Floyd & Clea and some unnecessarily long bad title

We usually have faith in Playwrights Horizons, so I guess even with a title like "Floyd & Clea under the western sky" or something to that effect, we decided to usher for this one.

BAD DECISION.

A couple reasons for this: 1) As ushers, we couldn't leave at intermission. 2) As ushers, we were asked to help fill the empty front row; this means I was highly visible to the actors as my headed nodded lazily and probably audible if I was snoring.

Let me tell you about this play.
Floyd is a has-been musician alcoholic who sleeps in a car in Montana.
Clea is a girl that looks like she's 12.

Floyd and Clea become friends, but it's REALLY gross, because it seems like they're more than friends.

Clea moves to California and becomes a big shot. She even uses one of Floyd's songs. Floyd is sad and misses her.

Clea's life falls apart, and she goes to Floyd to make it better.

They sing a lot, but the songs all kind of sound the same.

Floyd has an awful southern accent and spits a lot.

It kind of reminded me of a really bad hick version of Hedwig and the Angry Inch (play, not movie). Very loosely.

I will say that this play did raise some very interesting questions that definitely stimulated some thought however. These include: "Why would Playwright Horizons do this play?" "Why did a British guy decide he should play a Texan?" "This set is very extravagant. Why would they spend money on it?" "Am I supposed to clap?" "Am I disturbed because of the pedophilic undertones, or just because of the play itself?"

I'm going to go ahead and go out on a limb and say this musical is not going to be the next "Grey Gardens."