"The 39 Steps," at the Huntington Theater -- Why?

If you are steeped in PBS dramas, comedies, and mega-series from Britain, you might like this play.

If you love Alfred Hitchcock's films, have seen them all three or four times, and are waiting for the next biography about him, one of his friends, or someone writing about him, to come out, you might like this play.

If you love funny exaggerations about the Scots, you definitely will like this play.

If you like the three stooges, you probably will like this play.

If you like everything British, and think you should have been born British, or think that perhaps you actually have a British soul even though you're not sure what that means, you might like this play.

If you like Sid Caeser's comedy show from the 50s (I've seen footage of it), you could like this play.

If you like all of the above, or resemble all of the above, you will surely like this play.

If you keep asking yourself the question, "Why was this play written? I mean, like, if it was written in 1949, I might say, sure, it's cute and funny. But why was it written now?" -- if you keep asking that question, you won't like this play.

Here's Marilyn on the play: "Well, if I finish a play, and I'm not totally bummed out and grossed out by it, then, yeah, I think it was a good play."

Great performances, especially the two clowns, who are exemplars of vaudevillian showmanship. The scenery and stage were a little too spare and dark (I know the idea was to spoof the Hitchcock noir ambience, but I was getting confused by the slapstick comedy fighting with the brooding darkness).

I basically fall into the category of the first few paragraphs above, and so I can agree with Marilyn...but I don't know why this play exists.