw some surprises in and then, without missing a beat, remind us of the humanity of these guys. Dresser is no Simon, though, and his odd couple becomes predictable even before the end of their first meeting.

I’m guessing that one of the draws in other towns has been the quality of the acting. Great actors can make good-enough material soar—in the same way a great ballplayer might make you glad you went to the ballpark even if the team isn’t a winner. Like the show, actors Roger Ortman and Nick Carpenter—both seeming a bit on the young side—and the direction by Don Farrell are polished and professional but don’t go anyplace even remotely uncomfortable or unexpected.

Which is fine, if good enough is good enough.

Halfway through, I found myself hoping Actors Theatre will amortize the creative-yet-simple sets and stage a production of “Damn Yankees” at some point. Now that one they might be able to hit out of the park.•


This column appears weekly. Send information on upcoming arts and entertainment events to lharry@ibj.com. Twitter: IBJarts.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I took Bruce's comments to highlight a glaring issue when it comes to a state's image, and therefore its overall branding. An example is Michigan vs. Indiana. Michigan has done an excellent job of following through on its branding strategy around "Pure Michigan", even down to the detail of the rest stops. Since a state's branding is often targeted to visitors, it makes sense that rest stops, being that point of first impression, should be significant. It is clear that Indiana doesn't care as much about the impression it gives visitors even though our branding as the Crossroads of America does place importance on travel. Bruce's point is quite logical and accurate.

  2. I appreciated the article. I guess I have become so accustomed to making my "pit stops" at places where I can ALSO get gasoline and something hot to eat, that I hardly even notice public rest stops anymore. That said, I do concur with the rationale that our rest stops (if we are to have them at all) can and should be both fiscally-responsible AND designed to make a positive impression about our state.

  3. I don't know about the rest of you but I only stop at these places for one reason, and it's not to picnic. I move trucks for dealers and have been to rest areas in most all 48 lower states. Some of ours need upgrading no doubt. Many states rest areas are much worse than ours. In the rest area on I-70 just past Richmond truckers have to hike about a quarter of a mile. When I stop I;m generally in a bit of a hurry. Convenience,not beauty, is a primary concern.

  4. Community Hospital is the only system to not have layoffs? That is not true. Because I was one of the people who was laid off from East. And all of the LPN's have been laid off. Just because their layoffs were not announced or done all together does not mean people did not lose their jobs. They cherry-picked people from departments one by one. But you add them all up and it's several hundred. And East has had a dramatic drop I in patient beds from 800 to around 125. I know because I worked there for 30 years.

  5. I have obtained my 6 gallon badge for my donation of A Positive blood. I'm sorry to hear that my donation was nothing but a profit center for the Indiana Blood Center.