What the Constitution Means to Me

This play is the a powerful anecdote to the powers, both positive and negative, of the constitution. If we really care about our women, we'll listen to them. Part is the beauty of this play is being able to disagree and being able to express why. For some this will be preaching to the choir and for others this will test your boundaries of belief. Dive in and start a discussion (not a build a bunker around your own idea)

The importance of this film/play, cannot be overstated. Described as predictable by another rater, until change is realised fundamentally, this material needs to presented over and over and over again.

From the title you can see I was misled. I kinda got it, it would be a reflection on what a young person would think about the Constitution and how it may change over time.

It is really just this lady's rant, and boiler plate Feminist complaints about how terrible history, and especially the U. S. , has treated women.

My complaint is that it falls into a very large pile of stories. We live in open and progressive times in which women are treated equally and U. S. women have more freedom of action and freedom of expression than ever in history. Indeed, far and beyond women in 90% of the planet. Artists and writers seem to find nothing to complain about in the 21st C, so they will go back and tell never-ending stories about how awful the world/U. S. used to be.

This falls into that pile.

As a piece of art? It is lecturing, it is strident, it is biased, it is unfair and many parts of it seem false. Why false? She seem to set her speech in mid-1990s? When she was 15 years old? All of the commentary is about the 1800s - turn of the century? What are her credentials/experience?? She discusses having difficulty finding birth control? In the 1990's? Her excerpts from 'her speech' are so bad and so goofy that I can't believe the premise of the show. "Heidi" didn't win any speech contest.

Also, it is a stage production. I like live drama. This has very sloppy delineation between the setting and the story/drama. Fourth Wall? It is just a rambling lecture and has little artistic presentation, nor consistent style.

It could have been better if it were shorter, if it had stuck with its setting in the Foreign Legion Contest of 1990s, and if the author/performer had presented ideas and let the audience think/respond about them- instead of telling the audience what to think.

An excellent and poignant show documenting our positive and negative evolution in ensuring all Americans are treated equal under our constitution. From a deeply personal point of view, you're drawn in and kept on the edge of your seat, crying and laughing along while learning (verifiably correct) history about our constitution. The reviews on here are absolutely nuts and only validates schrek's point that we have so much more to go in protecting the rights of the most vulnerable. Ignore the Karen's and Kevin's in the reviews and WATCH THIS.

It pains me to write this review, and I don't know what I expected. The content and stories told in this play are heart-wrenching, but the way it's shown and the decision to film this as a live taping with audience chiming in really made me stop halfway. I'd rather read an article about the ordeals that the protagonist faced (and I'll probably like them too), but watching this as a 1 hr 45 min drama is a chore, more so with audience laughing in between which gives the feeling that laugh track in a sitcom gives. Hamilton as a movie made sense, but not this monologue.