Merry CHRISTmas!

(Emphasis added.)

London Theatre I’ve Seen Recently

We watched Kevin Spacey (Henry Drummond) and David Troughton (Matthew Harrison Brady) at The Old Vic in London in Inherit The Wind. Described as

A parable that fictionalizes the 1925 Scopes “Monkey” Trial as a means to discuss the then contemporary McCarthy trials.

Trevor Nunn the well experienced Theatre director was in charge, so as one would expect the production was of a very high standard. Onc

e we got over the thrill of seeing Mr. Spacey in the flesh as well as the thrill of experiencing the sight of a genuine monkey on stage (!) as well as the singing of some classic old American hymns; I found this an extremely satisfying and brain-poking show.

Secondly I watched a show called Pied Piper, by a group called Boy Blue Entertainment.

It was an adaptation of the classic Pied Piper fable. They made some great modern day translations; the rats became criminal hoodie vermin, and it was peppered with London ‘gangsta’ references. It fell short with it’s attempt to stick to the storyline by making him actually lead actual children actually away. I get the fact that it’s good to get rid of crime but I don’t get why we’re promoting child kidnap!?

Most of this show consisted of amazingly choreographed street dance sequences in the style of ‘Diversity’ and the like. Bits that made you go “that was just so cool!“

Namedrop-Bellyflop #2

You may remember a while ago I posted this all about my assault on Gary Lightbody of Snow Patrol.

Today’s entry is somewhat less well-known but in my eyes more exciting. Have you ever seen/heard of The Adam and Joe Show? It was on Channel 4 in the late nineties, I re-watched them a while back when they put it up on 4oD, it’s very silly and funny.

I listened to them on XFM and then they had a Coca-Cola sponsored podcast which was a bit rubbish, now they’re on BBC 6 radio and they are back to their great standards.

There is a new Tintin movie on its way next year which Spielberg is directing. Joe Cornish is/was involved in the screenplay, which is very cool.

So I was out this afternoon watching Pied Piper this afternoon and we wandered into a really cool arty abandoned bunker thing made by Robert Kusmirowski.

He has created a World War Two-era bunker. This highly atmospheric installation – featuring a warren of mysterious rooms and a draisine running along a track that disappears into a dark tunnel – transports viewers to another reality.

We came out and bumped into Mr. Cornish. Now my first mission was to remember whether he was Adam or Joe, my brain delivered on that one and before I knew it I was telling him how much of a fan of ‘his work’ I was. That’s probably the most clichéd sentence I could have come up with.

He then asked me why I was here and for some reason I thought it was a good idea to put myself in an Ali G style pose when I said we were here for the street dance. He claimed he’d just come for the exhibition but I saw him half an hour later, sitting in the row in front of us watching the street dance too, so… .

I then realised that he felt it was appropriate to leave and I tried to think of something else to say, all I came up with was “oh, have you met my brother Dewi?” What!? Where did that come from? I quickly realised that this exchange was over and wished him a Merry Christmas and briskly walked away.

One always re-imagines these situations and thinks through the other things they could have said. In my mind we compare notes about writing scripts and he tells me some exclusive gossip about the new Tintin film and how Steve Spielberg is “such a sweetheart”. But my lips failed me this time. Oh well.

Not the Joe Cornish I met, just some photographer with the same name. This is nice though isn't it!?

Advice to a recent Twentian.

You’re full of a cold today, which I suppose you could see as a summing up of the winter period in which you perhaps unwisely chose to be born. This is a significant age for you to be entering into, departing from the iconic ‘teens’ into somewhat more vague terrain. Feelings are mixed as to how you can sculpt this occasion into something worthwhile. I tell you, perhaps a realistic common cold is a most helpful tool to teach and remind you of the realities of life upon this earth (this life of which you are by now most likely to be more than a fifth through.)

Have you heard or experienced that clichéd story of a child reaching a certain age and suddenly somehow feeling that they are  no longer as excited as they once were? The ‘magic’ or maybe more accurately the ‘fuzziness’ has gone. The pop-up picture pages become practical cook books and helpful biographies; the Manchester United football shirt becomes an itchy jumper and a Birthday Card which looks like it was printed in the mid to late 70’s. You take your wallet out of the back pocket of your jeans and realise that actually; you could have bought these things yourself anyway.

However, this isn’t how you should choose to spend your neuros (brain cell currency), that would be a far too easy an option. Ambition once again leaps onto your back and decides that she wants you to rule the world, to change the world, to move the world, to re-imagine the world, to escape the world, to become the world, and you will be the first! Minor feelings of regret are suppressed by the ever alluring Mrs. A and with her song of optimisity, she turns them from stone to silver, whilst all the while, wrestling her very self. Guzzling diet pills in order to keep the unfortunate realism mind, “you can’t do everything Master, but we’ll sure as heaven try!”

Resolutions, decisions and commitments are made for your God. The thought frightens you slightly, when you give the time to think about it; He’s the Spirit who knows which birthday will be your very last. Oh and by the way, it could be this one.

Don’t you dare go forgetting how popular you are, and don’t brush off those 46 facebook messages as ‘just courtesy’; individuals have made specific efforts to remember you or at least be reminded of your existence. It’s a compliment to you that they feel you are come-at-able, receptive and positively usable enough for them to quickly drop by with their cheery consolations and condolences.

You got two, three… you ended up getting at least five cards in the post today and you know full well that unless the world ends or the postmen go on strike, you’ll get a couple more in the next few days. Stop looking at them as symbols of duty, rather prop them up on your mantle piece sleeve, and wear them.

As for the wrapped up moments, you know full well that you are far too blessed. Your wife is a one-step prancing dream! Did you know she has a PhD in ‘you-studies’, she sends you a delightfully simple yet reassuringly captivating SMS, with just enough x’s to show she cares.

Knock knock. Who’s there? Your Grandmother. Your Grandmother who? Your Grandmother who loves you with a big hug and words which mean more than they mean. She only wishes your other relatives could be here with you; those ones in motorway towns, B-road villages and gold-paved cities.

Ring ring.  Who’s there? Your family back home. Your family too? They sing in shreeky shouts that melt into embracatory thuds which in turn, you swallow and taste and indulge and put on like loud-speaking ear muffs that resonate respect and racoon red reverence (and love).

You’ll be closing your eyes soon, ready for the normal days, the average days, the less than cool days, the actually rather brilliant days, the close to God days, the lost sheep days, the sickly tempered days, the last days, the thirst day,  the first day, that Thursday.

Let Papa God give Mrs. A, a leg up onto your hunchback, she’ll take you on that future trip to actual events that won’t happen because in reality, they’ll be better, they’ll overflow with answers. Introduce Mrs. A to Mr. P; the conspiratating communicatron, he checks with upper deck and pleads with Captain G to let it be O.K. But even when it’s not O.K., it P.J., one day you’ll be sailing down the life canalbum and you’ll think, “I’m glad I wasn’t in charge.”

* Mrs. A. M. Bishon.

Two brilliant songs, two completely different messages.

The flower as a metaphor in Japanese Theatre.

Zeami was the original practitioner of Japanese Noh theatre and wrote a classic book on dramatic theory called Kadensho. He uses images of nature as a constant metaphor, for example hana, or the flower. Kenneth Yasuda, in his book Masterworks of The Noh Theatre claims that ‘This flower is both an aesthetic principle and the soul of the actor or the character or the play, and it is, beyond that, a spiritual quest. Every element of the play, every gesture, must be devoted to the flower.’ Thus we can clearly see the weight of importance given to this one symbol, but why is he so interested in using it as a metaphor, in the context of Noh Theatre?

The title of his book Kadensho can be roughly translated as “Floral Message: How Does the Wind Look?”. Zeami is using the metaphor of a flower to imply that one must possess sophisticated or ‘flowery’ skills to achieve anything in Noh Theatre. Zeami saw the flower as a sophisticated and complicated thing. This is true [see below]. Zeami felt that learning theatrical skills is sophisticated and complex; just like flowers.

Zeami also sees the flower as a metaphor for viewing a performance. The flower sheds its petals and goes through many different stages in what it looks like, starting from a bud, to disappearing completely, and this is a visible process. Similarly, in front of an audience we see a theatrical event before hand as if it didn’t exist, it then bursts into life on the stage before once more disappearing. The flower is important to Zeami as he feels that this allows us to truly understand what the performance is.

Then we come to the concept of Yugen which he defines as ‘a profound, mysterious sense of the beauty of the universe… and the sad beauty of human suffering’. This can be simply related to the flower as a metaphor, the flower is so visually enticing when alive; yet Zeami believed that when a flower begins to die the process is all the more so. Zeami, perhaps somewhat controversially, saw human suffering in the same way. Noh Theatre portrayed human life as it is; so assuming that pain is a process all must undergo, some believe that human suffering in its own way, is beautiful.

Zeami has been known to compare the flower with the idea of omoskiroki or in English, ‘fascination’. Zeami sees the flower as something to be in awe of. In relation to its metaphor within Noh Theatre, we see his encouragement for the audience to be fascinated by the performance, thus he weighs importance on the concept in this case in order to amaze the spectator.

Another key word is mezurashiki which means ‘novelty’ implying that the flower can be something new and exciting. When this metaphor is replicated on stage through interaction actors have with each other and the audience, they see that there is now a certain thrill in experiencing this, just like the joy one finds in viewing a flower. So the metaphor is important in this context because it excites the audience, just like one might feel towards nature.

We can see that this points to another point Zeami makes about the similarity between the way one cultivates flowers and the way the performer seeks to harvest a relationship with his or her audience. Zeami wants to reinforce this link as actor/spectator relationships are central to understanding Theatre, especially Noh Theatre.

Finding beauty in nature is something unique to the human soul. No matter who the person is, there is a certainty that any person from any background will find the flower beautiful. In the same way Zeami seeks to reinforce this concept. If the Theatre is like the flower, it can be loved and appreciated by all.

Finally Zeami reminds the reader of ‘the beauty of the flower of youth, which passes with time.’ This is an important metaphor to him as it reminds his audience of the fragility and fleeting nature of life. Many would argue that this is the most accurate and profound part of Zeami’s thinking, though not all see it as a positive concept, as mankind is left without hope as to what happens after his decease. Christianity was not to reach Japan until 1549,  but Zeami’s sentiments are echoed in the following bible verse,

All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord stands forever.

When creating theatre as well as in life; Zeami held this view in mind, perhaps a view that more modern practitioners should ponder, knowing that soon, our petals will fall and we will perish. However Zeami’s flower metaphor shouldn’t necessarily discourage us, all is not swallowed up into the earth, the roots remain and buds appear once more, so nevertheless, if looked at from the right angle; there is hope for theatre, there is hope humanity.

 

‘Objecting to Objectification: Re-Viewing the Feminine in The Silence of the Lambs’ a summary of an article by Greg Garrett

In the article Objecting to Objectification: Re-Viewing the Feminine in The Silence of the Lambs (first printed in Journal of Popular Culture, 37.1, August 2003, pp. 1-12), Greg Garrett outlines ‘a theme that runs throughout the film’; the objectification of women. He argues that ‘by accenting Starling’s harassment, by removing male helpers present in the novel, and by stressing Starling’s resistance to the attempts of men to objectify her, the film creates… [a statement] about the various forms of female victimisation in our society.’

In his introduction Garrett refers to what he believes are the two core moments ‘consistent with [this] theme which runs throughout the film.’ The first is a scene where ‘Starling (Jodie Foster) holds up a punching target and braces herself as brawny male trainees light into her. She is no longer a woman; to her fellow trainees, she is only a punching bag.’ He believes that the fact she is surrounded by men and that they are shown to be pummeling her in this way, makes her seem less human, which makes way for the other times throughout the film in which men in her place of work objectify her because she is a woman.

This ‘verbal’ example clearly ‘reinforce[s] the idea that women must be seen as people rather than objects.’ This is what Garrett sees as something of a ‘strong… statement’.

Many examples Garrett makes in reference to this concept come in his references to things people say during dialogue with Starling. He recalls that ‘Starling is sexually harassed by Dr. Frederick Chilton’ when he is insultingly asks her for a personal ‘follow up’. Later he points out that ‘two young deputies make objectifying remarks about her.’ So through these examples Garrett shows the reader that in the scripted dialogue, the objectification of women is obvious in her male colleagues attitude and conversation with her.

Garrett argues that the ‘chief objectifier of women in the film’ is Buffalo Bill.  The main manifestation of Buffalo Bill’s objectification comes in the way he treats his victims; killing them so that he can ‘construct a costume of their skins.’  Garrett recalls Lector’s murdering method as similar in it’s objectification; (though it is not unique to women) he ‘turns people into gourmet meals’. However there is a difference with his attitude towards Starling when he ‘begins to regard her as a person, and thus is no longer capable of objectifying her,’ in the same way that Buffalo Bill was encouraged to.

Garrett describes his second reference from his description of the following scene:

…in response to a televised appeal broadcast to killer “Buffalo Bill” (Ted Levine) to release his most recent hostage alive, Starling lauds the strategy of repeating the victim’s name, Catherine, over and over. She knows that if Bill “sees Catherine as a person and not just an object” it will be harder to destroy her.

By analysing this theme in The Silence of the Lambs, we see that Garrett’s main aim is to highlight the moral importance of treating people as they should be; as humans, not as objects.

Two Minute Film Analysis #1 – ‘Chocolat’

The first two minutes of the film Chocolat (2000) are highly revealing as to the concept of what film academic S. Brent Plate describes in his book Religion and Film (2008) as two ‘contrasting spaces’ which essentially represent two ‘contrasting worlds.’ During this introductory segment the viewer is able to become accustomed to (through a number of cinematic lingual elements) a central strand in the film’s narrative; the way in which regimented religious structure and pleasure driven business can become two conflicting sectors in society.

The first thing heard in the film is piano playing musical notes on a higher register; Rachel Portman’s score suggests a tranquillity and the viewer may feel enticed; yet the fact that it is played in a minor key suggests that something is foreboding, perhaps this calmness and peace will soon disappear. This is relevant as the order of the town is destroyed when the new chocolate shop appears.

The first titles that appear are basic in their format; this simplicity matches the feel of the town we will later visit. The town is a place which on the surface of things seems devoid of modern complications that perhaps the church feels it is able to keep in order. Beyond this simplicity, the white and black colours suggest that their actions may be viewed as one of two things; right or wrong, which contrasts the complexities of the confectionery seller with her questionable morality.

Beyond the titles, the first things filmed are what look like clouds, which the camera glides through. The viewer may assume that we are now descending through the clouds from somewhere high up in the sky; are we being told that God is watching?  This could be true when seen in relation to the church and it’s aims. However, when the camera moves beyond these apparent clouds, we see that we are not descending from the sky, rather moving horizontally through what looks like mist. This illusion could well imply that the supposed divine intentions of the town’s religious leaders are in no way inflicted by a higher power, rather by human will.

The long shot of the entire town reveals a number of things; firstly the size of the town; it is a small place where presumably not many people live, which suggests that any changes to daily life will be noticed by all of the town’s inhabitants and that any sort of control; be it political, criminal, commercial or religious, won’t take much to create a stir.

Secondly this long shot establishes the position of the town; it is high up on a hill and in the middle of the countryside. This could well mean that the town is difficult to reach and maybe is a place that is untainted by the proverbial ‘big dark world’ around it. This sets the film up as the shop owner moves into the town and is a modern and fresh addition to a town which is steeped in traditional values.

Thirdly this long shot reveals the church as the tallest and most central landmark of the town. The viewers eyes are immediately drawn to it, which serves the purpose of it being the institution that’s existence is threatened. It is at the centre of the town and the centre of the lives of the town’s citizens.

Two sound effects are heard when the music stops; birds singing and church bells ringing. The birds once again allude to the town’s apparent tranquillity but also could be read to symbolically represent new life and new beginnings; something which the town is about to experience. Things are about to change and become transformed.

The church bells are a familiar sound to even the most pagan of viewers; most people know that they are rung in order to call people to church, or at least to draw attention to it. These bells however are not tuneful, but are somewhat monotonous and off-key; which could well refer to the fact that the weekly routine of going to church is not a joy to these people, these bells are not joyous or inviting, rather they are boring and dreary. The viewer when hearing this will perhaps view see that this place does not achieve the things that a good church should; contrastly it is a place of boredom and weekly duty.

We are now shown a straight on shot of Comte Reynaud (Alfred Molina), this shot suggests that he is someone who is not necessarily of any threat; but the straightness insures that he is definitely in control. As people pass him and enter the church, this notion is confirmed when he signals to a man to remove his hat, almost like a school teacher. This is not a man who lets anything go unnoticed, especially rebellion; something that Vianne (Juliette Binoche) has plenty of.

The costume choice of black, his removed hat and the facial hair on his upper lip (moustache) all suggest that Comte is a man of conservative persuasion. This prepares the viewer to see him in juxtaposition to Vianne who is presented as progressive and daring.

The church is framed from a lower view-point suggesting its domineering nature. This church is not a place that is open to sinners who can find solace in it’s forgiving nature; rather it is a place which gives it’s members no freedom or joy; something which the chocolate shop can happily offer (especially in the month of lent).

A French church, similar to the one used in Chocolat.

A good point on the fact that this is a wide-angle shot is made by Plate;

A significant early shot is taken from the opening of what will become the chocolate shop, and the wide-angle camera is forced to point high to take in the height of the church towering above it.

The fact that this shot is taken from where the chocolate shop is established implies that these two places are in head to head conflict which is definitely seen throughout the film in the fact that both places stand for such different values.

This opening sequence of filmic images all combine to portray the film’s core narrative line; two very different worlds colliding. Those who manage to watch the film all the way to the end see that the two world’s eventually settle their differences and that Vianne undergoes an earth shattering change of her very own. This film does not necessarily serve to highlight a negativity towards the Christian church as a whole; rather it’s message discourages regimented and freedom infringment in religion and in politics. In the same way, the film is not necessarily encouraging chocolate binges or revolutionary retail, rather it would be better to read it as an acknowledgement of the beauty of freedom and enjoyment (namely the enjoyment of Chocolate).

Video: The Muppets do Bohemian Rhapsody

It’s been doing the rounds on Twitter, but if you haven’t seen it yet…

Video: Bob Dylan’s Christmas Single!?

Brilliant.