Skip to main content

‘Stuck Elevator’ is astute musical look at immigration

By Woody Weingarten

Julius Ahn portrays Guāng in A.C.T.’s “Stuck Elevator.” Photo: Kevin Berne.

 

Like God with a capital G, the little-g theater gods work in mysterious ways.

Or maybe it’s all happenstance.

Either way, A.C.T.’s “Stuck Elevator,” an insightful peek at the mental meanderings of Guāng, an undocumented Chinese worker, coincided with the U.S. Senate beginning debate on immigration reform and feasible pathways to legalization and citizenship.

The American Conservatory Theatre’s world-premiere musical leans on a true story of a takeout delivery guy trapped in a Bronx elevator 81 hours.

It’s chiefly about fear:

Rescuers might learn he has no papers, and that would lead to deportation.

Guāng frets, too, about thieves stealing the seat of his bike, a Mexican deliveryman “getting all my tips,” and being fired because he’s too old.

Stuck Elevator,” like Joseph’s biblical coat of many colors, rapidly becomes a metaphor, in this case unveiling deep personal feelings of apprehension, frustration and prejudice.

Its framework is a bilingual montage that conveys multi-pronged points (led by the strain of being an outsider).Thematically, the 80-minute, one-act show works incredibly well.

Yet it lacks the musical power it might have had despite the commendable operatic voices of Julius Ahn as Guāng and Marie-France Arcilla as Ming, his wife (who’s also stuck — in a Nike factory in China).

Because the issues are so blatant, the blandness in some of the sung-through score by Byron Au Yong and verbal redundancies by librettist Aaron Jafferis may leave audiences desiring more oomph. That’s true even with the show’s two dozen tunes cross-fertilizing contemplative Chinese melodies (albeit sometimes too withheld, other moments too screechy) with bouncy Latin airs and wistfully romantic refrains.

Ahn, as an immigrant caught as much in his fantasies and self-limitations as he is by the shaft, gets enough stage time for a one-man performance though four supporting actors play multiple roles.In rapid succession, he thrusts his voice, body language and facial expressions into an emotional gamut: fear, sadness, joy, acceptance.

But it’s Joel Perez as Guāng’s co-worker, Marco, who stops the show with a hip-hop tune.

In addition, Raymond J. Lee is artfully villainous as Snakehead, the human parasite who forced Guāng into lifelong debt by charging $120,000 to smuggle him and his nephew into this country. And Joseph Anthony Foronda is appropriately over-the-top in the drag role of the Ross’ Wife and the armor-clad Elevator Monster.

It takes no time for Ahn to bring home everyone’s dread of elevator entrapment and claustrophobia.

And it takes no time for the crowd to adjust to supertitles that alternately translate the lyrics into Chinese or English, depending on which language is being sung.

Occasional bittersweet humor makes the sung-through show’s earnestness more palatable — like a line referring to Guāng’s predicament being “the first time in my life I haven’t had to share a room.”Quirky characters that populate his past, current and future daydreams and nightmares also amuse.

Guāng sings and sings and sings — to himself, to his family, to the elevator.

His mental twists and turns include, at one point, being attacked in song by a

mugger, his boss’ wife, his own wife — and his bladder. At another juncture, he imagines becoming so successful he can make Donald Trump deliver chicken to him.

In his darkest reverie, though, he watches “the edge of mind…starting to fray.”

His fantasies sharply vary in tone.

The best one may be a sequence in which characters drum with chopsticks and then use them as utensils to poke at a carcass on a table.“Stuck Elevator” is ably supported by Daniel Ostling’s set design (with dreamlike frame and simple cage), effective projections by Kate Freer, lighting by Alexander V. Nichols that facilitates quick mood changes, and costuming by Myung Hee Cho that detail characters’ socioeconomic status as it showcases flamboyant figments of Guāng’s imagination.

The Bay Area, with its large blocs of new Hispanic and Asian immigrants (as well as older Italians, Russians and you-name-its), people who fled poverty and oppression, should be particularly receptive to “Stuck Elevator.”

Regular theater buffs are likely to enjoy it because it’s different.

Once-in-a-whilers might consider it because it’s inspirational, a paean to the human spirit.

“Stuck Elevator” plays at the American Conservatory Theater, 415 Geary St., San Francisco, through April 28. Night performances Tuesdays through Saturdays, 8 p.m., and Sundays, 7 p.m. matinees, Wednesdays, Saturdays. Tickets: $20 to $85. Information: (415) 749-2228 or www.act-sf.org.

37th Humana Festival of New American Plays 2013

By Kedar K. Adour

Breaking New Ground at the Humana New American Play Festival

37th Humana Festival of New American Plays 2013:  Actors Theatre of Louisville;

Reams could be written about plethora of fine acting, directing and production values at the Humana New Play Festival but for this reviewer the emphasis is on “the plays the thing.”

Les Waters’ first full year as Artistic Director of Actors Theatre of Louisville and over-seer of the 37th Humana Festival of New American Plays came to a successful conclusion on April 7 with plays that stimulate the mind, ask cogent questions, exposes political corruption with drama and humor.  Only one play, The Delling Shore by Sam Marks misses the mark although our own local Bay Area favorite director Meredith McDonough gave it a noble try.

All of the plays that arrive at the festival undergo professional scrutiny and are assigned a dramaturg(s) as well as technical staff. Rewrites have been often been incorporated while they are in rehearsal and previews. Along with Mark’s play that seems incomplete, Appropriate by Branden Jacobs-Jenkins has a dynamic first act that would benefit from a second act revision.  Cry Old Kingdom by Jeff Augustin, Gnit by Will Eno and O Guru Guru Guro or why I don’t want to go to yoga class with you (yes it is all in the title) by Mallery Avidon are all ready for road.

GNIT  by Will Eno (Two hours 10 minuts with intermission)

The best of the lot in this years offering is Gnit by Will Eno, the master of language with a wicked sense of humor. This time around Eno tackles the rambling epic poem of Peer Gynt and comes up with a winner that will surely grace the boards of Berkeley Rep who, like Christopher Isherwood of the NY Times are ‘Enophiles.”

It helps that Les Waters directed the show with an excellent cast of Linda Kimborough playing the Mother and Dan Weller as Peter along with four other cast members that play a multitude of roles. Our own San Francisco product, Danny Wolohan, who has relocated in New York, reinforces his selection as San Francisco’s Best Ensemble Actor with sparkling wit befitting an Eno play.

Eno has subtitled his play “a rough translation of Henrik Ibsen’s PEER GYNT.” That may be true since this reviewer is not familiar with the poem or the story line. Rough or not it just seems right without any apology. It begins with Mother saying “Never have children. Or, I don’t know, have children. You end up talking to yourself, either way” and her first words to Peter, “You’re a liar.”

From this point Peter goes off on a far flung journey to find his true self leaving behind his bedridden mother. Before he leaves Norway, with neighbors in hot pursuit, he runs off with the bride betrothed to another. She gets deserted because Solvay is his true love.

His journey takes him to Morocco, Egypt (fantastic moveable set pieces by Antje Ellerman) and a dozen other places where he encounters the real world only to return unfulfilled to Norway. One wonders what Ibsen would say of this work.

APPROPRIATE by Branden Jacobs-Jenkins  (2 hours and15 minutes with intermission)

Actors Theatre has great acting spaces including the spacious Pamela Brown proscenium arch stage, the medium sized theatre-in-the-round Bingham and the intimate three-sided Victor Jory theatre.  Appropriate directed by Gary Griffen is mounted on the Pamela Brown stage and Antje Ellermann’s sensational set design evokes the mood even before two characters enter through a window.

Author Branden Jacobs-Jenkins who was born in the South and whose mother lives in Arkansas is familiar with the depressed areas where once glorious mansions are gradually crumbling. He also has a fascination with family interaction, specifically dysfunctional families. And so it is with Appropriate.

The three generations of Lafayettes arrive at their Arkansan plantation to liquidate the estate of their deceased patriarch. Those arriving through the window are a wayward son Franz and his significant other, a young female who is a believer in meditation and has had a salutary effect on Franz’s screwed up life. The oldest daughter Toni has been burdened with the care of their father who had descended into complete dependency before his eventual death. She is arranging the liquidation, is extremely defensive and offensive about the misery she has endured.

Arriving from New York is successful lawyer and oldest brother Bo, with his Jewish wife and two children. The animosity between the siblings escalates and layer by layer the past transgressions are exposed. When a photo album containing graphic photos of blacks being hanged is discovered the secret of the patriarch’s racist life is revealed. Although denial abounds, the truth of that discovery seems real although Jacob-Jenkins leaves it up to the audience to believe or not to believe.

The play, after a brilliantly written first, partially falls apart when violent physical action erupts between the family members. A non-dialog epilog with the set falling apart as strangers invade the mansion, although very dramatic, is unnecessary and probably will be excised from the final script.

 

CRY OLD KINGDOM by Jeff Augustin (80 minutes no intermission).

Although Jeff Augustin has never been to Haiti, the setting for Cry Old Kingdom, his mother was born there and he has been immersed in the oral history of the island nation. There was a dichotomy between his mother’s romanticizing and news stories of the brutality of the François “Papa Doc” Duvalier’s regime. Set in1964 the protagonist Edwin a once admired artist painter is hiding in a secluded seashore location to avoid conflict with the oppressive Papa Doc’s henchmen the Tonton Macoutes. Into this secluded area ventures young Henri Marx who is building a boat to sail to America and freedom.

The inspirationally depleted painter/poet Edwin is rejuvenated when he meets Henri and will allow the boat to be built if he allows Edwin to paint the boy in the process. A poetic dependency develops between the two and progress continues on the boat building.

Edwin’s wife Judith continues to work each day and supplies the necessities for living. Her intellectual strength and love of country leads to her jailing, forcing Edwin to make a horrendous decision of whether to reveal Henri’s escape attempt thus freeing his wife or to remain silent. The ending is devastating.

O GURU GURU GURU or why I don’t want to go to yoga class with you by Mallery Avidon (90 minute no intermission)

Mallery Avidon’s strange play with the exceptional long title also has the tag of being a “triptych.”  Not only is it written in three parts, it is also a lesson in what really is yoga. To the initiated, this reviewer being one of them, it is a lesson in the history and art of Hindu transcendental meditation, not just the bone twisting physical exercises.  An ‘ashram’ is a hermitage, monastic community, or other place of religious retreat for Hindus and meditation is the game.

The play is semiautobiographical since Avidon lived for a time in an ashram in the Catskill Mountains but she moved on with her life forgoing satsangs that are gatherings where the participants experience a higher state of consciousness through music, meditation and wisdom.

The first part of the triptych on a stark blank stage is a lecture given by 30 year old Lila who projects blank slides in explaining the intricacies of yoga and how she got to this stage in her life. OK, now what? Now what is a full blown satsang beautifully staged with colorful saris and incidental music on an accordion type instrument with audience participation. At the performance I attended, 23 of the audience took off their shoes and sat cross-legged on stage to participate. As part of the satsang is a beautiful long shadow puppet show about the Hindu God Shiva and how he got his elephant head.

The final scene is a Hollywood set of a movie Eat, Pray, Love that stars Julie Roberts who dispenses wisdom to Lila playing an extra. Really. End of play.

**********************************

The Apprentice Company play this year, Sleep Rock Thy Brain, was written byRinne Groff, Lucas Hnath  and Anne Washburn. It was an off venue location where the cast members had a chance to fly suspended by wires from the ceiling. Fun but fails to win the brass ring.

 

The Fringe of Marin Lives On! 31st Season 4/19-5/5

By David Hirzel, Flora Lynn Isaacson

The Fringe is upon us again.  We have lost our guiding light, Annette Lust, but the long-running series of one-act theater productions she created and nurtured through 31 seasons lives on, still suffused with her energy, and now her memory.  Opening night April 19, with its mixture of low comedy, witty insight, and real-life drama, is a powerful testament to that memory.

The evening opens with “Mr. Wonderful” (long-time Fringer Harold Delinsky) and MC/writer/director George Dykstra exchanging vaudevillian one-line groaners between sets of 60s popular dance (think “the Swim”) by a trio of local high-school students.   Danielle Littman has written a touching, insightful ode to the “Last Letter” that will ever be carried by our dwindling USPS, and actress Hilda Roe delivers.  Maureen Coyne and Al Badger return to the Fringe with their trademark well-tuned performances, this as a married couple who never quite got what they wanted in Norma Anapol’s “Rose Levy Learns at Last.”

After the Intermission, the Romantic poet Elizabeth Barrett Browning (Molly McCarthy) comes to life, choosing “Not Death, but Love” (written and directed by Roberta Palumbo) and leaving the father who never quite knew her for the poet now taking her away to new and unknown adventures.  “The Dead Celebrity Line” (by Gaetana Caldwell Smith) looks into the inner workings of a lingerie store, and the lives of the young ladies in retail.  Amazing performances by Hilda Roe and Flora Lynn Isaacson reach deep into the real tragedy that war brings to those who have no part in it in David Hirzel’s “The Two Hundredth Day” (very well directed by Steve North).  The evening comes to a well-tuned close with a witty take on the complicated ritual of birthday-gift choices in modern marriage.

As always, the Fringe of Marin continues to surprise and delight.  Program Two opens tonight.  See the Fringe website for performance times and dates for both programs.

 

All shows at Meadowlands Hall, Dominican University in San Rafael.

Five performances only of each program, weekends.

Last show May 5 matinee.

Box Office 415-673-3131

Fringe of Marin website and program

Review by David Hirzel (author of “The 200th Day”)

PERICLES, Prince of Tyre is a theatrical event at Berkeley Rep

By Kedar K. Adour

David Barlow, Jessica Kitchen and James Carpenter bring humor and grace to Pericles at Berkeley Rep.

PERICLES, Prince of Tyre: Drama by William Shakespeare. Conceived by Mark Wing-Davey with Jim Calder. Director Mark Wing-Davey. Berkeley Repertory Theatre, Thrust Stage, 2025 Addison Street @ Shattuck, Berkeley, CA 94704. (510) 647-2949 – www.berkeleyrep.org.

April 12 – May 26, 2013

PERICLES, Prince of Tyre is a theatrical event at Berkeley Rep

How does a theatrical company change a Shakespearean drama that involves incest, murder, three shipwrecks, revival of a dead queen and a virgin forced into a brothel into a comedy? First hire Mark Wing-Davey as the director, surround him with an excellent production staff, compose original music for a live on stage trio and assemble a talented ensemble cast of eight to play all the roles originally written for 17 characters and a narrator/chorus named Gower (Anita Carey, the directors partner in life) chanting:

To sing a song that old was sung,
From ashes ancient Gower is come;
Assuming man’s infirmities,
To glad your ear, and please your eyes.

Even before the formal play begins “to glad your ear, and please your eyes”, the cast has been mingling with the audience and the leader of the musicians warms up the audience by composing a song using plebian words and eventually ending with a frere  jacques type three part melody. It works.

Antiocles, King of Antioch is having an incestuous relationship with his beautiful daughter. To keep her to himself and hide his actions he has created a riddle that every suitor for her hand must solve. By not doing so the suitors lose their heads. The severed heads of the unsuccessful ones are represented as heads of cabbage that fall from rear balcony. Yes humor rears its ugly head(s) and it is only the first scene!

When Pericles is given the riddle, it is written in mirror type and he reads it by reflecting the parchment in a series of mirrors fastened to the daughters dress. Now that is a clever directorial conceit and many more are to come. Alas he can solve the riddle and dare not do so and begs 40 days to study it. Pericles knowing his fate flees and his picaresque sea voyage journey begins. On his first stop he fills the coffers of the famine ridden people of Tarus thus making a friend of Dionyza, the governor. That will hold him in good stead later on. A sub-title should be “virtue rewarded.”

His first encounter with a storm at sea tosses him to the waves and rescued by two fisherman taking him to Pentapolis where a jousting contest is being held to win the hand of the beautiful Thaisa, daughter of King Simonides. He wins of course in a hilarious jousting contest acted out behind a black screen. The marriage night consummation on a platform bed mounted on heavy duty springs would make a virgin blush.

Off he goes with his pregnant bride on another sea voyage and the production crew mounts a storm to end all storm scenes with a fire hose spraying the stage with copious amounts of water while the ship (that consists of the aforementioned spring mounted platform) is tossed and buffeted while Queen Thaisa gives birth to a girl to be named Marina, of course since she was born at sea. To appease the gods Thaisa gets placed in a casket and dumped overboard but when the casket washes ashore she is brought back to life with magic herbs and she goes off to mourn in the Temple of Diana.

Time passes, Marina grows into a ravishing beauty, is about to be killed by her jealous guardians, is ‘rescued” by pirates, sold to a brothel but maintains her virginity by her virtuous nature. Eventually she is reunited with Pericles and they both find Thaisa in the Temple of Diana and all ends well.

The entire production has twists and turns of lights, sound, music that will keep you entertained. But the members of the cast are a marvel as they slip into character after character without a hitch. David Barlow as Pericles carries most of burden with a perfect demeanor of virtue personified even as he suffers the tribulations of Job. James Carpenter’s clear senatorial Shakespearian voice and commanding stage presence makes him perfect on to play the kingly roles. Jessica Kitchens’ regal/bawdy bearing almost matches Carpenter line for line and Annapurna Sriram exudes virtuous virginity even when she is hoisted high above the stage in a cargo net.

This is a not to be missed theatrical event that could become a model for further Shakespearean staging.  Note: Mark Wing-Davey may not be taking liberties with Shakespeare since there is question whether Shakespeare wrote this play or only part of it. A non-entity named George Wilkins may be the true author.)
Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine

 

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of  www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

 

Berkeley Rep director reconceives ‘Pericles’

By Judy Richter

“Pericles, Prince of Tyre” is one of Shakespeare’s later plays and, according to most scholars, probably wasn’t written entirely by him. Director Mark Wing-Davey goes a step further by reconceiving this work, with movement consultant Jim Calder, for Berkeley Repertory Theatre.

Wing-Davey cuts text and characters to clarify the story of Pericles (David Barlow). This nobleman flees Antioch in fear of his life after realizing that the king and his daughter, whose hand Pericles was pursuing, were involved in an incestuous relationship.

Pericles’ travels take him through stormy seas to far flung places such as Pentapolis. There he wins the hand of Thaïsa (Jessica Kitchens), daughter of the king (James Carpenter). On their return voyage toTyre, Thaïsa dies while giving birth to a daughter, Marina. Many more adventures separately await father and daughter, who has been given to the care of the governor of Tarsus.

Ultimately, the distraught Pericles believes that both his wife and his daughter are dead, but in true Shakespearean fashion, they’re reunited by coincidence.

All this takes place on a two-level industrial set created by Peter Ksander and Douglas Stein with lighting by Bradley King. Three musicians, including composer/music director Marc Gwinn, sit on one side of the upper level.

Except for Barlow as Pericles and Anita Carey as Gower, who serves as the chorus and a trusted lord of Tyre, everyone else in the eight-member cast plays three or more roles. Thanks to Meg Neville’s often-ingenious costumes, the characters are easy to identify.

The two-act production runs about two hours plus intermission. It starts with music director Gwinn and the cast, in street clothes, warming up the audience with a sing-along.

Wing-Davey has come up with some wildly theatrical stagings. However, some of it seems excessive and distracting. For example, during the shipwreck scene, Carey’s Gower soaks the actors with a steady stream of water from a fire hose aimed above them.

Despite fine acting, especially by Barlow, Kitchens, Carpenter and Carey, the production sometimes lags. Still, it’s a notable attempt to make one of Shakespeare’s lesser works more accessible and palatable.

“Pericles, Prince of Tyre,” will continue through May 26 in Berkeley Repertory Theatre’s Thrust Stage, 2025 Addison St., Berkeley. For tickets and information, call (510) 647-2949 or go to www.berkeleyrep.org.

 

BEING EARNEST at TheatreWorks has charming star quality

By Kedar K. Adour


Cecily (Riley Krull) and Gwendolen (Mindy Lym) both fall in love with men they believe are named “Ernest”
in the World Premiere musical BEING EARNEST,  presented by TheatreWorks April 3 – 28
at the Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts.  Photo credit: Tracy Martin

BEING EARNEST: Musical. By Paul Gordon and Jay Gruska, adapted from Oscar Wilde’s “The Importance of Being Earnest.” Directed by Robert Kelley. TheatreWorks, Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, 500 Castro St., Mountain View. (650) 463-1960. www.theatreworks.org. Through April 28, 2013

BEING EARNEST at TheatreWorks has charming star quality.

There are others who have undertaken to put Oscar Wilde’s near perfect 1895 satirical drawing room comedy The Importance of Being Earnest to music with a modicum of success. The first was in 1960 when Ernest in Love (Earnest without the ‘a’) received laudatory reviews off Broadway and move uptown where it played for about four months. The next incarnation was as a London musical simply called Earnest (the ‘a’ reinserted) that moved on into theatrical oblivion. Paul Gordon and Jay Gruska have kept the ‘a” in the title but their marvelous TheatreWorks’ production under Robert Kelly’s spot on direction only deserves a solid ‘B’.

Oscar Wilde’s play has a riotous plot with satirical characters that beg to cavort in gorgeous costumes trying to do justice to Wilde’s well known witticisms. Many of those (in)famous lines appear in the libretto and often provide titles for songs. Recognizing the necessity to incorporate the best (they are all good) of those wicked lines into the play the opening scene of the second act is devoted to the ensemble cast of seven quoting many of them to the audience with a photo of Wilde projected on the back scrim. It is a great touch and I would bet director Kelly had a hand in it.

The ludicrous convoluted storyline of two supercilious English girls who can only love a man with the name of Earnest has been transplanted to 60s London, specifically Soho’s Carnaby Street. It is a stretch of the imagination that there are similarities between 1965, the time period of this musical adaptation, and beginning of the Victorian Era but the authors wish the audience to think so as an explanation for the style/intent of the music.

The music is extremely clever and the lyrics incorporate Wilde’s words as cues for the actors but the final result does not reach the level of sophistication of Alan Jay Lerner’s use of Shaw’s dialog in My Fair Lady. The major actors (Hayden Tee as Jack, Euan Morton as Algernon, Riley Krull as Cecily and Mindy Lym as Gwendolen) are expert singers and the entire performance exudes good nature humor that carries through from opening number to an interesting Shavian type epilog with slide projections informing us that Wilde was right on, and it is true daughters become what their mothers are. This brings us to local favorite Maureen McVerry being miscast or misdirected as the formidable Lady Bracknell. Audience favorites are Brian Herndon playing multiple roles and Diana Torres Koss as Miss Prism who left poor baby Jack (Earnest) in a handbag at Victoria Station.

Dr. Chausable (Brian Herndon) and
Miss Prism (Diana Torres Koss)

Placing the action in the Carnaby Street Era (that has since faded) allows costume designer Fumiko Bielefeldt to go wild starting with gorgeous Mondrian style dresses in the early scenes maintaining the high style throughout the show. Joe Ragey’s set with a central stairway allows the girls to use it as a runway for Bielefeldt’s fashion show. Running time two hours and 10 minutes.

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

 

STUCK ELEVATOR at A.C.T. is ambitious and a long 81 minutes

By Kedar K. Adour

Julius Ahn as Guang in STUCK ELEVATOR at A.C.T. Photo BY Kevin Berne

STUCK ELEVATOR: A Theatrical Piece.Music by Byron Au Toung. Libretto by Aaron Jafferis. Directed by Chay Yew. American Conservatory Theater, 450 Geary St., S.F. (415) 749-2228. www.act-sf.org.April 16 – 28, 2013.

STUCK ELEVATOR at A.C.T. is ambitious and a long 81 minutes 

San Franciscowith its plurality of Asians is probably the perfect venue for the world premiere of Stuck Elevator with a Chinese protagonist, his family and a mostly oriental production crew. To further appeal to the locals, while the libretto is in English, Chinese super-titles are used. It is a clever idiosyncrasy.

 The entire production can rightfully be called clever but a more appropriate designation would be ‘eclectic” and the PR material labels it “a hybrid of musical theater, opera, and solo performance.”  The single word ‘opera’ would be equally appropriate. The stark libretto is sung mostly in long stretches of resistive and hip-hop rap. The staging is brilliant and that alone is worth a visit. The entire production that is packed into the 81 minutes (without intermission) becomes tedious although it is often mesmerizing. 

The libretto is based on the true story of a 35 year old Ming Kuang Chenoa a Chinese “take out” delivery boy for the Happy Dragon Restaurant inBronxwho was stuck in an elevator for 81 hours. It features Julius Ahn, given the name of Guāng, in the lead and a very competent ensemble of Raymond J. Lee, Marie-France Arcilla, Jose Perez and Joseph Anthony Foronda – all of whom play multiple roles. 

The 81 days is compressed into 81 minutes with a series of over-lapping scenes, some taking place in actual time but mostly in the mind of the trapped Guāng. He is working the sometimes dangerous “take out” job to earn money for his family still inChinaand also to pay off a huge debt to the Snakehead who smuggled him intoNew Yorkinside a cargo container. During that stifling trip his nephew has died of suffocation. 

Interestingly he initially thinks about losing money to his friend/competitor Mexican Marco to whom he has sold his cell phone that would have been his contact with the outside world. He thinks about his wife Ming and son Wang Yue and imagines they are there with him. An interesting conceit: When he fantasizes talking with Ming, Marco answers in Spanish. This is the start of hallucinations that become more bizarre as the hours, morph into days.

 His anger rises as he recognizes that he is an invisible immigrant stuck in the elevator and he eats the few fortune cookies and sauce packets in his delivery bag. Guang’s mind is obsessed with thoughts of his nephew’s death and the time he was mugged losing $200. That last memory elicits a bladder spasm wetting his pants. 

All the previous scenes are performed with the stage in blacks and grays. As his hallucinations become more outlandish color and humor is injected in the proceedings. The elevator becomes a slot machine inAtlantic Cityand when he pushes the button he wins the jackpot, color lights up the video projections, the ensemble cavort in amazing costumes. The winnings are used to buy a home and he and is family can now live the good life inAmerica. . . the futile goal of every immigrant is fulfilled. 

His letters exchange between Guang andChinaare folded paper airplanes that are flung on the stage and into the audience. . . a great way to involve the audience into the mix. In his dreams he wrestles with an Elevator Monster, complete in a glistening metallic costume only to be temporarily rescued by a Fortune Cookie monster that is revealed as Ming when the ever dangerous Snakehead rips off the Cookie Monsters mask. Alas Guang is defeated. 

A mugging scene enters Guang’s dream as he is stabbed with a pocket knife. Realizing he is not dead he imagines himself bicycling through the night sky over the city with Ming, Wang Yue and Marco before the 81 hours is up and the elevator door opens. End of play. It is to be noted that earlier Quang eats his last fortune cookie finding a blank fortune. Symbolic? Of course. 

Scenic designer Daniel Ostling; costume designer MyungHee Cho; lighting designer Alexander V. Nichols; video designer Kate Freer, IMA; and sound designer Mikhail Fiksel; music director Dolores Duran-Cefalu; choreography by Stephen Buescher; orchestrations by Byron Au Young.   

Kedar K Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com.

Shivalingappa, Namasya — Dance Performance Review

By Joe Cillo

Shantala Shivalingappa

Namasya — Dance Performance

Herbst Theater, San Francisco

April 16, 2013

I didn’t care for this.  This was a solo performance of Indian dance in the Kuchipudi style, to Indian music.  The music was better than the dancing.  I couldn’t relate to it.  I found it wearisome and dull.  It lacked engagement.  It was solipsistic.  Some of it reminded me of those pantomime games where one person acts out a scenario and the rest of the group tries to guess what it is.  It was like she had something in her head, but I couldn’t seem to connect with what it was.

She started out on her back toward the rear of the stage making painfully slow movements as if she were getting up in the morning very, very slowly — a decidedly downbeat way to start.  I often get up like that myself first thing in the morning, but it is not interesting to watch, and I would never have the temerity to perform it on stage and expect people to be interested in it.

Most of this performance was slow and static, decidedly undramatic and even disengaged.  For a couple of segments she left the stage allowing screens came down and a video of her dancing in costume appeared on the screen.  It was a video I would never watch were it to be given to me.  It was totally uninteresting.  I couldn’t understand why this was presented in a video.  Was she too lazy to just go out there and do it herself?  I think it emphasized her unwillingness to make full contact with the audience, which seemed to be a theme of this performance.

A further segment underlined this.  It was done mostly on her knees with her back to the audience making movements with her arms and torso.  When her back was not to the audience, she hid her face in her arms.  It was as if she were avoiding making contact with the audience, refusing to look at them.  I got the same feeling from it that I have had sometimes pursuing a woman I am interested in and she is making no response.  Not a negative response, but no response.  As if her back is to me and she is ignoring me, totally stonewalling, not willing to be engaged or communicative in any way whatsoever.   Not exactly the way for a woman to get a good review from me, and that was how I felt during much of this performance.

I made up my mind as I was sitting there not to even review this show.  I don’t like to write this kind of a review.  I like young women and I try to encourage them, but I started getting annoyed as it dragged on.  This woman is unprepared to be doing this kind of a performance, and San Francisco Performances did not do her a favor presenting her in a venue for which she is not artistically ready. Someone has to tell her.  A reviewer also has a responsibility to inform the public what they are in for when they take time and spend money to attend a performance.  Why should I keep silent to protect a poor performer who is out there soliciting paying audiences?

When you go out on a stage and do a solo performance: an hour or more of nothing but you, it has to be strong, and you have to have an imposing presence that can connect with the audience and sustain their attention.  People are paying money and spending their time to view this.  It has to have something to offer, something to engage them, stimulate them, connect with them on some level or other.  You can’t just bore them to death and expect them to like it.  You take a big risk when you do a show like this as a solo performer.  If people don’t like it, it all comes down on you.  You’re not part of a group that shares responsibility and offers support.  Shivalingappa does not have the kind of presence and artistic strength necessary to pull this off.  This performance was not substantial.  It was tedious.  She is way out of her league.  She should be dancing in a troupe learning her craft.

Maybe I am spoiled.  I just saw the San Francisco Ballet the other night and those dancers are first rate.  Every single one of them is masterful with a commanding presence that you can feel all the way up to the top of the balcony.  Shivalingappa is not anywhere near that caliber and certainly not of a stature to be doing a solo show on her own.  But it was mercifully short.  That was the best part.  Some serious rethinking need to be done with this one.  I’m sorry, but I cannot recommend this.

 

 

Renoir — Film Review

By Joe Cillo

Renoir

Directed by Gilles Bourdos

 

 

This is an outstanding dramatization of the French painter Pierre-August Renoir (1841-1919) (Michel Bouquet) in his later years.  (In French with subtitles.)  It takes place in 1915 during the First World War.  At the time Renoir lived on a farm in Cagnes near the Mediterranean coast above Nice.  He seems to have had an entourage of women around him who took care of the household and attended to him.  The film never explained exactly who they were or what their relationships were to him.  Some of them seem to have been former models.  His wife of 25 years, Aline, died prior to the time of the film, which would have been recently.  He had three sons with Aline, two of whom figure prominently in the film, Jean (Vincent Rottiers), the older, and Claude (Thomas Doret), the younger.

The film begins with the arrival of Andree Heuschling (Christa Theret), a.k.a. Catherine Hessling, who becomes his last model and the future wife of his son, Jean.  Born in 1900, she would have been fifteen at the time of this film, although in the film she appears to be somewhat older, probably in her early 20s.   Renoir’s son, Claude, whom she encounters at the outset, in actuality was only a year younger, although in the film he appears to be at least ten years her junior.

Theret is gorgeous and she spends a good part of her time in this film naked or nearly so, which is a huge plus.  Her naked body helps a great deal to maintain interest in this somewhat slow moving domestic film.  There isn’t a lot of action in this film.  It is domestic drama, but it is interesting and has substance.  The characters are intriguing and their circumstance dealing with the aging patriarch against the backdrop of the horrendous First World War give the film a strong engagement.

The center of gravity of the film is not really Renoir, who mostly sits and paints throughout the film, and sometimes talks — and what he has to say is always interesting — but rather, the romance that develops between the older son, Jean, and Andree.   I’ll let you watch the film to see how that goes, but it is very well done and both characters are strong and captivating, particularly Andree.

What I want to talk about are some of the comments Renoir made on painting and art.  Renoir’s paintings, particularly in his later years, are warm, colorful, and his subject matter tends to be benign:  domestic scenes, landscapes, portraits, and nude women.  His colors are strong, but tend to be pastel, softening contrast and shapes.  He didn’t use black very much.  He felt that viewing a painting should be an enjoyable encounter, reflecting positive, uplifting themes.  It wasn’t that he was unfamiliar with the darker side of life, but he did not wish to portray it.  And this is the point.  A painting, or a work of art more generally, reflects the inner reality, and especially the values, of the artist who created it.  The choice of subject matter and the way it is portrayed say a lot about who the artist is as a person and what he finds most important and valuable in life.  It takes considerable time, sustained attention, and skill to create a work of art.  What you choose as a subject matter upon which to spend that time, attention, and skill is not arbitrary.  An artist chooses to depict what he feels is interesting and important to share with others.  When you view a work of art, you are immersing yourself in the mindset and world view of another person.  You are allowing your attention to be guided by the interest and outlook of another person.  He may be a good person or a bad person.   His outlook may be positive and constructive, or negative, hostile, and biased.  But it is highly personal, individualized, and idiosyncratic.  This is the reason why art and artists often run afoul of prevailing morays and attitudes of their societies.  If they make political statements, they may get into trouble with the authorities.

Art, at least in our western tradition of individual creators, is a forum that lifts up the inner world of particular persons for public view.  In contrast to say, commercial art, which does not do this, or does it to a greatly circumscribed extent.  The operating values in commercial art are to sell a product, promote a name, or create an image associated with a brand or company.  The artist who is commissioned to do such work has limited, if any, choice over the subject matter or how it is to be portrayed.  The artist becomes something of a technician, executing work with a predefined object.  If he is skilled and imaginative, he may have some influence over the final depiction, but the work does not come from his own initiative, his inner need to share of himself.  He is doing the work in the service of an agenda that has been brought to him by someone else.  In the Middle Ages, when life and art was dominated by the church, religious themes were the norm in art.  Individual artists found ways to express themselves within that context, but radical departures from this prevailing mindset were not tolerated and simply had no venue.  The names of artists who created artworks in ancient times were not recorded.  The individual was not important and the individual’s perspective was not to be emphasized in the public forum of art.  Art’s role was to reflect the values of society as a whole, or at least the dominant class within it.

Modern art that you see in museums and galleries today, celebrates highly individualized, idiosyncratic perspectives.  If you contrast the paintings of women by Renoir, and say, Picasso, you see very different attitudes toward women and how they are portrayed.  Renoir saw women as beautiful and sensual, somewhat idealized, perhaps, but women are exalted in his paintings.  They are set in congenial circumstances in warm, vibrant colors.  You see their faces with expressions reflecting the mood and personality of the woman.  Picasso’s women, by contrast, are distorted, grotesque, their faces blank, cold, expressionless.  There is nothing beautiful or inviting about them.  Many of them are frankly hideous.  Certainly there is no idealization.  Neither is more “real” than the other.  The point is that artists depict the world, not as it is, but as they need to see it.  These needs are largely unconscious and are shaped by early experiences going back to the beginnings of their lives.  What you see in art is an interpretation, not “reality”.  When you look at a work of art, you are seeing a selective view of the world the way the artist needs to see it and chooses to share it.  So it is very personal.  Art is a way of connecting with other people on the level of the inner self through selective symbolic communication.  It is inherently limited, but on the other hand, it exposes one to aspects of another person not readily available, and can thus expand one’s awareness of the external world, the inner world of another, and awaken unexplored aspects of oneself.

The film is not so preoccupied with this philosophical topic of the nature of art — which might be a relief to you.  It emphasizes, rather, the romance between the young lovers, which is intriguing and spirited.  It is well crafted and well acted.  Not an action packed film.  You have to wear your thinking cap for this one, if you have one.  It does offer a convincing picture of Renoir in his later years, and particularly the inspiration he derived from attractive young women.  Renoir seems to have used his wealth to isolate himself from the world in an idyllic landscape surrounded by beautiful, attentive women.  (I would do the same thing, if I had the money.)  This was a cause for some tension between himself and his older son, Jean, who had been a soldier at the front.  Wounded in battle, he felt the pull of responsibility to his comrades and the nation, choosing to reenlist and go back to the war, against the strong opposition of Andree and his father.  Renoir senior sat out the war painting naked girls.  His warm, sensual, inviting paintings didn’t seem to sit so well with Jean, who had seen action at the front, which gave him a very different perspective on life from what his father portrayed.  Renoir painted until the very end of his life in 1919.  He was still painting on the day he died.  The film is an excellent introduction to his life and work.

TINSEL TARTS IN A HOT COMA is bicoastal and omnisexual

By Kedar K. Adour

Carmen Miranda Banana number

TINSEL TARTS in a HOT COMA: The Next Cockettes Musical Unabashed Drag Show. Thrillpeddlers. The Hypnodrome, 57510th St., S.F. (415) 377-4202  or www.brownpaper.com.

Through June1, 2013

TINSEL TARTS IN A HOT COMA is bi-coastal and omni-sexual

If you are not familiar with the original Cockettes you are in for a rollicking treat when you go to see the latest Thrillpeddlers production. It is a belly full of laughs when the 20 member cast cavorts, trip the light fantastic and belt song parodies with sex infused lyrics. Not only are the hilarious costumes covered with glitter, so are the faces and every (and I mean EVERY) exposed body part. Be warned that nudity, especially in the cataclysmic finale, is rampant.

This resurrection of this Cockettes musical had its origins in 1971 when the original show caused a semi-sensation, often for the wrong reasons, when their 1930 musical Tinsel Tarts in a Hot Coma opened in New York for a three-week run. Two of the original cast, Scrumbly Koldewyn and “Sweet Pam” Tent have rewritten the script added 18 (count them) new songs, music and lyrics. Another core member of the Cockettes, Rami Missabu, joins the cast.

The time is the 1930s and Hollywood is the place, filled with egocentric divas, actor wan-a-bees, eccentric directors and gaggles of movie extras. Conflict is as rampant as the songs and dances spill out into the audience. The theatre is a very, very intimate space. Vedda Viper a bitchy news broadcaster ala Walter Winchell is sort of the master of ceremonies as she spreads the gossip “no matter who gets F—-d!”

The irreverent hijinks just keep coming and coming and you will have a tough time if you try to figure out who is who. You’ll meet, Mayor Fiorello Laguardia, Goldie Digger Cow (complete with a two titted udder), Auntie Social, Salvador Deli, Graucho, Chico and Harpo Marx. Then there is the Tender Loin Chorus (you will not have to use your imagination since they leave nothing uncovered), Brunnhilde, Angel Gabrille and finally The Devil in the finale to end all finales.

Scrumbly plays the piano and directs the orchestra (Sax, Bass and drums) from on stage and has his chance to emote and take part in the action. Running time a bit too long but never boring and that is a promise.

(Music and Lyrics by Scrumbly Koldewyn. Book by Pam Tent and Scrumbly Koldewyn. Additional Lyrics by Link Martin,”Sweet Pam” Tent, Martin Worman, Tom Orr)

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com