I have never posted a comment on a review before because essentially, a review is an opinion and everyone is entitled to theirs. We have received more positive feedback then negative, which is what I try and take away with me. But the insinuation made that I was given "top billing" because I happen to be married to the producer is the most offensive thing I have read. First of all, my husband did not design the programs and the person who did apparently put them in random order. Please check your facts before making wild and hurtful accusations.

Wot eeez all diss taulk abut naght understaanding meee?

Re; the Dracula review, I think the review was pretty fair and Ms. Gauthier hit the nail on the head. Ok, so it was a first time attempt and it was indeed handsomely mounted with sets and costumes. However, the accents were absolutely dreadful, almost cartoonish, and it "really" killed it! Draula come across like a teenage boy attempting a cheap Bela Lugosi accent and his acting was as bad as the voice. Van Helsing was great in movements and expressions, but his performance was completely destroyed by the ludicrous attempt at an accent. The top billed Mina (why was she top billed, even above Dracula and Renfield? Perhaps because she has the same last name as one of the producers?) is terribly dull and even worse that the actor playing Dracula. I think Seward and Lucy had a few very good moments, but, yet again, their performances were sabotaged by dreadful accents and that has to be blamed on the producers. Renfield does steal the show, "when" you can understand him ( that’s well past strike three on forced accents there) but the most enjoyable part of all was the campy host who entertained us and introduced the show (I couldn't find him listed in the program). Now, he was refreshingly original and unexpected and I guess that's my overall beef; the show seemed kind of by the numbers, high school-like and lacked the imaginative unpredictability we expect out of the Asylum House. The actors certainly struggled with the misguided direction and the lackluster script and they had little room to breathe, but I would definitely recommend it for the host, the sets, costumes and half of Renfield's performance.

Why NUVO continues to publish half baked reviews on theater and the arts by half-hearted writers of little skill or measured insight is beyond me. I've seldem, if ever, read a valid review in this pee-stained rag. I assume they write them to add some supposed limited community credibility and thus justify their charging for the porn, pimp and pap advertising at their very foundation that further feathers the shallow publisher's precarious perch.

It's unfortunate that we knew this would not be a positive review before the play even started when the critic made off handed remarks complaining of how far she had to drive to get there. It has been 28 years since my first theatrical production and I would have to say that (especially) for a first time attempt, the play was very engaging, with spirited performances by the entire cast. Artbox Productions is to commended. NUVO, next time please send someone that wants to be there. For a much more accurate review see the blogs at www.indianaauditions.com