PLAYS : Head/Case

This play concerns two mental patients; an Irish woman who can't stop talking and an English women who can't start. A one act-er, it investigates mental illness, metaphysics, politics and relationships. The Irish woman and her male offsider were both magnificent, effortlessly jumping from fast to slow, focus to support, singing to crying. The English woman wasn't quite so strong, though I think this had more to do with direction and the script; her interpretaion of her illness was a little cliched and overbearing.
The theatre itself is great - right in the middle of Soho, with a real Soho feel. While I couldn't find any documentation (tsk, tsk) I believe the works they put on are the produce of the writers that reside there, as it is a 'writer's' centre as well. The room holds about 140, and quickly filled up to a good 80+% on a Thursday night.
Unfortunately I found the play itself quite unfocused... it covered many topics, but never really made a strong commitment to investigating any of them. It had a lot of repitition that it used to demonstrate the 'brain damaged' aspects of the characters, which was used to good effect at some points, but was largely tedious.
The mental illness aspect was quite dominant, and lead to some nice gotchas and story arcs, but it felt unauthentic, unresearched. That's a horrid thing to say when I don't know the process that went into the creation of the piece, but the 'mental illness' as a 'character' in the play felt two dimensional.
The metaphysical aspect was the main story arc, with the characters coming to terms with their changing selves; are they the same person they were before their accidents, are they the same person as the 'healed' person they will be in a few years time, are they the same person as they will be in 5 seconds for that matter! I found this a quite interesting idea, but it just wasn't persued with any rigour and was often clouded by some of the mucking around with brain damage (repition etc)
Then, finally, there was a single scene of 'the Northern Ireland Problem' as we find out how the Irish woman was hurt (and of course she doesn't take sides...) but this seemed to be added just because it was obvious; it had to be there. Not because it added anything to the actual play.
Again, this is a piece I really liked, and that's why I have criticized/analysed it so much. I want works like this to be fantastic, not just good.

COMEDY : Tsunami Benefit

Jo and I went along to this hastily organised benefit for orphan survivors of the Tsunami in Sri Lanka (via a buddhist group, why am I so opposed to christians?)
The first half was excellent with

• an amazingly talented presenter,
  
• a lewd, but very funny second guy (Jo didn't like him - very boy humour :)
• a very funny, and sensitive, woman (very short as well!), and
  
• an A Capella group called the Magnets, who Jo really liked and I thought were OK

The second half compares favorably with the first. The presenter took a while to warm to, but I ended up liking him a lot; not as funny as the first half's presenter but a nice on stage personality. Again there was an excellent woman (Australian - my what an accent!) who cracked Jo and I up after a faltering start, and a really funny guy to cap it all off who had tears running down my cheeks as he related the Crazy Clarks style ads from Oz to the rest of the audience. (It seems the funniest stuff was all Australia based, coincidence?)
There was an interesting incident in the second half. A canadian comic came out (I think he may have been an honorary american), made a very poor taste joke about the tsunami and, having not received the warm laughter and applause of other performs, proceeded to heckle the crowd. He did play a song, but then totally lost it when people asked for other songs and admitted that that's all they wanted from him. He then made some semi-lucid and quite offensive insults about how some of the audience had eaten a big dinner to 'save the orphans', and that we are all celebrating the tsunami by having a good laugh. This cut a bit close to the bone and was when the compare decided (or was pushed) that the guy wasn't just being radical, and came on to get the Canadian off. This took about 5 minutes, but the compare did a very good, non-violent, passive removal and got the audience relaxed and in the mood again very quickly.

MOVIE : Mean Streets

Another Scorscese classic, I think it's his second film or something, any way, very early.
This is about a bunch of ordinary Italian thugs, not exalted mafia, and looks closely at the ordinary; ordinary thugs, ordinary problems, ordinary solutions. It ends up being quite an ordinary story, but this is made up for by the characters who have a lot of depth, making them both real and extra-ordinary. (very few real people are 'ordinary', we all have some point of interest that sets us apart).
I suppose the realism of the characters is what left me angry (that's a bit too harsh a word), I have known people like them in similar situations and I just get pissed off that they don't do anything about it!
The story follows the escapades of Charlie (Harvey Keitel) as he tries to move up in the gang world, all the time being held back by his insane buddy Johnny Boy (DeNiro). And Johnny Boy is too reminisent of some insance people I've known, people who you simply can't help, only support if they come asking. And by his actions he drags down the unfortunate Charlie as he tries desperately to cover up Johnny's debts.
Probably the best performance (I think) is that of the guy playing the reluctant debt collector who doens't want to be treated like a fool. He really comes across as a friend who is being pushed further and further to uphold his 'standing' by a snotting, insane little kid like Johnny.
So maybe it was a good film, to affect me the way it did, though I don't really see it being a 5/5 as most critics claim.

MOVIES : Alexander

I'd heard this was shit, and it was. I specifically went to see the exact opposite of The Godfather, and because I didn't have to 'pay' because I have an unlimited card...
From the opening scene where Anthony Hopkins craps on about stuff, to the closing scene where he changes history to maintain the legend of Alexander, I was bored. No commitment to characters, no commitment to story telling (why did yo make the film Oliver?), no commitment to homosexual themes.
Just crap really.
Couple of examples. Alexander has a male lover (that his wife gets jealous of) but he always refuses to enter Alexander's chamber, and hardly ever kisses him! And yet Alexander's father obviously has a male lover and in a very important scene they kiss very strongly. And when Alexander is a child and being taught by a sophist, he is informed that Aristotle said that homosexual love was bad because it was only based in lust. Now I don't know what Aristotle said, but I do know that Plato, in the Symposium, said that homosexual love was the greatest love because it _wasn't_ based on animal lust, because it didn't create children (and was therefore about intellectual love rather than physical).
Alexander sometimes talks about his dream to unite the world and set its peoples free by bringin together all the different races in harmony. What a pile of crap. This was supposed to be his vision that was to great for his time, but it's really hard to believe that the real Alexander would say these things, and just as hard to believe when the actor hollowly intones them. What about the slaves, and the women? It just doesn't ring true - there is no reason Alexander would think this, there was no mentor for him to develop such a completely radical suggestion (in the movie anyway)
Bad boy Oliver Stone is all I can say. 3hours in a cinema and bored for nearly all of it.

MOVIES : Team America, World Police

From Matt and Trey, the boys who brought you South Park, Cannibal the Musical and more, comes their next biting sitire made with puppets.
While good, this was definitely not up to the standard that I was hoping for (I believe South Park the movie is one of the finest musicals ever made). It felt like a 1 or 2 joke movie (Orgasmatron was a one joke movie, and was very below par); wow look, isn't it funny, we did this with puppets (no it isn't funny), and we had the world police do more damage than the terrorists (ha ha) and we called actors members of F.A.G. (oh, my sides are splitting).
I don't know, thinking back I am liking it less and less, though at the time I remember quite enjoying it. Why puppets? It just didn't add anything to the film at all. Oh look, here's some puppets having sex. Oh look, here's a puppet riding a remote control motorbike on a real road, isn't it funny he's so small?
And the songs were lame. One or two were ok, but the rest sucked.
Wow, I don't think I liked this movie.

PLAYS : Festen

This is a west end production of the Dogme film of the same name. Blurb from the bck cover; a family is gathering for their father's birthday, but when speeches are made a dark secret is revealed. Like Milo's Wake, only not as good...
The acting was fine, nothing outstanding. There is a nice scene where everyone eats dinner, and not a word is spoken, but overall it shows that the run has been going for a while. The lead character must use a lot of energy each night, and I think he's been doing it for some 7 odd weeks. The dad in this was the dad from adrain mole (the tv series) and did a good job, maybe missing a few emotional bits, while the mother was a bit boring, reacting a little too late and so on.
But overall the largest problem was the script. There were no subtelties, no greys. From the first scene with the whole family, the one were the secret is revealed, we know who the badies and the goodies are. From there it is just a case of getting to the end of the play and the final retribution.
At no point are we given any reason to not hate the bady. At no point is there any ambiguity about the secret; was it imagined or real - it was real. At no point are we given any reason to not like the goody.
While I suppose the characters develop, it came across more as one set of characters winning against the other - with no actual change to the inner condition (not quite true, but that was the feeling)
After reading that you must think that I didn't like the production, but I save my vitriol for those things I _do_ like, because I want them to be better. If the script introduced some ambiguities, and had some of the characters come around spiritually rather than only when the 'secret' is proven, I think this would be a fantastic production.

MOVIES : The Godfather

I've never seen this, but everyone raved about it so when I saw it was on the big screen I took advantage of it. And I wasn't dissapointed.
The Godfather is a truely superb film, with magnificent, imaginative direction from Capolla you are drawn into this Mafia family and its political intrigues straight away. It's strange that you have this feeling of 'greatness' from the beginning frame to the last, and in fact that (and it cost me nothing) is the reason I went to see Alexander on Sunday, to see what the opposite feels like.
The progam notes points out some nice bits; the husband that is marrying into the family at the beginning of the film is hardly seen and never talked to. This makes the retribution for his betrayal later on more easily absorbed. During the marriage celebrations we are swapping from the Don and his loyalty dealings in a darkened room to the brightly lit wedding at shorter and shorter intervals, until finally he emerges - bringing the two worlds together.
Definitely a fantastic film.

(The only downer of this film was that the guy next to me got up to have a smoke halfway through and came back reeking!)

MOVIES : Two lane black top

This is a drag racing movie made in 1970/1 on the tail of easy rider. It follows the lives of two wandering racer Dudes who pick up a girl (bloody young too!) and then enter into a race with this loner fantasist. This is not the sort of film I usually like, the story arcs are very subtle, and the conclusion isn't, but the director drew me in and kept me interested the whole way through and made me think about why he ended it the way he did.
I would imagine that this film was reasonably successful for at least one reason; the two lead boys are incredibly sexy, Bruce you listening?
The boys are total 'nerds', unable to relate to anyone or anything outside of cars, and it is this inability to connect that is the reason the real race - to win the girl - is no give away. The director apparently loves landscape, but hates just showing tablous (director of Hero, are you listening), and thinking over it you do get an amazing feel for the landscape they are driving through, but don't even realise this at the time.
The only downer about this film is the sound; it's only stereo and the cinema was set up to only play through the front speakers. We really wanted the sound of the gunning engines to be ringing around our ears, not just emanating from the screen. Oh well.
All in all a surprisingly sophisticated film about a very simple obsession, see it if you can.

MOVIES : Finding Neverland

Unlike my parents I addored this film, maybe I was feeling sick, or for some other reason, but I was feeling emotional when I say this, and it effected me very strongly.
The film centers on a particular summer that Mr Barrie, the writer of Peter Pan, spent with a group of boys; the lost boys. The boys have recently lost their father and are all deeply effected by this, they've had to grow up to fast.
Johhny Depp plays Mr Barrie, who definitely has NOT had to grow up too fast, and tries to use his imagination and love of life to concile the boys. And that tis the message of the movie; no matter how mundane your life may appear, it is in fact the most miraculous and extrodinary thing that has and can ever happen, you just have to see it as such!
I wasn't impressed with portrayal of the relationship between Barrie and his wife, it just felt tacked on for the purposes of keeping it close to real life, rather than a real exploration of the relationship. Mum was saying that she thought that everyone spoke to softly, which I guess they did, but I prefer that to 'If in doubt, shout!'.
This is one of the movies of the year for me, thank you Johhny for inticing me to see it! (I try to see every Depp film because there always seems to be _something_ interesting about the production)

MOVIES : 5 easy pieces

This was not the film I thought it was AT ALL! I thought it was this film about a bunch of guys transporting NitroGlycerine across a rain forest in an old truck; a masterpiece of suspense. Instead it was the story of a drifter (Jack Nicholson) who can't find a home in either the blue collar neighbourhoods he lives in at the beginning of the film, or the upper-middle class home he returns to in the second half.
It's a good film considering it doesn't really go anywhere, normally I hate this kind of film but there was something about this one (plus one momentous scene in which Jack actually acts!) that kept my attention and, while I can't bear Jack's character, I still wanted to know if he can overcome his hatred of himself and the world. (The only character that he likes is his sister, everyone else (including himself) he abhors or sees as a potential mate)
I am glad that I mixed this film up, it was well worth seeing

BOOKS : Ringworld Throne

What?
While the first two books where great, this felt like a 'lets make money'; didn't really have any new ideas, some obvious inconsistencies (how come we can suddenly disc step anti/spin ward?) and was overall uncompelling (maybe it was my fevered state...)
The worst thing, though, was the ending in which there are all these hints about Louis Wu (the main character) which I just couldn't work out at all. And that was frustrating because it seemed that these hints were what the book was ultimately about!
Longer than the other two, more distractions, more stupid alien sex, all a bit unnecessary really.
(Gee that was pretty damning; sorry Robert Niven!)

GAMES : Robotech

While sick I thought I'd give this another go on the Gameboy and yep, it's really shit.

BOOKS : Luck of the Wheels

This is the fourth and final Ki and Vandien book, following on from Megan Windholm's previous one tha tI have just mentioned below (Limbreth Gate). As a completion to a series it doesn't really complete a 'story arc' but is an OK episode in their adventures. There is an important milestone reached right at the end of the book, but most of the events are very much localised to the book.
K&V are stuck in an arabic style country run by a despot and haven't quite worked out that the place is not too friendly to strangers. The only cargo work they can get is delivering a boy to a town 14 days away, and strangely they are given some extra cash by the bar keep when she finds out they are doing it...
The night they have set off and a young woman running off to her fiance catches up with them and begs them to give her a lift, they acquiese.
Things are not, of course, what they seem. We have the various characters emotions pushed to their extremes as disaster and deceit combine to tear their hearts apart.
I wasn't that fussed really, and was waiting for it to finish, though I did quite enjoy it (is that possible?) Some of Vandien's stuff was great, and I think it is unfortunate that the last 2 books really became dominated by Vandien, whereas I was initially excited about the strong female (not male with boobs) character of Ki. Precursor for Althea I guess.

BOOKS : The Limbreth Gate

By Margret Whindolm, AKA Robin Hobb. I am tempted to ask 'Robin' how she developed from the writer of these books to her recent stuff. While I can see the connection, I would love to know how she developed her skills in the interim.
Anyway, this si the third book in a quadrilogy that so far has been OK, certainly not as inspired as the recent stuff. Thsi particular book makes the mistake of starting with a circular premise; the aim of the book is to get back to where we started. This can be the death of a story, as the reader thinks/feels that 'if I'm just reading about how we get back to where we are right now, why botyher reading it?' Fortunately there are a few other things taht draw one in (and I did read it very quickly, but I think that had more to do with having nothing much else to do)
VAnden is his usual charismatic self, rushing off to the rescue, taking on the role of pragmatic while Ki is 'reckless' and lead astray. The scenes with Ki therefore feel long in the tooth, as Margret tries to explain how she feels and why she does the things she does. I don't know, all a bit drawn out for me.
The main theme of the book is the spectrum which includes pragmatism, recklessness, logic and emotion. This is a big theme in my life at the moment as I am still much too unbalanced (toward the logical end, if you couldn't guess!) but the book didn't really capture me as it should, and I don't think Margret really made it clear how she feels (or made it clear that she was just posing questions).
Anyway, it wasn't really bad, the above criticism I think comes from me wanting Robin Hobb when I read Margret Whindolm, but it's interesting to see where the seeds of her ideas come from (forging of the dragons in Fool's Errand is very reminiscent of the creation of new works that the Limbreth force people like Ki to undertake).

MOVIES : House of Flying Daggers

Why did I see this when it is directed by the same guy who did Hero and Raise the Red Lantern? Because there wasn't anything else on, and I wanted to see if he could get a trifecta.
Well he didn't. This movie isn't boring, it isn't aweful, and it is still beautiful.
Story, in ancient China, centres around a skilled under cover policeman who is sent to seduce the daughter of the oh-so naughty House of Daggers Cheif. And most of the story was OK, which was the biggest failing of Hero (I don't really remember RtRL enough to comment, but I suspect the story was good, just told reeeeaaaalllllyyyy sssslllloooowwlllyyy). Some of the intrigues were interesting.
I noticed at the beginning of the film that the fight scenes were all choreographed by someone else, and they were pretty all right, a little to0 balletic (and we all know how muych I like ballet). But the cinematography was all classic (insert name of director: Yimou Zhang, thanks Neek!) with some fantastic scenery and colour. Very much a 'paints the canvas' type director.
There is a fantastic scene in which it moves from being autumn (all the colors before this point are autumnal) to winter with the snow falling hard and covering the ground. Unfortunately it is also this scene which undoes the film for me as you assume that the director is being metaphorical and about to draw some parallels with other things happening in the film, but then introduces some really stupid 'realistic' elements that ruins it all, destroying the poetry and our connection to the characters. A real pity, when he almost had a pretty good film (rather than boring as batsh*t one.
I think it might be a culutral thing. But at least this one gets more than 1 star (not that I do stars...)