tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-59544628970949843602024-03-13T08:32:55.219-04:00TomufasadoTheatre, film, lit, and all around silliness.Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.comBlogger83125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-61801121731601357222012-12-03T20:00:00.001-05:002012-12-03T20:00:48.342-05:00DC's Demon Knights; Sexuality and Gender Done Right<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnw5x6tsPd1qghfy5o1_400.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnw5x6tsPd1qghfy5o1_400.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
A long time ago, I got my first exposure to a gay character in mainstream comics. Terry Berg, Kyle Rainer's assistant in his day job as an illustrator/comic artist, got brutally assaulted because he was gay, and for a few issues of <i>Green Lantern</i>, it was very upsetting to everybody.<br />
<br />
When I was young, this was groundbreaking; first that gay people could exist in comics, and second that even in the realms of a comic book gay people were getting the shit pounded out of them, no questions asked. You know, normally in comics, victims brave their way through horrible circumstances like this one and get superpowers, or martial arts training, or something like that, so they'll never be victims again. Not Terry Berg! He woke up from his coma, thankfully, but he got jack-diddly-squat. Apparently he was going to be a Green Lantern or something, but his character arc was totally scrapped before DC execs had to think of the PR headache that a tertiary gay Lantern would have caused.<br />
<br />
Growing up as a painfully conscious gay girl, I loved comics and it broke my little sparrow heart when I could find literally no characters that were like me in <i>Batman</i> or <i>X-Men</i>. When the Terry Berg arc happened, it became very clear to me that gay people served the exact same purpose in comics as they did in news reels; shock factor and sympathy.<br />
<br />
It wasn't until I was a teenager and found Batwoman that I started to see gay characters that were empowered, in control, and not likely to be crucified for the sake of pathos. Gay characters were still very few and far between, a problem I'd hoped that the New 52 would fix. I will never ever expect the New 52 to fix anything ever again, but there have been a couple of triumphs. Take<i> Demon Knights</i>.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7d/Demon_Knights.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7d/Demon_Knights.jpg" width="208" /></a></div>
<br />
<i>Demon Knights</i>, next to maybe <i>Batwoman</i>, is by far my favourite title in the New 52. To explain briefly, it follows a group of seven warriors who have been brought together in Medieval times to go on an Arthurian style quest. It also deals with gender, sexuality, and race with a deftness and interest that I have not yet seen in comics. I find this hilarious because, far from being a social issues comic,<i> Demon Knights</i> is a fantasy adventure story which just so happens to have a ridiculously diverse cast.<br />
<br />
To sum up, we have Jason Blood, bonded with Etrigan the Demon, who travels with his lover of many centuries, Madame Xanadu. On the way they meet Vandal Savage, who at this point in time is living up to the Classical aspect of his first name.<br />
<br />
These three characters are joined by the transgender/asexual/something else Shining Knight Sir Ystin, a lesbian Amazon named Exoristos, a paraplegic Horsewoman, and Al Jabr, a Muslim engineer.<br />
<br />
The team is having adventures in a kingdom presided over by happily-married princess lesbians, and <i>holy shit</i> if this comic had come out when I was eleven or so I would have been incredibly happy and at peace with myself.<br />
<br />
In addition to having almost complete gender parity, this title makes an effort to create a diverse world. Arthuriana is typically a field dominated by neckbeardishness, EVERYONE IS CATHOLIC AND WHITE syndrome, and strawman feminism, and while there is some of the latter in <i>Demon Knights</i>, I find that it's drowned out by the positive and complex representations of many kinds of people.<br />
<br />
Sir Ystin is one of the most pure-hearted, golden characters I've ever read, and by far one of the best representations of trans people I've seen in DC. Though his gender identity is frequently misunderstood by the characters in the comic, it is not meant to be misunderstood or ridiculed by the readers, and in the end Sir Ystin's choice of gender representation does not stop his allies from supporting him in battle. As it should be.<br />
<br />
The Horsewoman is paralyzed, but though she receives many offers to be 'repaired', she rebuffs them because she sees herself as more than capable with her magic saddle and her link with horses. She is at peace with the loss of her mobility, and has learned to use it to the best of her abilities.<br />
<br />
Al Jabr's Muslim heritage is illustrated with dignity and without sensationalism, for once. I disliked the introduction of the Muslim Green Lantern in the New 52 because it felt tokenistic and ill thought out. In <i>Demon Knights</i>, Al Jabr's faith is a central and positive part to his character. Because of the time period, his faith is also relatively new, which means he faces a lot of prejudice for practicing it in the Christianish setting the title takes place in. This makes his adherence to Islam even more impressive and heroic.<br />
<br />
Exoristos is a bit of an odd case, in that she appears to be a subversion of the 'strong independent woman' who plagues our Hollywood blockbusters. Her radical views about woman's place in the society that she isn't used to has caused more harm than good. She wears very impractical clothing, and has a militant attitude towards men, though I suppose if I were just off the boat from Themiscyra I would too.<br />
<br />
Exoristos appears to be the uncompromising bruiser of the group, and sometimes her hard-headedness needs to be taken down a notch. However, her attitudes about women in society contrast pleasantly with those of the more worldly Madame Xanadu and down-to-earth Horsewoman, leading to a lot of interesting conflict between these ladies. And her heart is in the right place; she uses her strength to protect those who are weaker than she is and to honour the society that she's been expelled from.<br />
<br />
What's really great about <i>Demon Knights </i>is the fact that while it represents people from all kinds of backgrounds and sexualities, the book isn't self-congratulating about it!<br />
<br />
Too often in media, though especially in comics, when minorities are portrayed it's scene as an act of charity, as a signpost of progress and magnanimity. And it is extremely frustrating for the targets of such extremely generous gestures. <i>Demon Knights</i>, on the other hand, is a dark adventure comic marketed towards <i>everyone</i> with a taste for high fantasy. It just happens to also have folks in it who are LGBT, handicapped, and of different religions than 'the default'.<br />
<br />
But, because<i> Demon Knights</i> doesn't wear its progressive nature on its sleeve, I don't think very many people have realized just how wonderful it is. Certainly, I have not seen that much feedback for <i>Demon Knights. </i>So in conclusion, track down issues of this great book, or get an account on comixology and read it all in one sitting!</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-7246711773110934492012-10-07T13:45:00.001-04:002012-10-28T20:12:56.614-04:00On Rebecca<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wGsh2ljA1T4/UHGmnoKlQuI/AAAAAAAAACg/lVXkefs1ylM/s1600/Rebecca+On+Broadway+LOL.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wGsh2ljA1T4/UHGmnoKlQuI/AAAAAAAAACg/lVXkefs1ylM/s320/Rebecca+On+Broadway+LOL.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Rebecca billboard on Broadway</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So my heart has been ripped out by the <a href="http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/onstage/article/1267310--was-broadway-musical-rebecca-the-victim-of-bizarre-fraud">recent events </a>surrounding<i> Rebecca: Das Musical's</i> troubled and ultimately aborted transfer to Broadway. That link is a pretty good rundown of what happened, but basically the producer, Ben Sprecher, was probably the victim of an audacious financial scam that left his production 4.5 million short of its budget. So now <i>Rebecca's</i> Broadway opening has been postponed indefinitely, and several hardworking theatre people are out of work.<br />
<br />
I love this musical, in all its incarnations. In the past three years since I became acquainted with it, I have been longing for a production that was closer to where I live than Austria or Japan. There were myriads of rumours and workshops and aborted productions in the English-speaking world, but this was the closest an English production came to actually opening.<br />
<br />
Yeah, I do feel betrayed. It's a vicarious betrayal, perhaps, but it hurts all the same. I can't even imagine the disappointment of those who had bought tickets to this show or those whose bread and butter were depending on its premiere and run. It's a gigantic loss.<br />
<br />
I feel that anger is the only acceptable emotion to have towards the debacle, both towards the person or persons who perpetrated this despicable fraud and towards Ben Sprecher. The situation was severely mishandled by Mr Sprecher. There were livelihoods and reputations running on his decision-making, and he played fast and loose with them.<br />
<br />
Though I try to be an optimist when it comes to the inevitable disappointments in theatre, the things that have happened lately serve only to upset me. An English-language production of this wonderful show seems unlikely now. I would not blame anyone if they decided to drop this project, and frankly the fact that Mr Sprecher wants to try producing Rebecca again isn't heartening.</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-36730974881074881272012-10-04T14:46:00.002-04:002012-10-21T17:02:36.028-04:00At Last, A Play To Audit: Stratford's Cymbeline<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Lately, theatre at Stratford has been focused more on the visuals and the concept rather than the rich text and characterization. This isn't a bad thing; there is always going to be a place for spectacle. But Shakespeare's audiences went to audit a play, not see one. Antoni Cimolino understands this succinctly, and makes the words the star of the show in <i>Cymbeline</i>.<br />
<br />
Staged on the Tom Patterson's extreme thrust stage,<i> Cymbeline</i> is at first blush an extremely problematic play. With a twist-riddled story that feels an awful lot like Snow White, <i>Cymbeline</i> is often perceived as one of the weaker entries in Shakespeare's canon. Be that as it may, it has some thrilling passages of text. When delivered by a cast as strong as the one at Stratford is, this play is a fantastic experience.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
As the titular king Cymbeline, Geraint Wyn-Davies pulls out all the stops. He is a good king but a bad father, which in a play more grounded in reality might have made him unsympathetic, but in this fairy tale land there is far worse than bad fathers.<br />
<br />
Yanna McIntosh is a delight as Cymbeline's second Queen, who is absorbed with the study of poisons and a plot to make her feckless son Cloten (Mike Shara, very funny as always) king. McIntosh is totally at home with the long and complex passages of text that she is given.<br />
<br />
Cara Ricketts as Innogen, Cymbeline's daughter and only child, is in turn courageous and vulnerable.<br />
<br />
The rest of the cast is uniformly excellent; they seem to know what they're saying, which can be depressingly rare at Stratford. I attribute this to the production, which has been designed to put more emphasis on the words than on the visuals. While the trappings, are nothing less than Stratford's usual extravagant standard, they are nonetheless understated and inobstrusive.<br />
<br />
This is the caliber of understanding I expect from professional theatres. Any theatre with a budget can make something that is visually stunning but ultimately empty. It's productions like<i> Cymbeline </i>that set Stratford apart from the rest. I anticipate Antoni Cimolino's run at the Festival with great anticipation.</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-19287051958574769652012-09-15T02:21:00.000-04:002012-10-21T17:02:42.623-04:00Absolute Perfection: Stratford's Matchmaker<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
One of the aspects of reviewing I have the most difficulty with is what to write about in the case of a perfect production. Praising uniform amazingness gets tiring (this is an unspoken rule of criticism, I fear), and often does the production a disservice. So imagine my consternation when I came out of the Festival Theatre having seen <i>The Matchmaker</i>.<br />
<br />
Goddamn it, this is a beautiful show.<br />
<br />
...<br />
<br />
<b><i>How dare they?</i></b><br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Before I go on to sing the praises of <i>The Matchmaker</i>, I should make one thing clear. On paper, and often in performance, I don't like Thornton Wilder's work in the least. I find his writing to be sanctimonious and condescending. Even<i> Hello, Dolly!, </i>the musical based on <i>The Matchmaker</i>, rubs me the wrong way.<br />
<br />
But something about the cast and director Chris Abraham's handling of the script make me appreciate and respect this work in a way I hadn't thought I would. There's a new level of relatability and humanity. When the characters talk to the audience, it doesn't feel like Thornton Wilder hissing carpe diem from beyond the grave; it feels like an honest and profound look at the inside of the character.<br />
<br />
The plot of <i>The Matchmaker</i> is a bit complicated, but in a nutshell -- Once upon a time in Yonkers, millionaire Horace Vandergelder refuses to let his niece marry an artist with no financial prospects. At the same time, he's preparing to propose to hatmaker Irene Molloy, via the arrangements of matchmaker Dolly Levi, who has her own eye on Horace and his considerable estate. Meanwhile, Horace's employees decide to leave Yonkers and have a life-affirming day in the big city. Hijinx ensues.<br />
<br />
It certainly helps that the cast is comprised of the acting titans who bless this Festival. Seana McKenna is outstanding as always in the role of Dolly Levi. With a wink of her eye, she stamps her signature on the role, giving it the gravitas one might see in any Shakespearean role. Geraint Wyn-Davies gives a surprisingly grounded performance as job-hopper Malachi Stack. Tom McCamus as Horace Vandergelder is crusty and amiable, with impeccable comic timing, and Cara Ricketts as his tearful niece Ermengarde is a delight to watch.<br />
<br />
As Irene Molloy, Laura Condlln acquits herself most elegantly, and Andrea Runge as her shop assistant is really charming. As Cornelius Hackl, Mike Shara brings his usual a-game, and Josh Epstein as Barnaby Tucker is unbearably cute.<br />
<br />
What's really marvelous is how brilliantly the cast works as an ensemble. From a breathless transition between scenes that got gasps and applause, to the deliciously farcical restaurant scene, these actors bring an energy and unity of the kind that was sorely missing in <i>Henry V</i>.<br />
<br />
The candy-coloured sets are very impressive and multi-leveled, and they lend themselves well to the physical comedy that's required. The costumes are gorgeous and evocative of the era without looking like museum pieces.<br />
<br />
The Festival stage's various dimensions and features were used with great understanding and a panache that is sometimes lacking in mainstage productions. Thought the production is very frenetic, it is never overly busy and always keeps a focus on the main action.<br />
<br />
This is my first time seeing a play directed by Chris Abraham, but if he handles next year's <i>Othello</i> with the same amount of thoughtfulness and profundity, I'm totally on board.</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-32838119591939126852012-09-15T01:52:00.000-04:002012-09-15T01:52:21.972-04:00We Interrupt This Review-Glutting...<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
For a little update on things to come!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Sorry updates have been few and far between lately; my laptop has had some trouble, but it's fixed now and just as reliable as before the issues.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Unfortunately, it is also September, and that means school! To be fair, my school schedule is not as horrible and time-consuming as I'd like to believe, but there are still a lot of commitments I have to make if I want my marks to be stellar. And I do, I really do.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I will finish this year's round of Stratford reviews. I've yet to review:</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The Matchmaker</li>
<li>You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown</li>
<li>Cymbeline</li>
<li>A Word or Two (maybe??)</li>
</ul>
I also mean to write about my experiences fencing, a sport I've just picked up this week and intend to take through to the end of the year. Lots of cool random stuff to tell you guys already.<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
My other big plan for this year is the vlog I've been getting ready these past couple of months. I will be reviewing foodie media. There will be food porn. The first thing I will review is <i>Julie and Julia</i>, and I will make some delicious boeuf bourgignon.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Add to that whatever shows I'm guaranteed to get involved in, and I think we have a pretty cool school year ahead of us!</div>
</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-83422819607359262802012-09-05T20:50:00.004-04:002012-10-21T17:03:15.346-04:00Stratford's Much Ado About Nothing<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
One of the biggest problems I have with theatrical productions in general, but especially productions of Shakespeare, is the tendency of creatives to give their show a totally arbitrary setting and aesthetic. At best, this can be an amusing showcase of the creativity of the designers. At worst, the new setting can undermine the text and feel totally appropriative. I tend to feel uncomfortable with 'reimagined' settings no matter how unobstrusive they are, which is why I feel at a loss to describe my feelings about the Festival Theatre's production of<i> Much Ado About Nothing</i>. Light and engaging, with an appealing cast, <i>Much Ado</i> nonetheless has a troubling attitude towards its setting and the setting's culture.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Set in Brazil at the turn of the century, the kind of time where designer Santo Loquasto's designs and silhouettes can really shine and be luscious, <i>Much Ado's</i> plot has two main plots. In a time of temporary peace, Beatrice and Benedick deny their attraction to each other despite everyone around trying to make them a couple. Meanwhile, Beatrice's cousin Hero is accused of being unfaithful to her love Claudio by her father Leonato. These accusations of impurity are planted by Don John, who is determined to bring trouble to the house of Leonato.<br />
<br />
As Beatrice and Benedick, real life couple Deborah Hay and Ben Carlson are simply adorable. Ms Hay has the rare physicality of old-school comediennes like Lucille Ball and Carol Burnett. This quality is complemented wonderfully by the more aural humour that Mr Carlson possesses. The charisma of these two stars keeps the first half of the play light as a souffle, making the abrupt tonal shift halfway more effective.<br />
<br />
James Blendick brings a great gravitas to the role of Leonato, which is too often played like a more red-blooded Polonius. Gareth Potter is having great fun in the role of Don John.<br />
<br />
Bethany Jillard as Hero is appropriately demure in the face of wrongful accusation, and has a good amount of chemistry with Tyrone Savage's Claudio.<br />
<br />
All in all, this is a good-looking and charismatic cast that works quite well as an ensemble. Along with the lovely set and costumes, I really should love this production.<br />
<br />
But the arbitrary setting is actually really distracting and problematic. Let me illustrate.<br />
<br />
I remember seeing a the COC's production of<i> Carmen</i> a few years ago, which was set in Cuba during the 1930's. Apart from the local references in the text which were made nonsensical by the new setting, there is also the consequential fact that the nation of Cuba has banned bull-fighting since its independence in 1901. Banning the blood sport was part of the effort to establish a new Cuba, independent from its colonizers. So in this <i>Carmen</i>, there wouldn't have been a toreador for 30 years or so, which eradicates the setting of Act 5, the character of Escamillo, and that wonderfully catchy song that we all love. The creatives' willful ignorance of this fact undermined the opera's libretto and whatever gambit the director had had to make <i>Carmen</i> relevant or fresh.<br />
<br />
When I watched<i> Much Ado About Nothing</i>, I felt the same kind of uncomfortable sensation that I felt with Carmen. I wondered why. The Brazilian setting is totally arbitrary, true, but it seemed harmless. And then I read <a href="http://www.stratfordfestival.ca/OnStage/productions.aspx?id=16259&prodid=41217">the director's notes</a>.<br />
<br />
Having studied magic realism, I can say that a) <i>Much Ado About Nothing</i>, as a text in general and specifically to this production, has few, if any, elements of magic realism and b) even if it had, magic realism is not a genre that has a geographically specific setting. Several well-known works in this mode are indigenous to South and Central America, but setting <i>Much Ado</i> in Brazil does not automatically qualify it as a magic realist work.<br />
<br />
(nor did the first books and stories classified as magic realism originate in Brazil)<br />
<br />
Like practically any Northerner or Westerner who uses this term, Christopher Newton takes magic realism to mean anything South American or vaguely exotic, something that he, as a first-worlder, cannot understand or relate to his own world-view.<br />
<br />
Secondly, it is soooooo gross to refer to an actual nation with an actual history and actual people as a magical place or a fairy-tale land. It exoticizes and others a very substantial place, making it nothing more than a carpet to lay on the stage or a style to adapt for a play. Stomping on Brazil's history is culturally appropriative and stinks of the privileged, white, and North American pretensions that I loathe in theatre.<br />
<br />
Thirdly, referencing an actual South American work which is considered magic realism,<i> Chronicle of a Death Foretold</i> (Gabriel Garcia Marquez) I feel that the South American setting of this production may actually undermine the play's text. Both <i>Chronicle </i>and<i> Much Ado</i> have at their crux a wedding deterred by accusations of impurity on the bride's part.<br />
<br />
In<i> Much Ado</i>, it is Hero who shoulders all the blame. Her father is enraged with her and wishes her dead.<br />
<br />
In<i> Chronicle</i>, however, the bride Angela- though she loses her marriageability when it is discovered she isn't a virgin -is not outwardly punished. Her brothers ask her who she slept with, she tells him, and the man who defiled her is killed. If there had been this amount of investigation in the plot of <i>Much Ado</i>, there wouldn't have been much ado at all.<br />
<br />
Don John's machinations make no sense in a South American context. The unspoken code of machismo would demand that the man who slept with the taken girl be punished for his crime, but the girl would have been left alone. Leonato's wrath would have been with the man who slept with Hero, not with Hero. This is a gross misunderstanding that derails Shakespeare's text.<br />
<br />
This is the kind of thoughtlessness that introduces even more plotholes than are strictly necessary. When creatives don't think through or research their choices, they create nonsense worlds where<a href="http://tomufasado.blogspot.ca/2011/07/branaghs-hamlet-and-why-it-sucks.html"> people take outside naps in the middle of winter and</a> where 1930s Cuba celebrates its bullfighting. But more and more, arbitrary and ill-thought-out settings are becoming the norm, and even celebrated.<br />
<br />
I really enjoyed watching <i>Much Ado About Nothing</i>, but the clunky and problematic setting detracted from my enjoyment. Using a whole country and its rich history as justification for catchy music and fun dance in a production is never okay. This is by far the most mixed review I've ever written, but hopefully it provokes some thought and discussion.</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-79771013008369434052012-08-24T19:13:00.000-04:002012-10-21T17:03:26.829-04:00Empty Vessels Make the Loudest Sound: Henry V at Stratford<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Aside from his frenetic comedies of the past few years, I have not been a fan of Des McAnuff's directorial work at Stratford. As such, perhaps I was already a little biased when I went to see this season's flagship production of Henry V. But, as predicted, this interpretation held all the hallmarks of Mr McAnuff serving the needs of the lowest common denominator rather than the text.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<br />
When I entered the theatre, I noticed how spare the stage was. At the back of the stage was a twenty-foot moat surrounded by a lovingly rendered battlement. It made for a very austere setting, and not a visually captivating one.<br />
<br />
Immediately, McAnuff employs one of his favourite conceits, that of modern dress for about thirty seconds before everyone quick changes to period dress. I first saw this used in his Romeo and Juliet a few years ago, and the concept remains superfluous. The cast as an ensemble then recites the Chorus's usually thrilling prologue, distilled by this odd choice which serves only to clutter the wooden O on what we are to imagine Agincourt.<br />
<br />
The cast is hampered by deadly pacing, which only bored me rather than make me relish the language. That said, Timothy D. Stickney turns in a great performance as Essex, as does Tom Rooney as Pistol and Deborah Hays as Alice. Ben Carlson is fine as Fluellen, if oddly accented, and Sean Arbuckle as the Dauphin is a rare delight.<br />
<br />
The trouble lies with Aaron Krohn, who plays Henry V. Unfortunately, he seems to have great trouble with the role. He does not come off as human, and too often wastes the great lines he has been given.<br />
<br />
I attended this performance with my francophone mother, who has nothing good to say about Bethany Jillard's casting as Catherine. It does boggle the mind how he biggest repertory theatre in Canada could not find a single actress to speak proper French for this brief French role. Indeed, the theme of cultural/national unity that McAnuff pins onto the end of the play rings that much more hollow for me.
<br />
<br />
The text is done the greatest disservice in this production; he moments of greatest excitement are not grown from the words and action, ultimately a failure on the director's part.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, though I never wanted to know what 'poor theatre' looks like on a million-dollar budget, the innovation that grows from necessity and want in smaller theatre is manufactured to a nauseating degree in Henry V. At times, it feels like cutting corners.<br />
<br />
All in all I was underwhelmed in excess by this production. It was lukewarm, ersatz, and it ran on a false sense of camaraderie with the audience. I felt thoroughly condescended towards.</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-87443792809470351102012-08-16T13:28:00.001-04:002012-10-21T17:03:58.886-04:00Sub-Par Steampunk or Second-Tier Disney?: Stratford's Pirates of Penzance<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
The Stratford Festival has a long history with the operettas of Gilbert and Sullivan. Many remember with great fondness the Festival's seminal production of <i>The Mikado</i> in the eighties, which had several revivals and a Broadway run. The productions of the other operettas that followed were just as handsomely dressed and casted (great Canadian stars such as Brent Carver and Maureen Forrester all had their turns in these productions), if not met with the same critical fervor. In 1961, <i>The Pirates of Penzance </i>had its first non D'Oyly Carte production at the Festival. So I was really excited to see the return of Gilbert and Sullivan to the festival.<br />
<br />
I was not the only one; my little brother of seven years was seeing his very first play at the Festival the afternoon we attended, and he loves pirates. Particularly the ones who aren't very good at being dastardly.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Briefly, <i>Pirates of Penzance</i> concerns a young man named Frederic who leaves the pirate crew that he has known all his life to pursue an upright career in the Navy. As soon as he leaves, he falls in love with the beautiful Mabel, daughter of the modern Major-General Stanley. Predictably, several complications arise to keep these two apart, but everything is fated to end well.<br />
<br />
One thing I noticed immediately as I came in was how the set was dressed. It made visible all the scaffolding, and the backdrops and sets were done in a Victorian style. Above the proscenium arch was a clock that was all gears and little else. It was steampunk without the punk.<br />
<br />
I opened up<a href="http://www.stratfordfestival.ca/OnStage/productions.aspx?id=16274&prodid=41229"> the programme</a>, and sure enough director Ethan McSweeny, who declares his intention to keep this work<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"> ''</span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">both entirely familiar and yet fresh at the same time', finds himself inspired by the Steampunk movement. But his understanding of Steampunk is only partially adequate, and I don't think that using an aesthetic that is, in the wrong hands, nostalgia for a bygone era is the correct choice if you want to keep something fresh or modern.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">The Steampunk movement is focused on incorporating modern technology and sensibilities to Victorian imagery in a thought-provoking way. Though it is retro, it is supposed to be relevant to the 21rst century society. It's about the present and future, not the past. If one is not thinking about the future and constant what-ifs, one loses the spirit of steampunk. It's making a leather corset with cogs on it, and not taking into account how modern feminism subverts the intention and use of a Victorian corset. It's using that turn of the century japonisme that was so characteristic of Victorians and not thinking too hard about how neo-colonialist that may be in a modern setting. It romanticizes industrialism and imperialism in a very superficial and tacky way.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">That said, I can see how Gilbert and Sullivan operettas may lend themselves to the Steampunk aesthetic; these pieces are extremely satirical of the time that they come from, and hold up so well because most of what they say still rings true in our society.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">Amy Wallis and Kyle Blair are both very sweet as Mabel and Frederic. Ms Wallis has a very serviceable voice, but I found she was slightly breathy during the higher passages. That said, she is a vision in her poufy pink dress and fascinator. Mr Blair is very earnest, a credit in a G+S romantic lead, and has a very strong voice.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">Sean Arbuckle is an effete and quiet Pirate King. This works on some level, but I'm used to Brent Carver's dramatics from the DVD of the 80s production, so I was slightly underwhelmed.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">C. David Johnson as that famous modern Major-General is a bit of a disappointment. He is the only one who feels miscast in this production. There was a superfluous addition to his patter song where they outlined the last sixty years of Stratford history. Considering everything else in this show is totally Victorian, this seemed very out of place and self-congratulatory.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">That said, I found myself enjoying my afternoon in the Avon Theatre.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">There were a couple of touches I really enjoyed; Major-General Stanley's daughters were all done up in adventuring khakis, bringing to mind the design for Jane in the Disney <i>Tarzan</i> movie. At one point a character shows up in a Victorian-era diving suit that reminded me of <i>Treasure Planet</i> or <i>Atlantis.</i> In fact, at the end of the second-act I found myself feeling the nostalgia that I associate with the second-tier Disney 90s movies that all have the same colour palette and fascination with Victoriana, regardless of context. And so now I fervently wish that Disney would just make Gilbert and Sullivan movies, and take a leaf out of Stratford's book while doing so.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 18px;">I know there was one little kid in the audience who loved this show as much as he loves watching old Disney VHS tapes. My little brother had a grand time watching those bumbling pirates and adored the music.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 18px;"><br /></span>
<i style="line-height: 18px;">The Pirates of Penzance </i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">does not subvert any expectations, nor does it do a very good job of being a satire. It is at heart a hyperactive and lavish piece of family entertainment, along the lines of the Guy Ritchie 'Sherlock Holmes' movies or<i> The Great Mouse Detective</i>. Well-acted, choreographed and sung, it nonetheless lacks the intelligent spark that would make this production soar.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><i>The Pirates of Penzance</i> runs at the Avon Theatre until October 27. For more information about the operetta and ticket availability, go <a href="http://www.stratfordfestival.ca/OnStage/productions.aspx?id=16135&prodid=41229">here</a>.</span></div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-41559601087818441082012-08-12T21:19:00.005-04:002012-10-21T17:04:16.634-04:00Stratford's Elektra is Stunning<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Elektra mourns the death of her father Agamemnon, whose death has left her in the hands of her loathed mother Clytemnestra. Having alienated her sister and unwilling to live under the same roof as the woman who killed her father, Elektra has little to do save suffer the pain of Agamemnon's death and await the vengeance that comes with the arrival of her brother Orestes.<br />
<br />
I saw Elektra by Sophokles at the Tom Patterson Theatre on Thursday, prior to last night's opening. It was, I am happy to report, a spectacular effort, with a solid cast and confident direction.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
It is impossible to begin praising this production without first mentioning Yanna McIntosh, who plays the title character. Bespectacled and wearing an oversized sweater over her long skirt, her Elektra is far from the preconceived notions a modern audience may have of goddess dresses and attractive tears. She does not mourn passively. She beats the ground, she growls at the sky, and offers prayers for her father with every breath. McIntosh turns in a supernatural performance as this woman who fixates on the single act of brutality that she has witnessed, and cannot let it go forgotten.<br />
<br />
With such a strong leading performance, it would be very easy for the rest of the cast to get lost in the shuffle. However, the supporting actors all turn in extremely committed and physical performances. Peter Hutt is a stand-out as the old man who accompanies Ian Lake's pensive Orestes and E.B. Smith's riveting and silent Pylades. Laura Condlln does a great job with the thankless role of Elektra's passive-aggressive sister Chrysosthemis, and Seana McKenna is great fun as Clytemnestra (I have never heard someone die with so much perverse glee before). Graham Abbey as Aigisthos very sleazy, which is interesting, but a bit of a let-down given how much build-up the character gets in the text prior to his very late appearance.<br />
<br />
But particularly remarkable about this<i> Elektra</i> is the Chorus, a dedicated corps of actresses who slip effortlessly between speech and song, the stage and the audience. Their a capella harmonies are woven effectively into the text, and often they provide the beats for characters in the play to say their speeches to. Their feet are covered in red dust, presumably a vestige of the pottery they've broken to get some glimpse of what comes ahead. They, along with choreographer Amalia Bennett and composer Kornilios Selamsis deserve kudos for some of the best ensemble work I've seen in ages.<br />
<br />
I was skeptical of the set by Ellie Papageorgakopoulou at first; the extreme thrust of the Tom Patterson is fenced off, separating the audience and sometimes the Chorus from the action of the piece. Garbage bags and graffiti adorn the walls of the house of Agamemnon, whose statue lies broken on three glass backlit tables on the stage. It reminded me of some more unfortunate high-concept productions of operas in Eastern Europe. However, I was fully invested in this world before long.<br />
<br />
Director Thomas Moschopoulos has produced a visceral and sleek production that has the vitality of a work that has just been discovered, not a play one can find in any compendium of Ancient Greek drama. He exhibits an innate understanding not only of the play, but what makes it exciting and relevant to today's world, which is an understanding that is often lost by directors in the Classical vein. The translation by Canadian playwright Anne Carson is a perfect fit for this show, lacking pretense or formality and yet still majestic.<br />
<br />
I recommend this show highly to anyone who wants to see something exciting at Stratford. Even if the play seems static on paper, it is brought to vivid life by the cast and creatives. I went with my father, who had never seen an Ancient Greek play in any media before, and he adored it as much as I did.<br />
<br />
This is a play that is part of the aftermath of the Trojan War, so some knowledge of that subject may be desirable. However, people who come to this show who are new to these stories will be bought up to speed over the course of the evening.<br />
<br />
Elektra runs until September 29 at the Tom Patterson Theatre. For more information on ticket availability, the cast and creatives, or the play itself, <a href="http://www.stratfordfestival.ca/OnStage/productions.aspx?id=16140&prodid=41242">see its page here.</a></div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-71578113461587982182012-07-25T02:32:00.002-04:002012-07-26T13:12:10.441-04:00There Are No Asian Men In China?- The Nightingale Panel Discussion<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
A few days ago, several creatives from the La Jolla Playhouse had a panel discussion about the recent casting debacle surrounding their new production of <i>The Nightingale</i>. <a href="http://vimeo.com/46243248">You can see the whole thing here</a>.<br />
<br />
My notes annotating the discussion are below, but before those, I'd like to thank the La Jolla Playhouse for seeking accountability on this issue. There are so many responsible for whitewashed movies and theatre productions alike who think that they are totally justified in what they do, and hardly bother with open discussion regarding the choices that they make. This is a rare thing.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
The way that Christine Toy Johnson, Cindy Cheung, and Andy Lowe recount their initial reactions to the casting in<i> The Nightingale </i>is gutwrenching. Immediately after this, Christopher Ashley apologizes for having offended anyone in the Asian-American theatre community.<br />
<br />
Moises Kaufman:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I want to talk about the design process. It's true... that there is a sense in which this feels Chinese right? There are Chinese lanterns, yes, the whole back wall is filled with Moroccan lanterns, there are some costumes that are very influenced by Asian aesthetic, the costume of the Emperor is based completely on an Iranian Emperor's robe, the robes of the townspeople are all based on Brazilian fishermen...</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
[The casting] is an issue of representation that because we were in a workshop, we were still figuring out.</blockquote>
I see what he's trying to say here, but there is a very successful show running on Broadway that is set in Africa with a set and design that borrows elements from many cultures, and music that ranges from Broadway to soft pop to South African. Despite the show having elements from everywhere and anywhere, in the fourteen years it has been running, it persists in having an all-black cast: Lo-<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://brookep94.edublogs.org/files/2011/02/The_Lion_King_poster51-19slhr6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://brookep94.edublogs.org/files/2011/02/The_Lion_King_poster51-19slhr6.jpg" width="220" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Cindy Cheung responds to Moises Kaufman's comments about multi-ethnicity.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It's still glaring that there are no Chinese men on stage... except the puppets.<span style="background-color: white;"> </span></blockquote>
Yes. This is exactly my reaction. Reducing an entire demographic to props or background does not a multi-ethnic cast make.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
You said that you didn't want this to be a real China... but China's a real place!</blockquote>
Again. Yes.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Multi-cultural casting... was never meant to justify a Caucasian person playing a culturally specific role.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I wonder if the play was set in Africa, with an African king role, would you have dared to cast a white man in that role?</blockquote>
This question is never answered. It is dismissed as non-productive.<br />
<br />
After more discussion by the panelists, the panel is opened to the spectators.<br />
<br />
The second person who gets to speak points out that even with the multi-cultural cast, <i>The Nightingale</i> still plays into harmful tropes and stereotypes. The world of <i>The Nightingale</i> is still ruled by a white man, dark-skinned characters are still morally ambiguous, whereas light-skinned characters are good, and the character played by the solitary Asian actress is still the foreigner.<i> </i>In the 'multi-ethnic' world that was created, there are still no Native-Americans, Middle-Easterners, South-West Asians, or people with disabilities.<br />
<br />
The playwright Steven Sater is here to talk about his artistic vision:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We felt as white creators, we would not presume to tell or know the story of Asia, that the music which existed for the piece and the story-telling, which is more than anything informed by Shakespeare, and coming from a Danish telling of the story... I didn't want to tell a story only about Asia. I felt that... I wanted to tell a story about the world in which I live, which is multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. I think that I still feel that. But I must say that in <i>Spring Awakening</i>, all the place names are German, all the character names are German, the costume design is informed by German costumes of the nineteenth century, that all the set-pieces in the back where of German heritage, and yet we cast a Jewish girl in the leading role.</blockquote>
Where to start with this statement, which I plays into so many apologist tropes that it's like shooting fish in a barrel pointing out what's wrong.<br />
<br />
First, even if you didn't want to tell the story of Asia, Mr Sater, that should not have excluded Asian actors from taking part in this production. Stripping a narrative of race and time just so you can sidestep the issue of having Asian people in the characters you create looks bad. <i>Asian actors need not only be cast when the text deals with race</i>. That limits what they are allowed to do.<br />
<br />
Just because the fairy-tale that you are adapting from happens to be told by a white person, and is being adapted by a white creative team, does not justify excluding Asian actors from your work. If the characters in your text are Asian, then most of the actors should be too. If you set the text in the multi-cultural, multi-ethnic world that you lived in, then you can cast as multi-culturally and multi-ethnically as you want. But you set it in China, whether your China was 'real' or not.<br />
<br />
<i>Spring Awakening</i> is a show set in Germany, and there was a predominantly white cast. There have never been issues of representation regarding white people on Broadway. The only time I can think of people of colour playing characters that are specifically meant to be white are in the latest Kander and Ebb show <i>The Scottsboro Boys</i>. White people constantly play characters that are of a specific ethnicity or minority. It is a fact. To compare the representation in Spring Awakening to that of <i>The Nightingale </i>is misleading and wrong, because as long as Broadway stays the way it is, actors of German descent and colouring will never be out of work.<br />
<br />
Also, how could you possibly presume to know or tell the story of a pubescent German girl at the turn of the century, Stephen Slater? And you know, because the source play of <i>Spring Awakening</i> was written by Franz Wedekind, a middle-aged man, shouldn't you have cast a middle-aged man as Wendla Bergmann? That would have been the right thing to do, in my opinion.<br />
<br />
After Stephen Sater's appearance, there are several more questions from spectators. A lot of them are angry, a lot of them are sad, but everyone is very happy to have had the opportunity to get all their feelings out about the situation.<br />
<br />
I think this was a very productive discussion. Surely this will be a useful precedent in future dialogues about casting in theatre.<br />
<br />
Things I think that need to be taken away from this panel:<br />
<br />
1. This is a workshop production. The vision may not be the same as a production on a mainstream stage. However, this workshop production is still a show that people pay money to see.<br />
<br />
2. Contrary to popular opinion, apparently, Asian-American actors do exist, but they lack representation in visible theatre companies such as La Jolla due to casting choices like the ones made regarding<i> The Nightingale</i>.<br />
<br />
3. Colour-blind or multi-ethnic casting is a concept that is meant to provide opportunities for actors of colour. In <i>The Nightingale</i>, it appears that colour-blind casting was used to provide opportunities for white actors, even if that was not what was intended.<br />
<br />
4. Artistic license in the theatre should <i>always</i> be tempered with a sense of moral justice.<br />
<br />
5. Creatives and companies alike should always be ready to be held accountable for their choices in theatre.<br />
<br />
PS: I finally noticed that my last article on The Nightingale was <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/363035/20120714/la-jolla-playhouse-asian-actors-sterotypes-colorblind.htm">in fact quoted and linked</a> in the International Business Times about ten days ago. I'm 'one angry blogger' now!</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-69770329407334629922012-07-18T01:05:00.003-04:002012-07-18T14:30:02.151-04:00Stratford 2013<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;">2013 marks the year that Stratford alum and former financial director Antoni Cimolino takes the artistic reins for the Festival. Hurray! No more McAnuff. Maybe there'll be watchable tragedies at the Festival now!</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://stratfordfest.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/antoni-cimolino-unveils-first-season-as-artistic-director/">Here's the season:</a></span></div>
<div>
<a name='more'></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><u>Festival Theatre</u></b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Romeo and Juliet</b></div>
<div>
Dir. Tim Carroll</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Fiddler on the Roof</b></div>
<div>
Bock and Harnick</div>
<div>
Dir. Donna Feore</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>The Three Musketeers</b></div>
<div>
Peter Raby</div>
<div>
Dir. Miles Potter</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>The Merchant of Venice</b></div>
<div>
Dir. Antoni Cimolino</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><u>Avon Theatre</u></b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Blithe Spirit</b></div>
<div>
Noel Coward</div>
<div>
Dir. Brian Bedford</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>The Who's Tommy (what the actual fuck)</b></div>
<div>
The Who, I'm bloody well assuming</div>
<div>
Dir. Des McAnuff</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Othello</b></div>
<div>
Dir. Chris Abraham</div>
<div>
<br />
<b><u>Tom Patterson Theatre</u></b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Measure for Measure</b></div>
<div>
Dir. Martha Henry</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Mary Stuart</b></div>
<div>
Friedrich Schiller</div>
<div>
Dir. Antoni Cimolino</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Waiting for Godot</b></div>
<div>
Samuel Beckett</div>
<div>
Dir. Jennifer Tarver</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><u>Studio Theatre</u></b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Taking Shakespeare</b></div>
<div>
John Murell</div>
<div>
Dir. Diana Leblanc</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>The Thrill</b></div>
<div>
Judith Thompson</div>
<div>
Dir. Dean Gabourie</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
First of all, good to see that Des McAnuff decided to stick around for one more season, just so he could totally ruin my opinion of him. I don't know what <i>The Who's Tommy</i> has to do with Shakespeare, or classical repertory, or hell, this season as a whole. McAnuff wants a Tony, we got the picture about four years ago, but he really shouldn't use Stratford as a receptacle for out-of-town try-outs.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That's insulting.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Apart from that unfortunate (soooo unfortunate) hiccup, I want to like this season. It has a few really cool ideas, tight themes, and the pieces are more or less unified with each other. Someone put a lot of care into constructing this season, and it shows.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But it's honestly just too safe. I'm reminded of the later Monette years, when there were three well-known Shakespeares on the big stages, and all-around feel-good and familiar fare. A lot of these plays have had very recent incarnations at the Festival. That's not necessarily a bad thing; theatre is above everything else entertainment, and at a repertory theatre, there are going to be retreads of old favourites.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But honestly, I feel like we've just had a <i>Rom and Jules</i> (and a<i> West Side Story</i>, for that matter), and it feels very safe to have the star-crossed lovers as the flagship production in Cimolino's inaugural season. There's only so many times you can tell that story. But the school groups will keep coming in.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In fact, I'm pretty sure three of the four Shakespeare plays on for the projected season are in the high school curriculum for Ontario, so the money's in the bank from the busloads of kids guaranteed to come in to see these shows. I hope for everyone's sake that 2013's <i>Merchant of Venice</i> doesn't fuck up in the same epic scale as Stratford's last attempt at this show, and that <i>Othello</i> is finally given the treatment it deserves here. There's nothing that will turn students off to Shakespeare faster than an actual professional production of one of his plays missing the point of the text completely, or trudging through like Shakespeare <i>is</i> a chore.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That said, I have faith in Cimolino as a director. His<i> Cymbeline</i> is getting great reviews, and people loved what happened when he did Jonson's<i> Bartholomew Fair</i> a couple of years ago. I think it's interesting that he's chosen to direct both<i> Merchant of Venice </i>and Schiller's <i>Mary Stuart</i>. Both have similar themes and they are both on stages that he's proven himself on. I'll be tentatively anticipating his contributions to this season.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm also looking forward to Martha Henry directing <i>Measure for Measure, </i>as well as Brian Bedford directing <i>Blithe Spirit</i>. I love what they do, no matter what.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm relatively indifferent to the Canadian offerings. The Murell piece seems really cliched, even if it does tie in to this season's <i>Othello</i>, and quite honestly, if you want something that ties into this season's plays, I have <i>Good Night Desdemona, Good Morning Juliet</i>. I'm not a fan of Judith Thompson, but I'll reserve judgement on her play because it hasn't even been performed yet.</div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
<i>Fiddler on the Roof</i> seems like an arbitrary spoonful of sugar for the bitter pill that<i> Merchant of Venice</i> is definitely going to be. That said, Donna Feore is an extraordinary director, and if they cast Brent Carver as Tevye again I'll be really very happy.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This version of <i>The Three Musketeers</i> is something of a legacy piece for Stratford. The play was specially written for the Festival stage, and has been performed sporadically there for some time. Between it and <i>Cyrano,</i> Stratford stocks up on its dashing French musketeers. I'll be interested to see this, if only because of the relevance it has to the Festival.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I really want to see <i>Waiting for Godot</i>. Along with<i> Measure for Measure</i> and <i>Blithe Spirit</i>, it's one of the few shows I'll see without any reservations going in.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Which leaves <i>Othello</i>. I have complicated thoughts about <i>Othello</i>. It's a fantastic play, without a doubt, and it's not performed enough at Stratford. But I swear, if the cast is what I think it's going to be, I'll flip a table because of the uninventive but inevitable casting.<br />
<br />
But altogether, this seems more like a transitional season than an out-and-out premiere season for Cimolino. Though he's announced a couple of ambitious projects to expand Stratford's influence, most of the seasonal offerings seem pretty light, and again, pretty safe. But this is July 2012; maybe my view will change by 2013.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So these are my half-comprehensible thoughts on the Stratford season of 2013, emphasis on the reprehensible. What are your thoughts?</div>
</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-51291555768507231432012-07-12T23:59:00.000-04:002012-07-13T00:02:08.678-04:00Colourblind Casting Two: You're Doing It Wrong<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.duncansheik.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Nightingale_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.duncansheik.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Nightingale_2.png" width="247" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So lately it has come to my attention that Duncan Sheik, who wrote the angsty coming-of-age rock musical <i>Spring Awakening</i>, has premiered a new show at the La Jolla Playhouse. <i>The Nightingale </i>is based on the Hans Christian Andersen fairy tale of the same name, and has also kept the story's original setting of Ancient China.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Well great!</div>
<div>
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div>
I find that the work for Asian actors in theatre, particularly commercial musical theatre, is really scarce.<a href="http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/advocates-ask-why-do-asian-americans-go-uncast-in-new-york-theater/"> And it's not just me</a>. Advocates for casting equality have been pointing out the conspicuous lack of representation for Asian actors since <a href="http://aatheatre.web.unc.edu/2011/04/23/a-few-good-insights-into-the-miss-saigon-controversy/">Jonathan Pryce donned yellowface</a> to play the only major Asian male character for <i>Miss Saigon</i> back in 1989. <a href="http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CFgQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftomufasado.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F04%2Fcolourblind-casting-one-streetcar-and-i.html&ei=0ob_T839Dsbv0gHa49zGBw&usg=AFQjCNEBp0k-GCvD4BqixalpAjMin6uaMg&sig2=NaasXiSYYkhnsTYIDp-kdA">As I've pointed out before</a>, Rodgers and Hammerstein's <i>The King and I</i> has a long and proud history of yellowface for all its major Asian characters since its premiere in the fifties. Whenever someone puts on a production of Gilbert and Sullivan's <i>The Mikado</i>, you can bet there is a negligible amount of Asian actors in it.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Though there are projects that are meant to feature predominantly Asian casts, such as <i>Pacific Overtures</i>,<i> Bombay Dreams</i>, <i>Flower Drum Song</i>, and lately,<i><a href="http://www.allegiancemusical.com/"> Allegiance</a>, </i>the fact is that creators on Broadway and elsewhere don't tell the stories of Asian people, or even feature them in the work that they put out. So I approached the idea of <i>The Nightingale </i>with an air of optimism.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="http://www.lajollaplayhouse.org/nightingale">And then.</a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/70355525.html">And then.</a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
No. No no no no no.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Let's look at this:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Sheik responded [to the criticisms on casting] by stating that the piece isn't about Asian culture, and went on to explain that Andersen's purpose was "writing a satire about the West, and setting it in China"</blockquote>
Oh, thank you for explaining that to us, Mr Sheik. You know, the same thing can be said of Gilbert setting <i>The Mikado </i>in Japan, but I still get really upset when the cast for that show is predominantly white. No matter what you think the intent was regarding the setting of the story,<b> the fact is that <i>The Nightingale</i> is still set in China</b>. You and the creatives on this show <i>made the conscious decision</i> to have a Chinese setting in your musical. About 80% of creating theatre is choices, and you made that choice. Nobody forced you to.<br />
<br />
If you didn't want any Asian people in your show, you should have set it somewhere else.<i> Nobody would have cared</i> if you decided to set it in Generic White City, because that's what we've come to expect in our entertainment. But you kept this show in China, with all the Chinese stereotypes and your beloved Chinese puppets, but without the Chinese people. And that's why we're pissed off.<br />
<br />
Not even going to get started on your use of actual Chinese history and people from it, such as the Dowager Empress, to springboard a satire about the West. I'd get pissy.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At the start of the workshop process, “The Nightingale" had an Asian cast, but was changed since it wasn’t “appropriate to the piece we’ve written,” said Sheik.</span></blockquote>
Let me guess. Because you didn't explicitly write race into your piece, you felt totally comfortable jettisoning your Asian cast. That's not racist. That's just a sound artistic decision right there. I guess we congratulate you now for looking beyond race and casting the best person possible. Good job, Sheik. Good job, La Jolla.<br />
<br />
No. Not a good job.<br />
<br />
The excuse of casting the best people for the show is all well and dandy, but when it's used as a deflector from criticism regarding racial insensitivity, that pisses me off. It's an excuse used for every whitewashed Hollywood film that's ever come out, and that the theatre community should start doing that is just depressing as fuck.<br />
<br />
Even if their actors are not using yellowface (dubious progress, I suppose), the fact remains that the people behind <i>The Nightingale </i>at the La Jolla Playhouse used Ancient China as an exotic (in the worst, most objectifying sense of the word) setting for their new musical. Because a piece is not centred around race, the (white) creatives felt that casting Asian actors was distracting or 'inappropriate' to the piece they'd written, and proceeded to cast non-Asian people who were appropriate.<br />
<br />
Colourblind casting gone spectacularly wrong, my friends.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-84273022711020825892012-06-25T00:41:00.001-04:002012-06-25T00:41:04.068-04:00My Ideal Stratford Season<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Antoni Cimolino will soon be taking over the artistic direction at the Stratford Shakespeare Festival, and he's already <a href="http://www.toronto.com/article/729609--tense-drama-as-stratford-shakespeare-festival-passes-the-crown">breaking my heart.</a> According to the linked article, he would rather produce<i> The Who's Tommy</i> than <i>Henry IV parts 1 and 2 </i>along with<i> Henry V</i>. That is a pretty bizarre priority for a classical repertory theatre, but considering that it's been Des McAnuff's mission to make Stratford a well-oiled cash machine featuring the seminal works of Andrew Lloyd Webber, maybe this mentality isn't too surprising.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That's not to say that I still won't be excited for next year's season. I am always thrilled when it comes to what Stratford does. The Festival is basically Disneyworld for me. But sometimes, when I'm a little blue, I like to construct my own seasons. Here's my favourite one that I've made.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://beggarstaffs.com/images/01A.1-hamlet-l.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://beggarstaffs.com/images/01A.1-hamlet-l.jpg" width="126" /></a></div>
<b style="background-color: white;"><br /></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><br /></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Hamlet- </b>This play is one of my personal favourites, and it looks like I'm not in the clear minority for once. Honestly, there's so much literature, theory, and original text that comes with this piece, lines on which entire productions can be based. I think this play is full of possibility that can never be fully plumbed, and it is my personal opinion that there is no such thing as Hamlet fatigue.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
I tried to compliment this<i> Hamlet w</i>ith other productions that are in the season: <i>Doctor Faustus </i>and <i>The Devil Is An Ass</i>. Themes of discourse with the supernatural, unnatural doings by immoral men, and the science versus religion debate all figure prominently in these three contemporary works. At a time when perceptions of the world were rapidly changing, these plays were extremely topical. I feel they still are now, when everyone is increasingly paranoid about the advances in science and technology. As the play progresses, Hamlet's vision of the world changes, and with it his morality.</div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;">For this specific hypothetical production, I'd cast Dion Johnstone as the sweet prince, because he is the only person in the existing company who I think has an entire <i>Hamlet </i>in him at the moment.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;">Richard Monette also had a fascinating idea regarding </span><i style="background-color: white;">Hamlet</i><span style="background-color: white;">, where he would have had it in a studio setting with six actors sharing the role. It would have explored several interpretations of Hamlet over the course of the evening, as well as being an awesome showcase of talent. If</span><i style="background-color: white;"> Hamlet</i><span style="background-color: white;"> wasn't going to be my flagship production, I'd certainly try this. Out of the existing company, I would cast Sean Arbuckle, Wayne Best, Dion Johnstone, Seana McKenna, Martha Henry, and Cara Ricketts.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_v9JSZMQuVaQ/TUlSIRiLAFI/AAAAAAAAAeM/E4TiZckuw00/s1600/winters+tale+deer+stag+3%25282%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_v9JSZMQuVaQ/TUlSIRiLAFI/AAAAAAAAAeM/E4TiZckuw00/s320/winters+tale+deer+stag+3%25282%2529.jpg" width="217" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<br />
<b>The Winter's Tale- </b>This beautiful and sweet play is really underestimated but has everything a later Shakespeare comedy needs; magic, mayhem, a wistful understanding of nature, and a broken family that is fixed by endless reconciliations in the fifth act. I can't really explain my attraction to this play, but it's the only one in Shakespeare's canon that will make me honest to God cry without fail every time I read it. I don't even care how or where it's done, but it has a permanent place in my ideal Stratford season.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51JQZYPRRZL._SL500_AA300_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51JQZYPRRZL._SL500_AA300_.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>As You Like It- </b>I love this play. It is far and away my favourite Shakespearean comedy, and would definitely be a part of my ideal Stratford season. I'd let my friend design this one, and she informs me that she would like a Takarazuka-inspired outing of the play, if not actually getting the Takarazuka Revue to come and do a few showings here. She also wants an all-female cast. I'm surprised I wasn't the one who was suggesting half these things. :D This time.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">I think if the court scenes were inspired by the rococo aesthetic of Takarazuka's big ol' musicals, while the country scenes were in the vein of their more traditionally-rooted offerings, this would be a very successful <i>As You Like It</i>.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://sydney.edu.au/seymour/images/content/whats_on/king_lear_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://sydney.edu.au/seymour/images/content/whats_on/king_lear_poster.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>King Lear- </b>I just want to do this with Martha Henry in the lead role. I defy you to think of anything wrong with that plan.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41mNkEEsSjL.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41mNkEEsSjL.jpg" width="199" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>The Devil is an Ass-</b> <i>Ben Jonson</i>- Jonson is criminally underperformed at the Festival (hence the pathetic image above), and though a couple of his pieces show their age, a lot, especially the comedies that he wrote, feel incredibly contemporary. This play is pretty fucking hilarious, and does not require too much telegraphing on the part of the creatives to stay funny to modern audiences.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><i>The Devil is an Ass</i> deals with issues that are also present in<i> Hamlet </i>and <i>Doctor Faustus</i>. It also complements Hamlet's nod to metatheatre, with a great scene where the characters of the play are watching <i>The Devil is an Ass</i> at the Blackfriars theatre.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://fraver.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SweeneyTodd1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://fraver.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/SweeneyTodd1.jpg" width="203" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Sweeney Todd-</b> <i>Stephen Sondheim- </i>Because<i> <u>Hell yeah</u> </i>this deserves a place at a classical repertory theatre, especially Stratford. One of the finest actors to come out of Stratford, Len Cariou, was the first Sweeney on Broadway, and in my opinion the definitive one.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">My main problem with Stratford doing musicals is that in the programme notes, half of the content is them justifying their choice in mounting<i> Evita </i>or<i> Jesus Christ Superstar </i>at a Shakespeare festival. They don't want to say that they just do these shows for money.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Well, <i>Sweeney Todd </i>has all the cred that JCS does not. It follows the ouroboros structure of a revenge tragedy, a protagonist who avenges past wrongs with monstrosities until he consumes himself. It has brilliant music and a complicated plot. Done with a full cast of classically trained actors, this <i>Sweeney</i> would be one of the best in recent memory.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.pigasus-gallery.de/Posters/Zbigniew-Kaja/Posters/CYRANO-DE-BERGERAC-1957.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.pigasus-gallery.de/Posters/Zbigniew-Kaja/Posters/CYRANO-DE-BERGERAC-1957.jpg" width="224" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Cyrano de Bergerac-</b> <i>Edmund Rostand-</i> I very much want to see this show done in French with English surtitles on alternating nights. This was tentatively tried with <i>Don Juan</i> a few years ago, but I don't think it's been attempted since then. That is a shame, because <i>Cyrano de Bergerac</i> <u>crackles</u> in French, even to those who don't speak the language. In addition to that, Canada has so many fantastic classically trained French actors who don't get too much exposure outside of Quebec, and it seems practically criminal not to have them at Stratford in some constant capacity.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Now, if I couldn't go with a complete French production of this play, then I have another concept up my sleeve. It would be an adaptation/translation where Christian is not adept in the French language, and has to rely on Cyrano's expertise in order to woo Roxanne. It would be hard to pull off -- an exceptionally talented translator and dramaturge would be needed -- but I think it would effectively bring the main conflict home in a new way, while preserving the fantastic poetry's original form. <i>Cyrano </i>is always done best when the focus is on the love of language which all the characters share.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://memory.loc.gov/music/ftp/fprpst/1142/11420002/0001r.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://memory.loc.gov/music/ftp/fprpst/1142/11420002/0001r.jpg" width="217" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Doctor Faustus-</b> <i>Christopher Marlowe-</i> I'm a bit of a Marlowe head. I honestly wanted to put <i>Massacre at Paris </i>on this list, but it's so breathtakingly incomplete that I couldn't possibly justify it's being put on a commercial stage. Maybe <i>Massacre at Paris</i> would do well on the small outdoors stage that Stratford has for special events, but it isn't even substantial enough for the smallest of its interior stages.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">So I chose the classic Marlowe tale that also ties in quite nicely with the themes and locales of <i>Hamlet</i>. Someone who has found both Faust and Hamlet went to Wittenberg even wrote a play where they have discourses with Martin Luther. Beyond the university connection, there is the same sense of magic, superstition, and the more spiritual side of religion being replaced by secularism and science. Faust tempts what is otherworldly with his ambition, and it backfires in the most spectacular way possible.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.njartstix.org/images/show/Meet%20Orestes%20poster%2011x17%20FINAL%20compressed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.njartstix.org/images/show/Meet%20Orestes%20poster%2011x17%20FINAL%20compressed.jpg" width="207" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Look at the blurbs for this production. Look at that subtitle. You can't not love it.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Orestes-</b> <i>Euripides-</i> Shut up Classics people I love this play. AND I'LL ALWAYS WANT IT PLAYING AT STRATFORD. Why do I want the middle part of a long and convoluted story playing by itself at Stratford? Because<i> fuck youuuuu</i> that's why.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles24/252800/projects/809437/d63b8ffc63c7dfae9850c19633c9f334.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles24/252800/projects/809437/d63b8ffc63c7dfae9850c19633c9f334.gif" width="206" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Tartuffe- </b></span><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 16px; text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Molière</span></span><span style="background-color: white;">-</span></i><span style="background-color: white;"> Two words: rhyming translation. As you guys might know from my previous posts about doing this play, I have a minor fetish for translations of Poquelin's plays that manage to keep with the couplets in the original French. These range from the respectful to the downright bawdy, and my favourites have always come down on the bawdy side.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">And honestly,<i> Tartuffe</i> is much better as a romp than a drawing-room comedy of manners.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.ci.port-washington.wi.us/SummerTheater/PastProductions/OnceUpon_a_Mattress.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.ci.port-washington.wi.us/SummerTheater/PastProductions/OnceUpon_a_Mattress.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Once Upon A Mattress-</b> <i>Mary Rodgers (music) and Marshall Barer (lyrics and book)- </i>I cannot express the full extent of love I have for this musical. It's fun, it's silly, and very much aware of how fun and silly it is. It's one of the most ridiculous fairy tale adaptations<b> ever</b> (yes, there is a <i>Princess and the Pea </i>musical!), but it's not cynical or condescending towards its source material. It's a guaranteed good time at the theatre, but above all I think that it would be a great showcase for Chillina Kennedy's truly underutilized talents as a comedienne.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">This would probably be the moneymaking musical of the three I have in this season, so we'd probably find it in the Avon playing to full capacity three times a week.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://newimages.bwwstatic.com/columnpic/poster-The%20Wonder-QC-fe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://newimages.bwwstatic.com/columnpic/poster-The%20Wonder-QC-fe.jpg" width="213" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I swear to God the fact that this was put on by the all-female Queen's Company in New York had no bearing on my love for this play.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>The Wonder- </b><i>Susanna Centlivre-</i> One of the most popular playwrights of her time, Susanna Centlivre's numerous works have been more or less forgotten by time, which is quite unfortunate. Her plays, with their incredibly intricate plots and memorable characters, are gems. They rely on a strong cast with impeccable comic timing, especially <i>The Wonder</i>, which has more plot points than some Roman comedies and yet manages to tie them all in a neat knot by the end of the play. Truly a worthy challenge for one of the most praised Classical companies on the continent.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/454033.1020.A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/454033.1020.A.jpg" width="203" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>The Fantasticks-</b> <i>Harvey Schmidt (music) and Tom Jones (lyrics and book)- </i>This extremely well-known and long-running musical is based on<i> L'Aiglon </i>by Edmond Rostand, who of course also wrote <i>Cyrano de Bergerac</i>. It's a very intimate musical, and so I think I'd put it in the Studio Theatre, the most intimate theatre space there is at Stratford.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">I just want Brent Carver to sing 'Try to Remember.' Is this a crime? Is it ever a crime to want instant theatre magic?</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://torontopubliclibrary.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5509ea6a188340154368acacd970c-800wi" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://torontopubliclibrary.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5509ea6a188340154368acacd970c-800wi" width="212" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>The Penelopiad-</b> <i>Margaret Atwood-</i> I'm very fond of this play, which is based off of Margaret Atwood's novel of the same name. It's a retelling of the Iliad and Odyssey from Penelope's point of view in Ithaca, and it is quite witty.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Seana McKenna. As Penelope. <i>Yes</i>. Sorry for no creative casting.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://wlt.org.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CFSBprogjpg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://wlt.org.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CFSBprogjpg.jpg" width="225" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><b>Compleat Female Stage Beauty-</b> <i>Jeffrey Hatcher- </i>This is a weird choice of mine, and not one I'm entirely sure would really fit at Stratford, especially when we already have<i> Elizabeth Rex</i>. Whereas this play does talk <i>a lot </i>about Shakespeare, and the plays in a part of their history that's interesting but not really addressed that often, <i>Compleat Female Stage Beauty</i> is betrayed by its overly contemporary sentiment. Nonetheless, I think that this play has a lot of cool ideas, if half-baked, about style versus realism, something that is still an issue in modern Shakespearean theatre.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">My main reason for choosing this play is the characters. <i>Compleat Female Stage Beauty</i> offers great roles, first in that of Ned Kynaston, the player of tragic women's roles who is abruptly displaced by a real live woman. His successor Maria has the biological assets for Desdemona and Juliet, but none of the training that Ned has had. King Charles II and his mistress Nell Gwynn also make memorable appearances. If this play is a bit preachy about gender equality and presentation, and a bit light on plot, it more than makes up for it with great characters and scenarios for them to bounce off of each other.</span></div>
<div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
</ul>
</div>
</div>
Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-44505359434471376982012-06-24T00:31:00.005-04:002012-07-22T16:19:53.349-04:00Danny Boyle's Frankenstein Viewing 2.0<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Three cheers for the alternate cassting! The wonderful manager of my local cinema had heard about the problems last week, and had kindly made it possible for me to see the Millerstein/Creaturebatch version.<br />
<br />
My biggest worry going in was that the double casting had in fact been nothing but a money grab, and that Miller and Cumberbatch would be less than brilliant in their opposite roles. I can honestly say that this isn't something that should have worried me at all. Both actors approached the other role with the same ingenuity and creativity as in the original casting.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Benedict Cumberbatch as the Creature was very different from Johnny Lee Miller's. Whereas Miller's Creature is one who was acutely aware of his intelligence and otherness (when he says 'maybe I'm a genius, too', one feels that there is no maybe about it), Cumberbatch's Creature comes from a completely different place. One still feels his intelligence, and his humanity, but he acts more like a child than Miller.<br />
<br />
In the opening scene, Miller's Creature nurtures himself. One senses the loss of parents which never existed as he rocks himself, helps himself to stand and run, and starts vocalizing. One gets the sense that he is growing up even when he's newborn. Whereas much of the initial choreography is the same for Cumberbatch, he does not rock himself like Miller does, and at the end, he tries to go back into the womb which bore him, which Miller doesn't do. Completely different choices that make for completely different Creatures.<br />
<br />
With Cumberbatch, I got the sense that he is more openly affected by the world than Miller. Whereas Miller's Creature is very bitter, and remembered all the bad, Cumberbatch's Creature continues to recall the good parts of his existence as well. For instance, he continues to imitate de Lacey and his mannerisms far into the play's action, and hardly ever in a negative way.<br />
<br />
Cumberbatch's special emphasis on certain words promoted a continuity of his thoughts that I could follow very clearly. <span style="background-color: white;">I did not make the connection between the Creature's fascination with snow at the De Lacey cottage and the frozen wasteland of the last scene until this showing, and that's only because he emphasizes a reference to snow during the scene with the Bride. I felt really quite stupid.</span><br />
<br />
A couple of problems I had with Cumberbatch's performance was his ridiculous hyperactivity and his tendency to be silly at delicate moments in the play's action. <i>Bird calls</i> are never ever appropriate to insert in a highly dramatic monologue, even when it's Benedict Cumberbatch making them. Of all the things. However, these are pretty small problems I had with his performance. Overall he was awesome.<br />
<br />
I wasn't sure how Johnny Lee Miller's Doctor would measure up to Cumberbatch's. It felt to me like Cumberbatch was pretty much perfect in the role of Victor Frankenstein, and I wasn't sure what Miller would bring to it. I miscalculated; he brought emotion.<br />
<br />
How these two actors went about portraying someone <i>who doesn't feel love</i> varied. With Cumberbatch, you can see that he does not feel the need to hide his detachment; he sees it as an asset rather than an issue, and it's only at the end that he realizes how lacking that basic part of the human experience makes him less human than his creation. He does not care for Elizabeth, and seems to forget about or discount the death of his brother William.<br />
<br />
With Miller, I felt like he'd had the realization of his own monstrosity around the beginning of the play, when he abandons the Creature. He locks himself in his room at Geneva out of guilt and shame, not fear. He realizes that he abandoned something that was helpless and entirely his creation. This, and not dislike, is why he postpones his marriage to Elizabeth; the idea of having children 'the usual way' terrifies him, because he now knows that he's capable of detachment and abandonment, and that it is incredibly easy. Already weary with his acknowledgement of his own monstrosity, the monologue at the end where he speaks of his incapability of love is just as touching as Cumberstein's, but in a vastly different way.<br />
<br />
The Sistine Chapel moment at the end is actually averted. It looks like the Doctor is about to take the Creature's hand, but he points to the great yonder at the last moment and they continue their never-ending chase without that contact.<br />
<br />
Well, I had a long and wonderful journey with this particular play/broadcast, but now that the encore presentations are done and whatnot, I think it's time to bid farewell to Danny Boyle's Frankenstein, one of the best adaptations I've seen on screen or on stage. For my previous takes on this show, click <a href="http://tomufasado.blogspot.ca/2012/02/danny-boyles-frankenstein.html#more">here</a> and <a href="http://tomufasado.blogspot.ca/2012/06/danny-boyles-frankenstein-viewing-12.html">here</a>.<br />
<br />
Keep in mind that you can buy the script on e-book (totally worth it), and you can find the wonderful score by Underworld on iTunes (again, totally worth it).<br />
<br />
To sign the petition to have this show on DVD, leave feedback at <span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">feedback@nationaltheatre.org.uk</span></span><span style="background-color: white;"> So far, there are no plans for such an endeavour on the NT's part, but I'm sure with enough interest those plans might change.</span><br />
<br />
And, as always, if you can support the <a href="http://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/52900/productions/national-theatre-live-season.html">NT Live cinema broadcasts</a>, then do. They have a great line-up this summer. Five years ago many would not have had the opportunity to see top-notch theatre on a whim. Bless the National Theatre for doing this, and always attend.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-8745615588392210372012-06-23T01:03:00.000-04:002012-06-24T00:33:45.964-04:00Sleeping Beauty Is An Epic<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://static.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/angelina-jolie-maleficent_467x282.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="193" src="http://static.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/angelina-jolie-maleficent_467x282.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Recently, pictures were released of Angelina Jolie as <i>Maleficent</i>. She's shooting a movie about the evil fairy in Disney's <i>Sleeping Beauty</i>. I have mixed feelings about this project, but I'll be seeing it no matter what. I love <i>Sleeping Beauty</i>. It's my favourite Disney movie, challenged only by<i> Mulan</i> or<i> Beauty and the Beast</i>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://cdn101.iofferphoto.com/img3/item/108/824/881/vhs-video-walt-disney-s-masterpiece-sleeping-beauty-c9aa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://cdn101.iofferphoto.com/img3/item/108/824/881/vhs-video-walt-disney-s-masterpiece-sleeping-beauty-c9aa.jpg" width="198" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">When I was little, I watched the VHS of this movie until the tape broke. I was enthralled by every moment of this epic. That's what it was to me, an epic.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Part of it was the incredible amount of effort that went into the making of this movie. When I was that small, I was still under the impression that movies just came out of the ether.The VHS release of <i>Sleeping Beauty</i> had a documentary at the end that detailed the production of this incredibly ambitious movie, from Uncle Walt's decision to film it in Technirama, to showing footage of the actors modelling the characters. It was then I realized that every movie is something of a miracle; a movie requires a huge amount of people getting together and managing to get along long enough to create a cohesive product that ultimately has no purpose.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">In short, my love of movies comes from <i>Sleeping Beauty</i>. So anything I say might be <i>slightly </i>biased.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">So I saw, and still see, <i>Sleeping Beauty</i> as an epic. Unlike <i>Lord of the Rings</i> or<i> The Seven Samurai</i>, <i>Sleeping Beauty</i> was an epic which followed the actions of women. There was still a standard princess in the castle (and Aurora is about as standard as you can possibly get), and a standard prince (and Prince Phillip is somehow even more generic than Aurora), but it has four really strong female characters.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Yeah, name another high fantasy where the central conflict is between three sweet middle-aged ladies who like tea and an evil entity who has unimaginable power whilst presenting as female.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
And this is why<i> Sleeping Beauty </i>is boss.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I suspect that animators enjoy creating evil and not-pretty characters far more than the good-looking protagonists. Every animated movie I've ever seen has far more interesting design for the bad guys and the side characters than for the protagonists. In<i> Sleeping Beauty</i>, either due to a lack of focus during production (which is extremely possible when you read about this movie's production) or perhaps a conscious artistic decision, the three good fairies and Maleficent have a shitload of screen time and lines. They get way more development than Aurora, Phillip, or the two kings. After watching the movie, it becomes clear that they drive the action, and everyone else is just caught up in their grudge match.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I mean, look at Prince Phillip. One of the most incompetent princes ever, and unfortunately pitted against one of the most cold and calculating villains ever, Phillip literally could not have saved Aurora without the intervention of the three good fairies. He has no access to magic, no common sense, and is only a worthy prince because he's got the guts for it. The three fairies spring him from the prison that Maleficent has placed him in. They are the ones who strategize his escape. Flora actually guides the magic sword (which was conjured by their magic) into Dragon Maleficent's breast. If he were any more incompetent, one of them would have kissed Aurora for him. Also, he doesn't talk anymore than Aurora does. For the last half of the movie, he's mute.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So he's not the protagonist. Aurora, who's more of a catalyst for the film's action than an actual character, is not the protagonist.</div>
<div>
<br />
These badass mofo fairies are the active players in this movie. When you think of <i>Sleeping Beauty</i> as part of an ongoing struggle between the fairies and Maleficent, which just happens to have an entire kingdom caught in the crossfire, and not a princess movie, you are thinking about it as I did when I was little. It dressed like a princess movie, maybe, but it seemed to be about so much more than Aurora and Phillip, who were both boring.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Also, as I was always acutely aware of my preference for girls, but still played house and had baby dolls and whatnot, I was very much comforted by the idea of two older ladies living together in domestic bliss with what appeared to be their daughter.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://listings.ironictiming.com/sbfairies/header.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="136" src="http://listings.ironictiming.com/sbfairies/header.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Flora, Fauna, and their daughter, Merryweather, who's like on her fourth degree in university. Can't wait for her to move out, but they'll still be sad to see her go.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Maleficent is Maleficent. Enough said. Though a lot can be said about the fact that the openly intelligent, non-conformist and independent lady is the villainess in this film, I can honestly say it didn't matter to a six-year-old me. I loved this character. I loved the way she moved, the way she talked, the way she turned into a dragon and tried to fucking murder Phillip. She was awesome.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Of course, there was no good fairy or Maleficent merch when I was little. I had a Sleeping Beauty nightgown, just like all the other kids who liked that movie. I wasn't old enough to appreciate the humour in such a gift.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There are so many other things I love about this film (I haven't even talked about the music, which is adapted from Tchaikovsky), but honestly, it's the female characters. It's the sweet ladies who are the heroes even though they don't conform to the visual codes of 'hero' or 'heroine'. It's Maleficent, the beautiful and confident lady who curses a baby girl by making her deathly allergic to womanly pursuits. It's the love and care that was obviously put into these characters, who were allowed to subsume the original fairy tale with aplomb.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Sleeping Beauty</i> is awesome.</div>
</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-72480861679287458802012-06-22T10:23:00.000-04:002012-06-24T00:34:00.607-04:00Danny Boyle's Frankenstein Viewing 1.2<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Yes, Danny Boyle's <i>Frankenstein </i>was popular enough in the cinemas the last round that it got re-broadcasts this summer. Hells yeah I watched it again!<br />
<br />
This time around, I had purchased a ticket to the showing with Benedict Cumberbatch as the Creature and Johnny Lee Miller as Victor. Unfortunately, the showing was still the one with Miller as the Creature and Cumberbatch as the Doctor, an unfortunate mistake on the cinema's part. This coming Saturday they promise they'll be showing the correct screening, but as I'd already paid upwards to twenty dollars for this special event, I was a tad disappointed.<br />
<br />
But!<br />
<br />
It's still a great show, and really stands up to a second viewing. Having read the script in the space between my first time last year and this one, there were things I was looking for and references that were much clearer this time around. I honestly don't think I noticed the Sistine Chapel imagery the first time, which is hilarious to me now because it's kind of heavy-handed:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>In their initial discourse, Victor and the Creature make a deal regarding a mate for the Creature. They shake on the deal, and as they withdraw, their fingers linger long enough to recall God and Adam.</li>
<li>In the final scene set in the Arctic, Victor is weak and lying on the ground. The Creature pulls him up with one arm. For one moment they look very much like God and Adam, except this time the Creature is on the right side, and Victor on the left. SYMBOLISM.</li>
<li>"I should be Adam" - The Creature in Scene 24.</li>
</ul>
The thing that bothered me the last time around, the casting of Frankenstein's father, hasn't changed one bit. The actor just doesn't fit with the rest of the cast; his line delivery is odd and at times unintentionally funny, and he doesn't command the kind of respect I would have expected from someone who is said to be a magistrate.<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I'm anxious to see the alternate casting though, because I want to see how having dual roles affects the overall and complete performance of both. According to Johnny Lee Miller in the short film they show at the beginning, a lot of his Creature has seeped into his Victor. As a performer and a theorist, I really want to see that kind of 'two halves of a whole' thing.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
This time around I saw this show with a group of friends who are admitted Cumberbitches. Last time I'd seen it with my father and another friend. The atmosphere was slightly different, way more receptive. There was a lot more emotion coming from our row of the cinema than the last time. It reminded me of that scene in <i>Farinelli </i>where the titular character gives that duchess an orgasm through the pure force of his performance. If they come again this Saturday to see Benny in the actual tortured role, I think that the collective pathos will actually destroy the block.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
What was really great was that everyone I saw the show with looked really interested in seeing other live broadcasts from the National Theatre. This was a really positive experience for them, and I hope the NT takes note and programs a lot more of these events in the near future.</div>
</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-15907287226868182742012-06-21T09:51:00.000-04:002012-06-21T09:52:41.473-04:00Over The Rainbow In Toronto<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://seaandbescene.com/wp-content/uploads/over-the-rainbow1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="233" src="http://seaandbescene.com/wp-content/uploads/over-the-rainbow1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<i><br /></i><br />
<i>Over The Rainbow</i> was originally a British TV competition that followed the search for Dorothy in a new stage production of <i>The Wizard of Oz</i>. The winner, Danielle Hope, was chosen via viewers vote. This same production will be transferred to Toronto, and so a Canadian equivalent of the televised competition has been devised.<br />
<br />
On Monday, June 18th, I was lucky enough to attend the initial audition in Toronto. This was a cattle-call style audition; literally anybody could try out at this stage, with no preference made to professional or unionized talents. The only qualification was that participants had to be over the age of sixteen and willing to wait.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">When I arrived at 6:30 in the morning that misty and overcast Monday (registration and auditions only started at 9), I did not have realistic expectations for how many people would come to try out. I thought I'd come early to beat the rush, but there were already thirty to forty people in line ahead of me. On that day, the Glenn Gould Studio would see a huge amount of traffic, apparently unexpected even by the producers.</span><br />
<br />
While waiting outside the Glenn Gould Studio for registration to begin, a camera crew appeared, and did some filming that will likely be in the show. It was crowd and reaction shots, but maybe you'll see me!<br />
<br />
Inside, the people coordinating the event were doing their best to control the waves of Dorothies coming in. To my knowledge, there was nothing that would have hindered crowd control except for the sheer numbers. Kudos to the people who kept things going smoothly.<br />
<br />
The wide-eyed participants who succeeded in the first few rounds of auditions were given a yellow 'ticket to Oz.' It was very cute, but perhaps slightly superfluous considering that they would be coming back to the exact same location later that evening for callbacks.<br />
<br />
In order to audition, one had to prepare both 'Over The Rainbow' and a song of one's own choosing. I think the latter was meant for the later wave of auditions, because I never got to use it. I was eliminated in the first round.<br />
<br />
"You have quite the voice in there," said the very sweet woman who was auditioning me, "but you're not ready for this competition. You also have a mature voice. Dorothy is supposed to play as sixteen, and that's not going to happen here."<br />
<br />
It was good to get constructive feedback. I rarely get that at auditions. I left, found the friend I'd brought with me, and we went to watch <i>The Avengers</i> at the Scotiabank theatre after realizing that admittance to the CN Tower costs thirty-five dollars a pop.<br />
<br />
(Can we just talk for a moment about the Scotiabank theatre? It's a fucking mansion. I loved going to see a movie there. And they have over a hundred flavours of pop. Remarkable)<br />
<br />
A few notes about the people I saw at the auditions:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>There were nobody presenting as male auditioning for Dorothy. I was actually anticipating this and got kinda disappointed when I saw no dudes. It would have been really interesting.</li>
<li>A little bit more worrying was the fact that I saw maybe three or four women of colour at the auditions. There were hundreds of women auditioning.</li>
<li>Though the competition is allegedly looking for 'a modern Dorothy', several participants came in dressed for the 1939 movie. Some even had ruby slippers. Most had pigtails. I have to say that my inner hair and fashion guy was like "Oh honey, <i>no</i>."</li>
</ul>
So that was my experience auditioning for <i>Over the Rainbow</i>. It was interesting, and quite worth the trip to Toronto.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-81014973300104476062012-05-21T01:45:00.002-04:002012-06-20T09:08:10.549-04:00I Didn't Like The Captain America Movie<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://lytherus.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/captain-america.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://lytherus.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/captain-america.jpg" width="214" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
Usually, it takes me a while to formulate why I did or didn't like something. With<i> Captain America</i>, it took me a few months to shake the disappointment before I could look at the material objectively.<br />
<br />
To clarify, I really do love comic books, and their movies, and 2011 was one of the biggest years for comics, pretty much only dwarfed by 2012, which has friggin' every superhero movie coming out ever.<br />
<br />
So after seeing <i>X-Men: First Class </i>and <i>Thor,</i> which had their problems but were still hugely enjoyable, as well as <i>Green Lantern</i> and<i> Green Hornet</i>, which were largely disappointing even with the latter's hesitant charm, I was ready for <i>Captain America </i>to be the best superhero movie of the year.<br />
<br />
Best superhero movie of 2011? <i>Thor</i>. Not <i>Captain America</i>.<br />
<br />
That highly personal crap aside, here are some reasons why I felt that this movie did not succeed like it should have for me.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Full spoilers ahead!</span><br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<b>Who The Hell Uses A Super Weapon To Sell War Bonds?</b><br />
<b><br /></b><br />
The United States Army, that's who! Because<i> that's how you win a war!</i><br />
<br />
Honestly, I don't know where to start when describing how moronic this is. The majority of the 'action' Steve Rogers sees in this movie is during a montage where he makes it in show biz, show tune by Alan Menken and all.<br />
<br />
In order to bring home how idiotic this is, imagine if Tommy Lee Jones's character decided to encourage victory gardens by putting A-bombs in museums.<br />
<br />
You know, instead of using them to secure a total victory against their under-powered enemies before they figure out the technology as well, and in the process save the lives of a few thousand good men.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/uploads/Tommy%20Lee%20Jones%20CBM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/uploads/Tommy%20Lee%20Jones%20CBM.png" width="244" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Incompetent (adjective): Having a super weapon and making him sing and dance for most of the war.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b>Bucky, Guys! Come On!</b><br />
<br />
I never really read Captain America comics, but when I did, I always enjoyed the character of Bucky. When superheroes acquire their powers, not a lot of thought is put into the people who may have formerly protected them, or helped them along in their early years, and are now outgrown by the superhero who used to be the one they needed to watch.<br />
<br />
With Bucky, not only is this relationship explored most satisfactorily, but his character manages to evolve past being Steve Rogers' childhood friend and protection, but then to Captain America's trusted right hand man, and then to an entity in his own right. This evolution was achieved in a very believable fashion over the course of several years.<br />
<br />
Obviously within the time constraints of a movie, this sort of character development is pretty much impossible, especially with a secondary character who doesn't get that much screen time. Nobody told the writers this, and so Bucky's growth, which was so compelling to see in the comics, was truncated badly.<br />
<br />
I didn't get the sense of Bucky having to come to terms with the fact that he's the one who has to be protected now; he quite easily lets Steve call the shots, without any kind of friction or envy. This isn't a realistic reaction, regardless of how good a friend he is.<br />
<br />
And he is promoted to top-secret sabotage missions for no reason apart from Cap's apparent pity for him. That's not a viable qualification; Cap hasn't seen him in combat, unless one counts beating up thugs in Brooklyn. And honestly, pride alone would probably cause Bucky to turn down such a pity-laced promotion. He'd want to work on his own merit.<br />
<br />
(Hey Cap, here's an idea; why don't you pick someone who's actually qualified and well-informed to help you on these missions? LIKE AGENT CARTER.)<br />
<br />
And his death was just horrid. Even the cartoon<i> Avengers </i>made a better death for Bucky, who sacrificed himself in the most badass way possible. In the Ultimates series, Bucky lives to be an old man and is visited by the still-youthful Cap, to heart-rending effect. In the movie, he falls off a train and dies in the middle of a crammed and confusing action scene. Bucky? More like Sucky!<br />
<br />
-that was a horrible pun. I apologise-<br />
<br />
<b>Agent Carter, Dammit!</b><br />
<br />
Once again, why would Cap use a barely-qualified Bucky in his delicate and top-secret missions when he knows that Agent Carter is perfectly capable and trustworthy in tense and action-filled situations?<br />
<br />
Why should Carter care if Captain America has fangirls?<br />
<br />
Doesn't she have better things to do than secure a date with Cap? Like win the war?<br />
<br />
<i>Doesn't she have better things to do than be Captain America's emotion deposit system?</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<i><u>LIKE WIN THE WAR?</u></i><br />
<br />
<b>Too Much Tie-In Material Makes The Narrative Suffer</b><br />
<br />
The opening scene or image of any given narrative piece should establish its tone and setting.<br />
<br />
For instance, the musical of <i>Les Miserables </i>begins with an ensemble scene which counterpoints the panoramic with the personal narrative, which is this entire show in a nutshell. The main protagonist and antagonist, along with their basic traits and faults, are introduced concisely. The audience is informed that the setting is France in the 19th century via projection.<br />
<br />
In five minutes, the entire thesis of<i> Les Mis </i>is laid out through music, words, and visuals. The audience knows that the show is about ex-convict Jean Valjean in his epic journey through the troubles of 19th century France, who is being pursued by the fiercely determined and legally inflexible Inspector Javert. They know that the piece will be thorough-sung, and they also know the visual vocabulary of the show. It's a near-perfect introduction <strike>to a near-perfect show</strike>.<br />
<br />
But, whereas <i>Les Mis</i> goes out of its way to set up the audience for the rest of the evening's entertainment in the first few moments, <i>Captain America</i> goes out of its way to set up the audience for confusion when the actual narrative starts.<br />
<br />
<u>Captain America</u><br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Physical Setting: New York and Western Europe.</li>
<li>Time Setting: World War Two, in an alternate universe.</li>
<li>Main Characters: Cap, Agent Carter, and the Red Skull.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<u>First Five Minutes of Captain America</u><br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Physical Setting: The Arctic Ocean.</li>
<li>Time Setting: Modern day, in an alternate universe.</li>
<li>Main Characters: Random scientists we'll never see again.</li>
</ul>
<br />
The first scene is not the establishing scene for the rest of the movie. It does not establish setting, time or any of the characters who feature in the film. The most it does is communicate that the world in which the movie is set has more sophisticated technology than our own, but doesn't do anything to further differentiate the film-world from ours than show off a fancy green laser that can cut through ice (impressive, I know).<br />
<br />
In a Marvel movie that already takes place within the established universe of <i>Iron Man</i> and <i>Thor</i>, perhaps this disorienting first scene would have been less jarring. But the thing is, <i>Captain America</i> does not take place in the same time.<br />
<br />
There is another world, another status quo, that needs to be introduced quickly. There are villains the audience needs to be familiarized with, because we are familiar with Nazis from our own history, and we need to be sold on the film-world fact that Hydra is even worse than that horrible regime. The technology/magic which is featured a great deal in this movie needs establishment. Instead we get five minutes of set-up for another movie altogether.<br />
<br />
Joe Johnston's often clever visual homage to the pulp tradition of film is completely at odds with the visuals of the opening's Arctic Ocean, even the Arctic Ocean of the 1940's which Cap crashes into. The music is different, the characters are different, and when we cut away to Norway in 1942, it feels like another movie has started.<br />
<br />
Those first five minutes should be after the credits. Clearly.<br />
<br />
<b>Things I Liked</b><br />
<b><br /></b><br />
That said, I still found a lot to like. I liked the performances, particularly Stanley Tucci, Hugo Weaving, and Chris Evans, and as I said before, the pulp movie feel was welcome and clever. They also established a lot about the history of the Marvel universe with this movie, which was awesome to see.<br />
<br />
The film also tried very hard to make parallels between Cap and Iron Man, which had varying levels of success but sometimes felt a bit forced. Nonetheless, the idea was interesting and established better continuity than the stupid first and last five minutes.<br />
<br />
It's cool that they have the insight to see that Iron Man and Cap, two unproven leaders, have been through similar trials that make him into who they are. That's the sort of thought that is unfortunately lacking elsewhere in this movie.<br />
<br />
<b>Conclusion</b><br />
<br />
All in all, I feel this movie would have been a better one if it so clearly hadn't been rushed into production so it could come out before<i> The Avengers</i>. I would have much preferred a Captain America movie with the modern-day component part of his character already established in <i>The Avengers</i> so they could focus more on the WWII derring-do. I would have preferred a Captain America movie that left possibilities open for a sequel also set in WWII.<br />
<br />
The fact that there is no way <i>Captain America 2 </i>can be set in the same era (disregarding the possible time-bending powers of certain Asgardians) as the first is a bit disappointing to me, and makes me feel more ripped off regarding the non-action of the first three quarters of this film. With a sequel, I think they would have felt less compelled to rush the development and arcs of the secondary characters, and would have spent more time getting to know the truly fascinating secondary cast as well as evolving Cap into the leader we expect him to be.<br />
<br />
Also, more time in WWII would have been more time establishing the modern-day legend of Captain America, which is going to be a hard sell when I see<i> The Avengers</i>.<br />
<br />
I'm glad I got this off my chest! Are there any like-minded thinkers out there?</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-30879886758153291062012-05-01T20:13:00.000-04:002012-05-01T20:13:42.545-04:00Defaults Are Boring By Default<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I guess I've been working myself up to this for a pretty long time.<br />
<br />
Obligatory Disclaimer: I have nothing against straight white dudes. Some of my best friends are straight white dudes.<br />
<br />
However, I'm honestly sick of seeing straight white dudes in the movies.<br />
<br />
I think it's an established fact that main characters in movies aren't white, straight, and male out of any obligation to the plot in films that are not about race, sexuality, or gender.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Exhibit A:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://moviecultists.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/salt-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://moviecultists.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/salt-poster.jpg" width="215" /></a></div>
Exhibit B:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Bb4G5HwBrpw/TwtbUFb_YDI/AAAAAAAABSs/4SjAdVbvJ8c/s1600/i_am_legend+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Bb4G5HwBrpw/TwtbUFb_YDI/AAAAAAAABSs/4SjAdVbvJ8c/s320/i_am_legend+1.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
These two films were originally set to star white men, Tom Cruise as Agent Salt and Arnold Schwarzenegger as Doctor Robert Neville respectively. With Angelina Jolie and Will Smith in these roles instead, very little changed. The movies still made a lot of money at box office, which is not surprising at all seeing as Smith and Jolie are two of the top box-office earners in Hollywood.<br />
<br />
Heck, it could be argued that casting someone who's different from the gingerbread man starring in mainstream popcorn flicks might actually make the movie stand out from the crowd. I personally think that the reason <i>Think Like a Man</i> is presently out-performing <i>The Five Year Engagement</i> is because the former's predominantly black cast makes the pretty paint-by-numbers rom-com seem unique compared to a cinema's usual offerings. Movie tickets are expensive nowadays, and people will generally only pay up for something they haven't seen before.<br />
<br />
Yet for whatever reason, Hollywood execs seem to prefer to stick to their default, which in their mind is unambiguously the straight white male.<br />
<br />
Why am I bitching about this, though? I mean, aren't action movies supposed to be the lowest common denominator of cinematic fare?<br />
<br />
In an action movie, does it really matter who stops the bad guys from taking over the world, walks away from a few explosions, and then gets the girl? Does it matter if the protagonist is white, male, and straight? Is it really so confusing if <a href="http://enewsi.com/movies/190-17627.html">Spider-Man is played by an African-American?</a> Does it matter if Chris Pine and Tom Hardy are both dating Ryan Gosling instead of Reese Witherspoon in <i>This Means War</i>?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.cathaycineplexes.com.sg/images/Big/ThieMeansWarPoster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.cathaycineplexes.com.sg/images/Big/ThieMeansWarPoster.jpg" width="220" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Fun Fact: Hardy and Pine had way more chemistry with each other than either had with Witherspoon in this movie.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Short answer is <i>yes</i>.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-83672215074905563612012-04-26T16:08:00.001-04:002012-04-26T16:16:41.432-04:00Colourblind Casting One: The Streetcar and I<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
As someone who is not a part of a visible minority, I'm pretty sure I'm not qualified to talk about this, but lately this has been bothering me a lot, because there have been a lot of cases where colourblind casting (or hell, even colour-conscious casting) has been received with a mindset that is less than modern and far less than enlightened. Though the US and Canada that generally pride themselves on being open on issues of diversity, there are still embarrassing and primitive fails.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(I'm not talking about the <i>Hunger Games</i> issues. I am so late to the party on that one it isn't funny. The twitter shitstorm that followed the release of that movie was a problem that stems from idiots reading a book but blocking out what they don't want to here. Rue is clearly black in the books, and while it isn't a huge part of her character, it was definitely the right choice to cast a black actress in the movie, especially if that actress was someone of such screen presence as Amandla Stenberg. Case closed. Idiots are idiots, and should have their rights to the Internet restricted if not outright revoked.)</span><br />
<br />
What I'm talking about is the treatment of actors and actresses of colour in theatre, not film and television. Tentatively this subject will be covered in more than one post.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://media.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/cache/STREETCAR_long_image.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="130" src="http://media.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/cache/STREETCAR_long_image.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/56ExGsnLtP8?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
On Broadway, there's been a production of Tennessee Williams'<i> A Streetcar Named Desire </i>that chose to have actors of colour in it. I don't see why this has to be commented on in 2012, when the United States has a black president and when there has already been an all-black production of Williams' <i>Cat on a Hot Tin Roof</i> on Broadway. It's <i>Streetcar</i>! I'd go to see that show on Broadway, no matter who was acting in it.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://theater.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/theater/reviews/a-streetcar-named-desire-at-the-broadhurst-theater.html#">And yet:</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Heck, I wouldn’t care if all the performers were green and they called it “A Spaceship Named Desire,” if the acting were good enough. One of the advantages of theater, where metaphor reigns, is that it doesn’t have to be literal minded in the way film does. Part of the contract between any play and its audience is our willingness to make a leap of imaginative faith.' -Ben Brantley, New York Times</span></span></blockquote>
This is the sort of apologetic pandering that consumes a good fifth of the article. Mr Brantley waves his hands around, going "Ooooh, look at this bold directorial decision, but you know, there are a lot of black people in New Orleans, and James Earl Jones, and ooooh."<br />
<br />
I love how he says that suspense of disbelief is vital if we're to believe that someone with the last name of Kowalski is black. Or that it would be impossible to have a black Blanche on film. Has he seen the original cover of the play's script, by the way?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/66/StreetcarNamedDesire.JPG/175px-StreetcarNamedDesire.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/66/StreetcarNamedDesire.JPG/175px-StreetcarNamedDesire.JPG" /></a></div>
I mean, if I had never even heard of this play and just picked it up with this binding, I would assume Stanley was black. And it wouldn't make one iota of difference in my reading of it.<br />
<br />
Brantley is clearly trying to placate a white readership that for some reason can't see Blanche DuBois or Stanley as black. It's odd -- I thought the eighty-year-old corpses populating theatre audiences could only envision black people as lower-class beasts or manipulative deceivers. Why would Ben Brantley need to spend so much time in this review defending the directorial decision?<br />
<br />
And who, exactly, is he writing for? Whereas his review was more or less ambivolent as to the actual quality of the production (and not the race of its actors), a precursory look at the reviews below revealed that the people who didn't get in to see the show on a critic's pass ie. the ones who actually paid the exorbitant fee of a Broadway ticket, really, really enjoyed their evening:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Did the reviewer actually attend the play? He certainly doesn’t describe the same riveting, powerful performance of Tennessee Williams’ “A Streetcar Named Desire” that I attended on Sunday night.<b> Ben Brantley’s review seems created out of pre-conceived biases and his own agenda</b> (Emphasis mine).'</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">'I flew in from Florida...with no regrets.'</span></span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">'I saw Streetcar last night. Apt, thrilling, spot on interpretation, riveting, electric, mind blowing are the initial words that come to mind. The production was unforgettable and phenomenal and fabulous. I am a teacher, adjunct professor, researcher, Williams fan (read everything) amateur actress for a while (who studied at HB Studios under Walt Witcover, Bill Hickey, June Eve Storey and others) journalist (Technorati) blogger, novelist and poet.'</span></span></blockquote>
These people do not care about colour. These are happy customers! Who the hell does Ben Brantley intend to impress with his oh-so-enlightened views on race?<br />
<br />
The negative reviews seemed to pertain to the attitude of the audience. Apparently, some school groups do attend theatre now and again, and school groups are more responsive to the events onstage than certain naysayers would like. I don't think this is a problem, personally; as an actor and a viewer, I prefer an engaged audience to a polite one. Some of the language used was troubling, though:<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">'as a former casting professional, I hate to say this because of the way it's going to sound, but I <b>ran into the same kind of audience </b>when I saw the all-black version of "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" with Terence Howard. granted, the production was a snooze, but the busloads of clearly inexperienced, <b>urban</b>, Broadway theatergoers imported from the outer boroughs and beyond, <b>sassy-talked</b> back to the actors and laughed at inappropriate times throughout the entire play. and then there was all the eating during the show.<b> it was a most unpleasant experience and one I'm not eager to repeat anytime soon</b>.'</span></blockquote>
Sooo... did you even go to see <i>A Streetcar Named Desire</i>? The title of this review, by the way, was 'no, they're not Tyler Perry productions.'<br />
<br />
And here was the only negative review on the featured page which pertained to the show, and not to the location of the play:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">'Awful.<b> I felt like I was watching a bad episode of a Tyler Perry show</b>. They played it for laughs-interesting choice for a tragedy. Blair Underwood seemed like he was in another play entirely--the real one. The audience was cracking up at totally serious lines. <b>When the rape scene and final disaster comes, the audience was shocked</b>--they thought it was a comedy.'</span></span></blockquote>
Another Tyler Perry comparison? Really?<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Also, I'm not sure how an audience being shocked in regards to a rape scene is a bad thing. Frankly it troubles me that they are expected to react in any other way. In 1947, when the play originally came out, the audience would almost certainly have not expected a run of the mill kitchen sink drama to take such a grave turn.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">The rape scene was extremely watered down for the 1951 movie, because it was so shocking. I think it's fantastic and maybe not a detriment to our psyches that a modern audience still has insight into how brutal this is, and amplifying this shock by directing some of the other scenes with a lighter touch was a great move on the director's part. A play, even if it is over sixty years old, still needs to be affecting and have resonance with its audience. Apparently this reading of <i>Streetcar</i> succeeded on that front.</span><br />
<br />
I'm fixating a little on this particular review of <i>Streetcar</i>, but that's because it's only the most recent in supposed enlightened reviewers for some reason fixating on colourblind casting in the productions they go to see.<br />
<br />
My personal philosophy, and seemingly everyone else's who is not a theatre critic, is that casting a person of colour is a side product of casting the best possible actor for the role that needs to be filled. There are some roles where race matters a lot, like <i>Raisin in the Sun </i>or <i>Ragtime</i>. But there are far more plays and musicals where the characters are accepted to be white, not because they need to be, but because white is the default, or because the original cast was white.<br />
<br />
People get so incredibly defensive and tetchy about this, but it is a fact; Most won't imagine or cast characters in their plays as white because of any textual evidence. They will imagine them as white because that was the precedent set in the first cast. Exhibit A:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.posters.ws/images/306099/yul_brynner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.posters.ws/images/306099/yul_brynner.jpg" width="255" /></a></div>
<br />
It's Yul Brynner. He's a Caucasian playing the King of Siam in Rodgers and Hammerstein's <i>The King and I.</i> In the two Broadway revivals and movie that followed the original production, Mr Brynner reprised his role. The 1996 Broadway revival opened with Lou Diamond Phillips as the King.<br />
<br />
I've seen countless productions of this show, with a white King every time. I can only think of a few times a non-Asian production of <i>The King and I</i> had an actor of Asian descent in the role of the King. One was when Ben Kingsley played him in an album featuring Julie Andrews (which is really excellent. I recommend it highly). There was a US tour that starred Daniel Dae Kim. In Britain there have been several productions and tours that featured the likes of Raymon Tikaram and Daniel Scott Lee. But otherwise, colour-correct casting is rare in this show and especially this role.<br />
<br />
Because of the precedent set, it's been accepted that a Caucasian with a shaved head can play the King of Siam in this show, even though textually he is Asian. That this basically amounts to blackface is apparently irrelevant.<br />
<br />
To be fair, there are similar precedents set for characters of other races. In<i> RENT</i>, it is more or less expected that Joanne and Collins be black, and that Mimi and Angel be Hispanic. But I feel that setting a precedent for a character's race in a play where race isn't an issue explicitly dealt with in the piece is rare enough that the case of precedent in<i> RENT</i> is a positive one.<br />
<br />
It is not vital for Blanche DuBois to be white in <i>A Streetcar Named Desire</i>. Race is not a driving part of her character, and Ben Brantley shouldn't have to get anxious and defensive about it in his review of the show's production. It would have been far more constructive for him to spend more time on<i> why</i> he felt the production didn't work as a whole, which was something he said, but something he didn't explain very well.<br />
<br />
And in the end, reviews from people who paid full price to see this show pretty much unanimously show a huge amount of indifference. Which is my time wasted as well as Brantley's.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-51401160279607599422012-03-31T15:16:00.002-04:002012-04-15T20:24:18.977-04:00She's Queer, The Phantom Of The Opera: Part One<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">There aren't enough lesbians in musical theatre, so I thought I'd reappropriate some existing musicals into my world of perversion and aberrance. A little bit of personal context and Takarazuka will be provided to facilitate transition into my queering of<i> Phantom of the Opera</i>.<br />
<div><br />
<div>When I was ten years old, I was just coming to term with what my identity was called by everyone else. Though I'd more or less known that I was gay long before this moment in life, it was around grade six that students and teachers in my school started talking about homosexuality. This was because of the ongoing debate in Canada on whether or not to make gay marriage legal, and my teacher thought that it was important we know about the issue and the realities of gay people.</div><div><br />
</div><div>The hurtful things that my fellow students said at the time still stay with me. They weren't trying to hurt me specifically, and it's my belief that their opinions must have been heavily influenced by their parents, but it was shocking and distressing for me.</div><div><br />
</div><div>Luckily, my birthday rolled around. The Christmas before, I'd received a soundtrack of <i>Cats</i>, which I'd enjoyed, and so on my birthday I got the London Highlights of <i>The Phantom of the Opera</i>.</div><div><br />
</div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://991.com/newGallery/Andrew-Lloyd-Webber-etc-Highlights-Of-The-290290.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://991.com/newGallery/Andrew-Lloyd-Webber-etc-Highlights-Of-The-290290.jpg" width="306" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">What a horrible cover...</td></tr>
</tbody></table><div>I don't really know how to explain what happened next.</div><div><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
</div><div>First, I had a very limited idea of what musical theatre should be at that point, and to be honest <i>Cats </i>wasn't the ideal I had created. When I first heard the crashing chords of <i>Phantom's </i>overture, I remember thinking "That's it! That's what a musical is!"</div><div><br />
</div><div>Luckily for me and my drama degree, my idea of musical theatre has evolved since then, but my point is that <i>Phantom's</i> music was the right blend of grandiosity and exuberance that I wanted in a quintessential musical.</div><div><br />
</div><div>Second, I felt a connection with the Phantom that was instant and completely empathetic. Every time I finished the soundtrack, I was in tears for the Phantom, because I knew exactly what it was like to have to hide and to be unable to express feelings for someone because of a fear of rejection.</div><div><br />
</div><div>I think every person has his or her avatar in popular culture that they emulate or empathize with, or whose work helps them get through hard times. I know for a lot of my gay guy friends, it's Marilyn Monroe or Dorothy Gale. For me right now, it's Christopher Lee or Clifton Webb. At that point in my life, it switched from Mulan to the Phantom. The music and the Gothic aesthetic of the show helped greatly in this coup, I'm sure.</div><div><br />
</div><div>It was so easy to find gay context for the Phantom's pain, and it was especially easy to put myself in the Phantom's shoes, sometimes quite literally. The Hallowe'en after I got the soundtrack, I went out as Erik and had a blast.</div><div><br />
</div><div><i>The Phantom of the Opera </i>was a great way to express myself without outing myself, and probably solidified my decision to go into theatre.</div><div><br />
</div><div>But I outgrew<i> Phantom</i> pretty quickly, in comparison to my other obsessions, and the show became sort of background noise to the other things I started getting exposed to. At some point, it actually became embarrassing to be a Phan, around after the movie came out and a little bit after I started to realize the quality of the work isn't that great.</div><div><br />
</div><div>But then, the all-powerful Takarazuka revue gave me <i>Phantom</i>. Maury Yeston's, not Andrew Lloyd Webber's. I discovered this only a couple of years ago.</div><div><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/6UtLQ2hU9M4?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div><div>The stylized aesthetic and all-female nature of the Revue, combined with the story I knew so well and the wonderful new music, rekindled my interest in <i>The Phantom of the Opera</i> in general.</div><div><br />
</div><div>But despite my new appreciation for my childhood obsession, I haven't really been able to express my feelings for it until today, when I read <a href="http://flamingculture.wordpress.com/2011/08/21/hes-here-the-phantom-of-the-opera/#comment-913">this article</a>. I never thought I'd find someone else who had the same kind of connection to the material that I did, and it inspired me to get this thorough queering of <i>Phantom of the Opera </i>out into the ether.</div></div></div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-30700812301171917772012-03-29T22:19:00.003-04:002012-03-29T22:22:45.167-04:00(Mostly) Failed Animated Adaptations of Musicals<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">For about twenty years, animated films have done very well when converted to stage, and yet the reverse is hardly ever true.<br />
<br />
In 1953, one of the greatest animated films that never was got scrapped because of politics and paranoia. <a href="http://www.michaelspornanimation.com/splog/?p=2157">The story </a>of John Hubley's aborted animated adaptation of the Broadway musical <i>Finian's Rainbow</i> is seemingly all but forgotten except by those who have special interest in the fields of theatre and animation. Luckily,<i> Finian's Rainbow </i>received a revival on Broadway in 2009, which I hope will renew some interest in this project. In the meantime, check out the article I linked above. It has some great storyboard art, and the complete story of this movie that never was.<br />
<br />
For those who are not familiar with <i>Finian's Rainbow</i> (and who can blame you), the plot briefly concerns a leprechaun who comes to a small village and combats bigotry. Which is awesome, and you know it. It has a lush score with words by the guy who wrote the lyrics to <i>The Wizard of Oz. </i>In a word, brilliant.<br />
<br />
The film would have been the first animated film created with an adult audience in mind, and would have featured the talents of such giants as Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald and Oscar Peterson. Here's a song from the show sung by Sinatra in an unrelated album:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/uXWT2tiIGO0?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>The failed <i>Finian's Rainbow</i> affected a great deal of the animated musical sub-genre, I believe. More after the jump.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
After Hubley's failed project, I don't think there was a single musical that was ever converted to an animated film. Until that faithful year of 1999, when the neon-coloured bowdlerized version of Rodgers and Hammerstein's <i>The King and I</i> from Warner Brothers came out.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/o1SrmkdcFqI?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>Yeah, this was shit. Apart from the animation, which has horrid colouring and clumsy CG, this movie completely watered down the source material. While I know that <i>The King and I</i> is pretty heavy stuff, what with all the colonialism and the concubines and the execution and dying... on second thought, why would someone even make <i>The King and I</i> into a kids' movie?<br />
<br />
I'm not saying that kids' films can't tackle ambiguous or uncomfortable issues, but this piece of crap just completely sidestepped them. It inserted a villain into the piece, took out all the bad stuff about both Anna and the King, and simplified all the issues that come with having a foreigner trying to impose her values on a land that she does not care to fully understand. Furthermore, it cuts out the <i>Small House of Uncle Tom Ballet</i>, which is horribly inexcusable. Without these really important parts of the characterization or plot, <i>The King and I</i> became a condescending piece of trash that holds none of the relevance that the stage play has.<br />
<br />
But all this is not as repelling as the addition of magic and monsters to this movie.<br />
<br />
<u>Magic.</u><br />
<br />
And this is why the Rodgers and Hammerstein estates, in the wise words of Wikipedia,<span style="font-family: inherit;"> 'have <span style="background-color: white; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;">refused to allow any of their other musicals to be made into animated features<i><b> forever</b></i>.' Emphasis mine.</span></span><br />
<br />
The only musical that I can think of which was successfully animated and not completely awful was the charming <i>You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown</i> special. Maybe it's because these characters are just so wonderful in animation and comics, and maybe it's the infectious heart of the score that transcends any medium, but garsh this is cute...<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/PjFE9uy3N38?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>That said, <i>You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown</i> is hardly groundbreaking and innovative material. It's sweet, and it has a good heart, but the film clearly did not have the ambitions or goals of Hubley's <i>Finian's Rainbow</i>. I don't care either way -- Charlie Brown is still great entertainment -- but it saddens me that animators can't think bigger when they undergo these projects.<br />
<br />
Why couldn't have Warner Brothers' <i>The King and I</i> have tackled the complex characters of Anna and the King in a faithful manner? Why not try to present such a musical with the innovation and artistic integrity that Hubley was going for? If it's because of children and their sensitivities (and kids really aren't as stupid as studios want us to believe), then why not just make an animated musical for mature viewers?<br />
<br />
I believe that when <i>Finian's Rainbow</i> had to be scrapped because of the cultural scourge that was McCarthyism, animation's maturity in the West was set back by an incalculable amount of time. Now animated musicals follow a strict and anodyne formula, and rarely ever try to challenge viewers with hard questions. Though the technology might have caught up, and some sensibilities appear more modern, this subgenre of animation is in the same level of development as it was in the days of <i>The Little Mermaid</i>.<br />
<br />
And that's a damn shame.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-74932290119862623882012-03-27T20:18:00.001-04:002012-03-27T20:19:57.386-04:00The Importance of Challenging Theatre<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">That I should even feel the need to write an article with the title this one has is extremely depressing. There was a time when expression and innovation in the arts was revered rather than ridiculed, as it is today in political and professional platforms. It is my belief that I was not alive for this time. Particularly in the nation I live in, where the arts are simultaneously protected and denigrated by my current government, the arts seems more and more like a corporate outreach program every day.<br />
<div><br />
</div><div>Today, artists of any kind - theatre, writing, film or dance - seem to be phobic of making their work relevant to the current time and place. I can't speak for other fields, but what results is what in <i>my</i> field is known as 'dead theatre' (thank you Peter Brooks); a very nicely staged play done in a retrospective context rather than a current one. There is no reason for such a production to exist except to put bums in seats.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
The audience is not challenged to think or to reach outside of their comfort zones, and are intellectually massaged for a couple of hours, but they go home happy, new subscribers. A prevalence of dead theatre leads to stagnation and a thinning of the demographic that is not white, ageing, and bourgeois.</div><div><br />
</div><div>That this should be the state of theatre in general in my country is a good reason why we need government grants to keep our major theatre festivals running. In theory, dead theatre does little to alienate or offend, and therefore should result in a piece which is more accessible, but I believe that lack of challenge leads to boredom. Boredom leads to people not attending the theatre. Low attendance leads to the government needing to step in so as to keep these fossils called theatre festivals alive.</div><div><br />
</div><div>When I talk about relevant theatre, I don't mean the glorified soapbox theatre that pops up from time to time. I don't even mean new plays. A well-thought-out production of<i> Hamlet</i> can say more about the modern-day world than any new texts. But there's the proviso - in order for theatre to be relevant, it needs to be well-thought-out.</div><div><br />
As my dear drama prof would say:</div><div><br />
</div><div><b><span style="font-size: large;">Why Here? Why Now?</span></b></div><div><br />
</div><div>These are two very simple questions that most production teams appear to bypass when they put on their shows. This definitely affects the quality of the show. When a director does not ask these two essential questions, it is my belief that they are putting on their show for all the wrong reasons.</div><div><br />
Theatre's inception was intertwined with religion, and was taken very seriously. Today theatre is seen as an 'add-on' of sorts, a perk we can only permit when the economy is good. In times of distress, theatre is to be neglected, at least according to the actions of my current government. I cannot begin to emphasize how wrong this line of thinking is; cultural identity is easily assimilated, even in the best economic circumstances. In times of hardship, it's even easier to become little USA.<br />
<br />
It enrages me that the politicians of my nation have a shared contempt of the arts matched only by their condescending babying of theatre. The grants they give to theatre festivals makes directors complacent and politically dulled, and are easily withdrawn when a play that is funded by the government dares to say something that isn't yes. That theatre companies who are fat off the money distributed by politicians give jobs to incompetents and produce theatre which is mediocre to an extreme is just.... grah.<br />
<br />
This is while theatre companies who scrape to provide fantastic and relevant theatre can barely find performing space or funding. Fringe festivals, which thankfully strive in my area, showcase a vibrant and alive theatre scene that is not represented by the theatre festivals which monopolize our theatrical consciousness.<br />
<br />
I am hopeful that in the future the theatre scene fosters the innovation and leaves the crap, but at present I'm kind of disheartened.<br />
<br />
Happy World Theatre Day, everyone.</div></div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-12725723441060535492012-03-09T23:51:00.003-05:002012-04-09T21:26:26.191-04:00The Post-Flop Era of Broadway<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t_hNr2tyzQE/T4OMNq9l_LI/AAAAAAAAACY/jCkbNRCtPnc/s1600/Carrie_The_Musical_Broadway_Poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t_hNr2tyzQE/T4OMNq9l_LI/AAAAAAAAACY/jCkbNRCtPnc/s320/Carrie_The_Musical_Broadway_Poster.jpg" width="207" /></a></div><br />
</td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">'Don't you understand, Mama? Everything's not a sin!'<br />
-Actual line from this piece of crap. <3</td></tr>
</tbody></table>So, in 1988, the infamous musicalised version of Stephen King's<i> Carrie </i>opened to hisses and boos and disastrous reviews. After almost a week, it closed to a huge financial loss and an infamous history that would bury it in the eyes of serious commercial theatre forever...<br />
<br />
Until the fanboys attacked, that is.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><object class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="http://0.gvt0.com/vi/gfwuyA_rcHA/0.jpg" height="266" width="320"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gfwuyA_rcHA&fs=1&source=uds" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><embed width="320" height="266" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gfwuyA_rcHA&fs=1&source=uds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object></div><br />
<br />
To people who might read this blog for the dubious nerd and film content, it is true; theatre has its fanboys as well. I suppose that this is the theatrical equivalent of <i>Serenity</i> getting made because the lunatics took over the asylum. Except not really at all.<br />
<br />
The <i>Carrie</i> revival, which now has a refurbished score and book, opened a couple of weeks ago at the Lucille Lortel theatre in New York to indifferent reviews from the critics and rapturous feedback from the people who went to see this show. I believe that the run has already sold out, and there's already talk of a transfer to Broadway.<br />
<br />
Admittedly, I have an unwarranted liking of <i>Carrie</i>, but I think that there are some things that have their <strike>bootlegged</strike> place on my music player and not on a commercial stage.<i> Carrie</i> has great moments, but a few great moments do not warrant a full-fledged, albeit minimalist, revival on or off-Broadway. But if it puts bums in seats and gets money for other, more artistically viable projects, then I have no problem with this misbegotten show being trotted out again.<br />
<br />
However, when a venture like this is successful, there are going to be copycats. <a href="http://broadwayworld.com/article/BWW-EXCLUSIVE-Henry-Krieger-Talks-SIDE-SHOW-201314-Revival-20120309">And so someone</a> has decided to refurbish the second-biggest flop on Broadway, <i>Side Show, </i>a <strike>very sensitive and not exploitative at all </strike>show about conjoined twins in showbiz. It will be tried out at the prestigious La Jolla Playhouse before possibly transferring to Broadway in 2014.<br />
<br />
No. God no.<br />
<br />
I can't really emphasise the intellectual laziness that has hit Broadway and surrounding area lately. I mean, it was bad enough when good original musicals were practically extinct on the Great White Way, but at least then people offered handsome revivals of good shows in the meantime. And there's nothing wrong with that -- I don't think that Broadway has been a place for intellectually stimulating shows since Sondheim's <i>Passion </i>won a whole bunch of awards and then flopped in 1994.<br />
<br />
It's when stupid shows with stupid premises and anodyne scores are revived because of a very loud but small group of people who missed seeing their pet flop the first time around that things get silly. Reviving a notorious flop which is known to be mediocre just for shits and giggles isn't an artistic risk, it's dumb.<br />
<br />
Nostalgia isn't enough of a reason to revisit drek. There are perfectly legitimate low-key concerts and stagings of these shows that would suffice just as well as a 15-million dollar show on Broadway for all my nostalgic needs. There's great program that does concerts of musicals which are too unsubstantial for a full-fledged outing on Broadway. It's called<i> Encores!</i> and it typically does three or four presentations a year, attracting top-notch talent from the stage and screen. I strongly encourage everyone to get a look at what they do and support them in any way they can. <i>Encores!</i> is very successful in what it does -- its 1996 presentation of the then little-known show <i>Chicago</i> directly resulted in a Broadway revival that continues to run today and a superb movie which won the Academy Award for Best Picture.<br />
<br />
The difference between what <i>Encores!</i> does and what producers are doing with shows like <i>Carrie</i> or <i>Side Show</i> is one of creative integrity. <i>Encores!</i> acknowledges that most of the shows which are presented in its programs are flawed, and in some cases irreparably so. It's not their mandate to eventually produce every single show that they present on Broadway. That would be impossible. <i>Chicago</i> was a perfect storm of fantastic direction and choreography from Ann Reinking, an awesome starting cast, and a change in American culture that made the public more receptive to the show's themes. <i>Chicago</i> still remained a flawed piece, but became a very topical one. Apart from <i>Chicago</i>, I don't think any of the shows presented by <i>Encores!</i> have transferred to Broadway.<br />
<br />
What creatives do when they revive <i>Carrie</i> over a good show is claim that <i>Carrie</i> is in fact, brilliant, or that, like<i> Chicago</i>, it was made before its time. I know a lot of people would like to think the latter about <i>Carrie</i>, and I suppose the musical might have more relevance in a post-Columbine era. But even if<i> Carrie</i> gets topical, it will never be brilliant, no matter how much money, talent, and new music is thrown at it. It's an ill-conceived show, with a book that's all over the place in terms of tone and music from the people who wrote <i>Fame</i>. Yes, <i>Fame</i>. That eighties piece of shit. Nothing short of a very involved and complete overhaul can change what's fundamentally wrong with <i>Carrie</i>. Dramaturgs are not alchemists.<br />
<br />
I won't even go into what's wrong with <i>Side Show</i>. I don't have the energy.<br />
<br />
The other thing that troubles me about recent events is the motivation on the producers' parts. Honestly, it's sad that some ageing white man in New York would rather sink his investments into a known flop over a new venture. The only motivation I can think of, apart from the dubious nostalgia factor, could be that a flop being revived counts as a newsmaker, and therefore the curiosity generated will result in tickets being bought. This might work the first couple of times; there are plenty of people who buy tickets to see a trainwreck and go home gratified that they still know what bad theatre is. But the novelty does wear off, and cynical bastards are not the most faithful customers.<br />
<br />
So this is the post-flop era of Broadway. No show in the history of theatre has failed badly enough to ruin its chances at a revival. No show is bad enough to rake in the money from people who are sick of watching the original on grainy bootlegs on Youtube.<br />
<br />
I guess I should start printing t-shirts for the new <i>Lestat </i>revival...<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZImGSurax6w/T1rdVLm55KI/AAAAAAAAACQ/aIQK0j_0mj8/s1600/lestat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZImGSurax6w/T1rdVLm55KI/AAAAAAAAACQ/aIQK0j_0mj8/s320/lestat.jpg" width="267" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">DON'T YOU WANT THAT?</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
What investors and producers should be doing is finding new shows to develop. To avoid the possibilities of these new shows being crappy, they need to do what producers used to do; try these shows out of town for a good long time rather than dumping half-baked ideas onto the Great White Way. They need to stop pandering to their ageing and overly complacent demographic and try to entice those idiots as well as a new audience with shows that are grown-up, interesting, and artistically genuine.<br />
<br />
Instead they're attempting to relive memorable events of Broadway history, both good and bad.</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5954462897094984360.post-26875983298642237312012-03-08T07:57:00.000-05:002012-03-08T07:57:43.445-05:00Ur Doing It Right.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">Here is a photoquote for my film class in university. Schoolwork is lame, I know.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8IepbD4g53g/T1isjEq01OI/AAAAAAAAACE/OU8_l90cCMo/s1600/ur+doing+it+right.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8IepbD4g53g/T1isjEq01OI/AAAAAAAAACE/OU8_l90cCMo/s1600/ur+doing+it+right.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Isn't that just darling?</div><br />
<br />
</div>Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14049074163723418499noreply@blogger.com1