22 November 2008
Harvey (1950)
This is a movie about how being "oh-so-pleasant" trumps being "oh-so-clever" if one must choose between the two. This is a movie about how living with an imaginary friend is better than living with no friend at all, as long as the imaginary friend does not have a religious agenda.
7 November 2008
The Turn of the Screw
(Eastman Opera Theatre, 7 November 2008)
Remarkably for an opera, the singers take the trouble to act---and they do so well. Furthermore, it appears that as much effort has been put into directing the actors as in conducting the orchestra and rehearsing the arias. The singers stay in character throughout the performance and between the scenes. The orchestra and the actors are co-ordinated impeccably. The leading lady (Meghan Attridge, who plays the governance) is beautiful and is of the same age as her character, which, again, is doubly unusual for an opera.
Acting in this opera comes closest to a musical piece. The acting is intense and concrete, and, yet, it invites the observer to infuse it with a meaning of his choice. The plot is bursting with developments and at the same time is hollow and begs to be filled by the viewer's imagination.
The actors' task is made easier by the subject matter of the performance. Sexual tension is easy to identify with for a viewer (and the actor); so, any half-hearted hint at it will fire the viewer's imagination, and acting imperfections may go unnoticed. If there were any acting imperfections, they did go unnoticed, indeed. One exception, perhaps, is the narration from the protagonist's point of view at the beginning of the opera. The narration is done with an accent---New Jersey TOEFL---markedly different from the protagonist's accent in the remainder of the play.
There is a sparkle of madness in each character. This is the kind of madness that stems from hunger rather than satiation. Most instances of madness, perhaps, stem from hunger. Thus--- more precisely---the characters' madness stems from their intellectual poverty, their plainness.
Remarkably for an opera, the singers take the trouble to act---and they do so well. Furthermore, it appears that as much effort has been put into directing the actors as in conducting the orchestra and rehearsing the arias. The singers stay in character throughout the performance and between the scenes. The orchestra and the actors are co-ordinated impeccably. The leading lady (Meghan Attridge, who plays the governance) is beautiful and is of the same age as her character, which, again, is doubly unusual for an opera.
Acting in this opera comes closest to a musical piece. The acting is intense and concrete, and, yet, it invites the observer to infuse it with a meaning of his choice. The plot is bursting with developments and at the same time is hollow and begs to be filled by the viewer's imagination.
The actors' task is made easier by the subject matter of the performance. Sexual tension is easy to identify with for a viewer (and the actor); so, any half-hearted hint at it will fire the viewer's imagination, and acting imperfections may go unnoticed. If there were any acting imperfections, they did go unnoticed, indeed. One exception, perhaps, is the narration from the protagonist's point of view at the beginning of the opera. The narration is done with an accent---New Jersey TOEFL---markedly different from the protagonist's accent in the remainder of the play.
There is a sparkle of madness in each character. This is the kind of madness that stems from hunger rather than satiation. Most instances of madness, perhaps, stem from hunger. Thus--- more precisely---the characters' madness stems from their intellectual poverty, their plainness.
1 November 2008
Holiday (1938)
Money gives freedom and power. Being an offspring of a rich parent runs the risk of being dominated by the parent's power. Family riches can also deny the offspring freedom that stems from exercising the skills acquired in trying to find one's own way in life. Katharine Hupburn's character, Linda, is a casualty of such a family. Cary Grant's character, Johnny, is about to marry into such a family.
Linda is intense, earnest, and naive. Her zest and maturity seem incongruous at times; one anticipates her going mad unless her situation changes in a way that would allow her to put to test the ideas about life brooding in her mind at ever more frequent moments of solitude. But she never does go mad, and therein lies her strength.
Linda's father, Edward Seton, remarks that it is unAmerican not to aspire to maximize personal wealth. Linda stands for a different idea of America; it is unAmerican not to be critical, not to be curious, not to be adventurous, not to be free. The film is not an argument against a career in business. The film is an argument for making informed decisions and not being unnecessarily conformist.
Linda is intense, earnest, and naive. Her zest and maturity seem incongruous at times; one anticipates her going mad unless her situation changes in a way that would allow her to put to test the ideas about life brooding in her mind at ever more frequent moments of solitude. But she never does go mad, and therein lies her strength.
Linda's father, Edward Seton, remarks that it is unAmerican not to aspire to maximize personal wealth. Linda stands for a different idea of America; it is unAmerican not to be critical, not to be curious, not to be adventurous, not to be free. The film is not an argument against a career in business. The film is an argument for making informed decisions and not being unnecessarily conformist.
21 October 2008
Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice: The New Musical
(Rochester's Eastman Theatre, 21 October 2008)
The Orchestra, the Jane Austen, and her characters mingle on the stage as they re-create a story of romantic misunderstanding with a happy ending. A touch of honesty and confidence is added to the production by the actors who carry and peep into black folders containing the dialogue. The characters need little introduction and there is not much of it in the play---or at any rate not much compared to the steady development of the characters in the book.
The forte of the production is not dramatic acting but rather the musical numbers. The numbers get better as the play progresses, but there is no tune and no refrain that linger in one's memory after the curtain drops. (In this respect, the score resembles a typical opera.) The portrayal of the main characters (but not the musical score) is visibly inspired by the film Pride and Prejudice (2005).
The script would have benefited from a more-than-sketchy development of Jane Austen's character. Ideally, the play would have three stories running in parallel. In one story, Jane Austen contemplates rewriting the novel as she re-evaluates it in the light of her life's experiences. Thus, the second story line is the plot in Pride and Prejudice. The third story line is Jane Austen's memories of her own encounters with men that have shaped views on romantic love and the writing of the Pride and Prejudice. Does Jane Austen identify herself more with Elizabeth Bennet or Jane Bennett? Was Mr Darcy's character a man in her life or was he the man who never was? Or, perhaps, Darcy's character corresponds most closely to Jane Austen's self?
This appears to be solid if raw production; it can make it to the Broadway.
The Orchestra, the Jane Austen, and her characters mingle on the stage as they re-create a story of romantic misunderstanding with a happy ending. A touch of honesty and confidence is added to the production by the actors who carry and peep into black folders containing the dialogue. The characters need little introduction and there is not much of it in the play---or at any rate not much compared to the steady development of the characters in the book.
The forte of the production is not dramatic acting but rather the musical numbers. The numbers get better as the play progresses, but there is no tune and no refrain that linger in one's memory after the curtain drops. (In this respect, the score resembles a typical opera.) The portrayal of the main characters (but not the musical score) is visibly inspired by the film Pride and Prejudice (2005).
The script would have benefited from a more-than-sketchy development of Jane Austen's character. Ideally, the play would have three stories running in parallel. In one story, Jane Austen contemplates rewriting the novel as she re-evaluates it in the light of her life's experiences. Thus, the second story line is the plot in Pride and Prejudice. The third story line is Jane Austen's memories of her own encounters with men that have shaped views on romantic love and the writing of the Pride and Prejudice. Does Jane Austen identify herself more with Elizabeth Bennet or Jane Bennett? Was Mr Darcy's character a man in her life or was he the man who never was? Or, perhaps, Darcy's character corresponds most closely to Jane Austen's self?
This appears to be solid if raw production; it can make it to the Broadway.
13 September 2008
Elegy (2008)
The story follows a familiar pattern discernible in recent cinema. A woman with an "inner life," and a man, who is quite superficial, makes mistakes, often does not realise that he makes them, and when he does realise he does not have the courage to fix them.
The message of the film is not to shy from experimenting as life is complicated so it is hard to get it right the first time around. Furthermore, if an experiment fails, it can often be fixed. And listen.
With the exception of the Penelope Cruz's character, other characters appear misplaced. In particular, they are not good enough to earn the lives that they lead. Ben Kingsley's character, a professor of literature, is not brilliant enough for a university professor. His conversations do not betray the sophistication that the story ascribes to him. Ditto his friend, the poet. Ditto his long-term lover, perhaps. Such sketchiness is acceptable in Woody Allen's work, where it is a part of the fable. In this film, in contrast, it is a flaw.
The message of the film is not to shy from experimenting as life is complicated so it is hard to get it right the first time around. Furthermore, if an experiment fails, it can often be fixed. And listen.
With the exception of the Penelope Cruz's character, other characters appear misplaced. In particular, they are not good enough to earn the lives that they lead. Ben Kingsley's character, a professor of literature, is not brilliant enough for a university professor. His conversations do not betray the sophistication that the story ascribes to him. Ditto his friend, the poet. Ditto his long-term lover, perhaps. Such sketchiness is acceptable in Woody Allen's work, where it is a part of the fable. In this film, in contrast, it is a flaw.
30 August 2008
Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008)
Whereas saying it is all about sex would be to unnecessarily narrow the statement, acknowledging that it is all about love is perhaps an accurate description of the essence of art. Love is also the essence of good life as good life is a form of art in that good life transcends derivative and common, and accentuates innovative and universal traits of an individual's character. Being the ultimate project in life, it is important to get love right. It is unlikely that it comes out right from the first attempt and one should treasure all the signals about what is right for one and what is wrong, whichever form these signals take. Generating these signals involves taking risks and being creative, which are the subjects of this Woody Allen's picture.
Mr Allen's pictures are better when he engages European actors, who are typically better trained than American ones; this training is an asset given the minimal direction that Mr Allen gives. The film is well done. It is not polished; but its roughness cannot be mistaken for sloppiness.
Mr Allen's pictures are better when he engages European actors, who are typically better trained than American ones; this training is an asset given the minimal direction that Mr Allen gives. The film is well done. It is not polished; but its roughness cannot be mistaken for sloppiness.
6 August 2008
Roman Holiday (1953)
The picture is better than one may have expected. Gregory Peck's minimalist manner is derivative of Cary Grant's manner. Nonetheless, Mr Peck's version is executed well. Audrey Hepburn is charming, but not debilitatingly so as in the Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961). Her performance is more mature, less grotesque here than in some of her later pictures. Miss Hepburn's performance in the first scene after she returns home is impeccable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
