More of a Theatrical Experience

Or just an experience in itself! Today I'm taking a different line of thought in that I'm reviewing a place rather than a show. And the place is York Dungeons.

The tour of York Dungeons is a theatrical experience without people realising it. You pay to enter and walk around some bits in a group whereas some bits are with a guide, although the guide is an actor in role. It's meant to be informative about events that happened around York, such as the planning of the Gunpowder Plot, The Plague and the death of Dick Turpin.

It's pretty creepy in there, quite Gothic. There's fake cobwebs and eerie lighting which create a very good atmosphere. There are lots of models and some sound effects that add to the creepy feeling and so throughout you find yourself feeling quite tense and at times scared. This especially happens when one of the live actors suddenly decides to jump out and surprise you. I wasn't the only one that screamed more than once in there...

The actors were very good, some more than others, it was obvious who was working there full time than those who were there as a holiday job. Nevertheless they did well. Some were very good at getting involved (scaring) the audience or making jokes with them whereas some seemed to just convey the information necessary.

It's a thoroughly good experience which I think is worth going to in a larger group, it makes you feel less venerable! Book online before you go though because it's cheaper than just turning up on the day. It cost me £3.80 to go and it lasted about 1hour15min and was definitely worth the cash!

York Dungeon

The Fairytale that Breaks the Rules.

I'm talking about Stardust which I watched for the second time last night. I did think the first time it would be the usual fairy tale - boy goes off to prove his love to a girl fighting off 'evil people' as he goes. Well it's kind of like that...

The plot is Tristan is in love with a girl - Victoria - who isn't really interested in him. One night they see a falling star and he promises to bring it back to her and in return she will marry him. So he sets off to find the star only to discover it's a woman called Yvaine. Unfortunately Yvaine is also being sought after by 3 evil witches who want her heart in order to retain their youthfulness. A prince is also searching for her as she holds the necklace that will allow him to become king.

There's some famous names in this film. Our lead protagonist is played by Charlie Cox who I had not heard of but plays the ditsy hero very well. Claire Danes is wonderful as Yvaine at first a stroppy woman (well who wouldn't be after falling out of the sky) but slowly falling for Tristan's charms. Robert di Nero also features in this film in an absolutly excellent and funny role of Captain Shakespeare - on the surface a tough grouchy ship captain but underneath is a very camp softie. Not a role I've ever seen him in but I enjoyed it, and I think so did he! Also look out for cameos from Ricky Gervais and Rupert Everett.

The special effects are pretty good in this film - not the best but there's a whole tounge in cheek feel about it. The landscapes where it's filmed are rather impressive at points there is a bit of a Lord of the Rings feel. Costumes are impressive and definately captured the whole 'other world' feel.

This is a great film a really enjoyed it and I was fairly skeptical about how good a fairytale would be. It's worth renting it out at the very least.
Stardust on Amazon

Skating on Thin Ice

This evening I was forced to watch Dancing on Ice by my beloved family. For those reading that live outside the UK, it's basically a TV show where z-list 'celebrities' take on the challenge of performing ice skating routines over a number of weeks. Each week one is voted off until the finale and then the viewers get to vote for the winner.

I can kind of see the appeal. You get to see these ex-pop stars or ex-soap stars try to do something else. Will they succeed? Will they fail? And you get your panel of judges that we are so used to seeing by now on all these other reality shows. If your into that kind of thin you would probably love it. I don't however and so hated it.

The winner (Suzanne Shaw of Hearsay fame) in the end had performed well I guess. I'm assuming that none of the contestants could ice-skate before starting on this show so I guess that's a new skill learnt for all. However I did think that the voting of the judges was rigged, the winner got perfect scores twice in the one show. I'm sure because it was the last show and they felt nice, come on she's not Olympic standard...

I was surprised by how hooked my family was on this show. My sister's howls of disbelief that Chris Fountain from Holloaks lost out were almost too painful to hear. It's only a TV show and yet people are so intent on one person winning. Maybe if I had watched it from the beginning it would be different... But that's something I very much doubt.

I want to be a Producer...

What a brilliant film. I love The Producers, I think it's one of a very few decent remakes that has occured in the past few years.

Essentially the plot follows Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom who want to put on the biggest Broadway flop in history in hope of scamming lots of investors out of their money. They find a play called Springtime for Hitler written by basically a mad German who still believes in the whole third Reich shizzle. They get the worst director in town to put it on and think they will easily get their fortune. Unluckily for them the play is a failure and they are both arrested. It's full of funny jokes and very catchy songs and it's a film I could watch again and again.

It's extremely well cast, Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick make a great duo as Max and Leo with dialogue bouncing off each other and both of them taking the score in their stride, a surprise for me. Will Ferrel as the mad German is absolutely brilliant and slightly scary at times. Uma Thurman also takes a role as the token female, not exactly needed but she does very well in the part.

This is a very short review compared to my others but when it comes to talking about this films you really need to watch it to see exactly what I mean. A laugh out loud musical.

The Producers on Amazon (it's only £5 and definitely worth it!)

Cloverfield - Not Your Average Monster Movie

There's been a lot of hype about this film, there's been trailers running for over 6 months leading up to it's release beginning with ones showing the statue of liberty's head rolling down a New York street. Now if that's not something to grab an audience's attention I don't know what is. I have been wanting to see this film for quite a while. All I knew upon entering the cinema was that it was a monster movie and that it was filmed on handheld cameras. My expectations were certainly met and improved on.

The premise is; the protagonist, Rob, is leaving for Japan and so his friends throw him a leaving party, that night an unknown monster hits New York. The film is recorded by Hud, Rob's best friend firstly for leaving messages at his party and then just the events of this attack upon the city. The number of friends within the group slowly dwindles as would be expected within a monster film, and you end up with the usual feelings of hope that some will make it. I won't spoil the ending. Go see it if you want to know!

The actors do very well, and are completely believable in their panic and confusion of events. As relative unknowns (a brief look on IMDB reveals at the most a few films and the odd TV series for each actors) which was purpose casting choice these actors are looking at a future success. Their relationship with each other is believable as they cope with the loss and the unknown situation that they have left others in.

The camerawork is very Blair witch esque. Filmed in a jolty sometimes blurred way it did leave me feeling slightly ill at the end. It did however work well. I particularly enjoyed the way that the audience only know and see as much as the protagonists do, the glimpses of the monster at the beginning of the film leave you unnerved and with the slight feeling of panic about what will happen next.

The special effects worked very well in the film. As usual CGI has made it possible to create a monster like nothing has ever been seen before but yet believable at the same time. The destruction of New York is spectacular. Just the image of the Statue of Liberty's head severed is one that will stay with me for a while. Some of the shots were too September 11th for comfort such as buildings collapsing and the plumes of smoke heading towards the crowd but I suspect this is just what the director wanted.

Overall a very different film to those I've seen before, it worked well being shot on handheld camera's despite the slight queasy feeling I felt by the end. If you can catch it in the cinema, do, because it definitely won't have the same effect on a small screen.

Cloverfield

Lord of the Rings - The Musical

It was a while ago that I went to see this production (10th January to be exact) but listening now to the soundtrack has created some inspiration inside of me and I feel the need to write a review of it.

When it comes to Lord of the Rings I'm a big fan of both the books and the films and so was somewhat unsure about seeing a stage version. I recollect sometime in primary school seeing The Hobbit on stage but try as a I might I can't remember much of the production or what I thought of it.

On entering the theatre, the first thing that immediately amazes you is the stage curtain. Made to look like hundreds of branches not only do they cover the curtain but they come out over the side boxes and up over the ceiling. centre of the curtain is a large gold ring and through the ring is gauze which at points allows you to see the action behind.

The set it's self is amazing. It's essentially a large revolve although the parts of the revolve rise and fall creating many different levels. This created many effective moments such as when Frodo and Sam are climbing the slopes of Mount Doom and the revolve turned with the front sections rising at the same time to create the effect that looked as though they were climbing.

Special effects in this show are definitely worth a mention. The Orcs themselves used (no to be completely un-technical as I don't know what they are called) these springs attached to their legs, almost like kangaroos, which allowed them to jump and flip across the stage at amazing speeds. The Ring wraiths looked incredibly creepy onstage, with flowing cloaks and the horses heads controlled in a very realistic way by the actors. The most spectacular elements of the show had to be the way that characters were flown in, such as in the scenes in Lothlorien. Also at the beginning of the Second Act when Gollum is seen to climb down the branches over the stage curtain.

What lets this production down I felt was unfortunately, the acting. For me the actor portraying Frodo played him as wooden, unemotional and at times stupid. Not what you want for your protagonist. By the end of the show I really did not mind whether he destroyed the ring or not. The actor playing Gandalf started off in the same way but luckily he improved as the performance went on, which was good because his early conversations with Frodo were rather dire. Having said that some performances were excellent. Sam was brilliant and really made the show.

This show has some spectacular effects and some of the performances were good but it was let down by the overall acting. Also the fact that a hugely long book has had to be condensed into just under 3 hours of performance (the films alone total over 9 hours and cut out tons of the storyline) you do feel as though you are missing out on something. If special effects are your thing go see this show. I got a discounted student ticket at £25 which I felt is reasonable and personally if I had paid the full price I think I might have been more disappointed than I was.

Official Show Website

The Seven Deadly Sins - A 'Sung Ballet'

Don't let the title put you off - This was actually very good. Performed tonight by the Musical Theatre Society, it was Kurt Weill's satirical 'sung ballet' and his last collaboration with Brecht (Brecht! says the over excited drama student inside of me recognising a name!)

The play, or ballet, or opera or whatever you would like to classify it as focuses on Anna, played by two actresses as Anna 1 and 2. Anna 1 is the singer and the rational side of the character whereas Anna 2 is the dancer and the more emotional irrational side. She leaves her home in Louisiana and moves to various American cities to earn money and as she does so commits the 7 deadly sins in each city. The voice of Anna is complimented throughout by the thoughts of her family.

The stage and set was simple. Both Anna's sang and danced centre stage while the family had simple bits of furniture downstage right to portray their home. The scene changes were a bit of a distraction however because they happened underneath the action centre stage. The lights were again simple but effective some nice uses of blues and greens, especially in the 'envious' scene. The orchestra were fantastic, very atmospheric and conducted extremely well by Lee Tsang.

This was a well cast show. Anna 1, the singer was played by a recently graduated masters degree Music student and her voice was strong enough to be heard over the full orchestra. Eve, who played Anna 2 did well in portraying the more emotional stroppy sister and had some wonderful facial expressions at points throughout the play. Hull University's barbershop quartet added a nice comic touch throughout the show, especially with Ryan as one of the bass singers playing the mother's part in a pink dressing gown and wig. The only problem was that some of the solos couldn't be quite heard over the orchestra.

Although a short show running at only about 45 minutes it was enjoyable and well performed, I felt there could have been more of an audience there to support and hope that the matinee showing drew more of a crowd.

"Lovers' Suicides at Imamiya" or "How to Commit Suicide in the Gulbenkian"

Well maybe my title is a little harsh, last night I watched a performance of Lovers' Suicides at Imamiya at the Gulbenkian Centre in Hull.

A brief synopsis, the play is essentially a Japanese Romeo and Juliet. There is Kisa, a 26 year old unmarried seamstress and Jirobei her 21 year old lover, first issue the obvious social one is the age difference (it's set in 1711) Kisa signs a deal to say she will marry another man against her will, together the two lovers break into their master's shop where they believe the contract is being kept but are caught. It is then revealed that the mistress of the shop tore it up and was planning to let the lovers marry anyway, however because of their crimes it cannot happen. In the end the two lovers decide to run away and commit suicide so they can be together.

The play is the 5th mainhouse being put on by Drama students at Hull University this year and I have to say I was greatly disappointed by it. This time it was directed by an outside director, Masako Yuasa, that the department already has links with. From what I has heard around the department about the rehearsal times and the stress that had gone into the show, I was surprised to see a show that could have easily been directed by a student rather than a world renowned director.

The set was quite interesting, with a slightly raised level upstage (I'm assuming on some steel or light deck) The set was all made of wood or had at least been wood stained and there was a very Japanese feel about it. The beginning scene in the boat was effective with material for the river around a wooden boat and I did enjoy the way that the stage came forward around the audience in the pit. There were also projections which I felt were a distraction showing typical Japanese paintings and Japanese music was played before entering the auditorium and before the two acts of the show began. Lights were kept fairy simple, mainly the contrast of steel blues and warmer straw yellows, although there were some flashed to represent lighting. The costumes were traditional Japanese Kimonos although it was fairly obvious which ones had been brought over from Japan and which ones had been made in the department - no fault of Paul Goodman the costume assistant of course because he can't be expected to created several exact replicas of Japanese kimonos.

Now my problem with this play I think was partly due to the hype about it. I thought that going to see a Japanese play directed by a Japanese director. I thought what I would see would be exposing me to a new style of theatre that I hadn't experience before. However what I felt I got was a group of student showing what their idea of Japanese theatre was. I don't know if it was the way that the play was translated, but to go from some flowing metaphoric language to the word "dammit" just didn't feel right, and I wasn't the only one who felt this way.

I don't want to 'do down' the actors, I have seen most of them perform in other pieces of theatre and thought that they were fantastic, I know that they have talent. But I felt that in this play they just weren't pushed in a direction that would show their strengths. My complaints are more of a directorial nature than an acting one, I'm assuming the actors are just following what Masako has asked them to do.

So overall not a success in my view, I just wish for the actors it had been better directed.

Is this your "Tru Calling"?

This is, I have to say a very good T.V. series. Not the best I have ever seen but definitely worth a watch.

The premise is, Tru Davis is a medical student and she works in a morgue (Oh yeah and she's beautiful, in the way that lead females in U.S. dramas are) the twist is that every so often a body comes in that has died too soon and asks for her help, the day suddenly re-winds and she has to save the person before it's too late.

I wasn't too sure about this show to begin with, the first few shows tie you in but then it lacks something for a couple of episodes, you find yourself thinking, "I've seen this before in the last few episodes" then there is this introduction of the character Jack. (First let me have the Jack rant. In pretty much every U.S. drama - as a complete generalisation - there is a character called Jack, why? Is it because it's easy to yell when you are in danger? Well that's what I feel anyway) With the introduction of his character the series suddenly becomes gripping. The type of gripping when you realise you've stayed up until 3 in the morning just to see what is going to happen gripping. The end of season 1, well I won't spoil for those who might watch it but it's good. Not overly dramatic in a say, Smallville kind of way, but one that makes you think "I need to find out what's going to happen!"

Now the complete and utter devastating downside. 6 episodes into the second season, Fox pulled the show. Even worse, they didn't let the show know until the day of the filming of the 6th episode. So you don't get a neatly tied up ending at all. You have a fantastic show that leaves you hanging with about 100 questions at least. Even worse was a quick trip on Wikipedeia to find out some of the writers thoughts on where the show would have been going. Frustratingly you can see that if the show had kept going it would have made it out of very good to amazing.

It's worth a watch, force yourself through the lull in the first season to become gripped and annoyed by the 6th episode of the second. You will be. I promise.

If I've managed to sell it to you here's the link, it's only £10 on Amazon at the moment:
Tru Calling on Amazon

Meyerhold and his Magnanimous Cuckold.

Meyerhold. Now there's a surprise practitioner. Forget Brecht, Stanislavski or any of that lot. This man has done some interesting stuff. He learns under the guidance of Stanislavski in the Moscow Art Theatre then goes off to experiment with new styles of theatre, coming up with a reaction against Naturalism that means Stanislavski hates his work. Hooray for Avant-Garde!

In 1922 he collaborates with a Constructivist set designer - Popova- to put on The Magnanimous Cuckold. I would have loved to see the performance. Or one like it today. A minimalist set, made of pipes bars and boards that actors can climb on or even slide down. A Commedia Dell 'Arte style of performance that's very physical but also reflects the machine style of the Constructalism. I find it hard to imagine what the performance would look like or have the narrative is conveyed but it is one I would love to see.

What also surprised me is how much Brecht was influenced by Meyehold. Not a clue that Meyerhold was using techniques such as the half curtain and distancing actors from their characters. Brecht, you have been receiving too much credit! (Although I don't want to do Brecht down too much he again is a very good practitioner) Meyerhold has surprised me however because it was not a name I had heard of until asked to do a presentation on him.

Shame Stalin ruined it all. Shut down Meyerhold's theatre and had him shot because Meyerhold was anti-socialist. Nice one Stalin.

This is a good website for more information on the production:
The Magnanimous Cuckold