REVIEW: Once

The problem with high expectations is that no matter the quality of the show you will leave disappointed if it does not live up to your exact expectations. This unfortunately was the case with Broadway in Detroit’s Once which possessed all of the key pieces to create an incredible show but fell short.

Broadway in Detroit has a history of bring exceptional shows to the area. Combined with the elegance of the Fisher Theatre and professionalism of the ushers the experience leads one to believe they paid a lot more for a ticket than they did. Unlike a normal production where you are immediately led to your seats, we had the opportunity to wander on stage where a bar had been set up and cast members were playing their instruments. Standing on the stage of the Fisher Theatre, listening to talented musicians playing their hearts out and looking out at hundreds of seats packed with excited patrons caused my expectation to yet again rise.

Nominated in 2012 for 13 Tony awards and winning 10 including Best Musical, Lighting, Scenic Design and Orchestration, the musical itself was powerful. A beautiful set, perfectly timed lighting and great orchestration made me consciously realize that I should love this show but I didn’t. The first act, which has limited plot points, heavily relies on the acting of the Guy (Stuart Ward) and Girl (Dani de Waal) yet, much of the dialog came off as too rehearsed. The Girl, who must go from rejecting the Guy at the beginning of the show to falling in love with him in the second act, showed no emotional changes throughout the show until the moment before she admits that she loves him. Yes, her character is always serious because “I [she] am Czech” but her dialog felt thoughtless, that each line was said because it was her turn – not because she was in the moment as her character. The acting much improved in the second act when the plot began to move at a quicker pace.

Vocally, the cast was superior to many productions which I have seen. Additionally, the cast served as their own orchestra and the musicality of the numbers was beyond reproach. The first act finale Gold was exceptionally powerful as the performers performed choreography as they sang and played their instruments (including the cellist!). In the second act an a cappella version of Gold was performed with minimal movement starkly contrasting the movement of the first act finale. By staging the two performances of Gold in complete contrast the musical differences were highlighted as well as the emotional changes which had taken place between the two pieces.

This production had all of the pieces to create an incredible show. Whether is was because it was the last show of a run, the second show of the day or something completely unrelated to how tired the performers must have been, the acting felt contrived in the first act preventing me from connecting with the characters and from caring about them. I would highly recommend attending this show, from a technical standpoint alone it is worth attendance and the voices were perfectly cast for each and every role. However, I would advise against attending the second show of the day toward the end of the run – better to get the actors when they are fresh so the characters are real than rehearsed.

PREVIEW: Rotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra

Photo by Marco Borggreve
Photo by Marco Borggreve

The Rotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra from the Netherlands is coming back to Ann Arbor for the first time in almost 40 years. Led by a 39-year-old conductor Yannick Nézet-Séguin, the Rotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra is bringing into life some excellent works from the late Romantic period by Maurice Ravel and Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. The orchestra is known for the energy in their performances, colorful variety of their sound, and their unique and bold choices in interpretations.

This is one of the rare chances to experience an internationally renowned orchestra performing top-notch repertoire — FOR FREE! Students, pick up the Passport to the Arts and redeem them at the League Ticket Office to get your free ticket. Can it get any better?

For more information about this performance, check out the UMS page here.

WHEN: Thursday, February 19, 2015 — 7:30pm

WHERE: Hill Auditorium

HOW MUCH: Student half-price tickets starting at $12, OR get the tickets for FREE using the Passport to the Arts or Bert’s Tickets program!

PREVIEW: Stupid F###ing Bird

SFB-02

Stupid F###ing Bird, written by Aaron Posner, promises to deliver a night full of laughs, if the title says anything about it. Loosely adapted from Anton Chekov’s famous play The Seagull, this play takes the heart of Chekov’s original and turns it into an over the top comedy. With irreverent jokes and witty dialogue, Stupid F###ing Bird is bound to be a unique take on the original. Set in modern times, the story follows four different characters and the way they navigate their professional and romantic relationships. Haven’t seen The Seagull and afraid you won’t have any idea what’s going on? Fear not! While the story lines are similar, the jokes are not dependent on any previous knowledge.

WHEN: February 19 at 7:30 pm, February 20 & 21 at 8:00 pm, and February 22 at 2 pm

WHERE: Lydia Mendelssohn Theatre

TICKETS: $10 for students with ID, available to purchase online or in person at the League Ticket Office

Just a note, Stupid F***ing Bird contains profanity and adult language – this is not the play to bring your little brother or sister to. Better off seeing The Tempest. Er…well..maybe just go see The Spongebob Movie.

REVIEW: Misha Friedman’s Photography

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/996904/thumbs/o-MISHA-FRIEDMAN-11-570.jpg?2

Misha Friedman’s talk about photography began with the timeline of what led him to the practice.  His story begins as an immigrant from Moldova.  He then studied economics and eventually started working for Doctors Without Borders.  This inspired his first photo series on tuberculosis.  He was interested in photographing the disease in a manner that communicated the story of the people and invoked interest.  The unchanging day to day events of the patients made this difficult, and this prompted Misha Friedman to see what other observations could be meditated on through photography.

The intention behind Misha Friedman’s work is what I found most interesting.  He uses a method of informed story-telling.  “You only have one motherland.  You have only one mother,” Misha said, when discussing why he decided to make a trip to Russia to photograph a series centered around the concept of ‘corruption’.  There is no denying where you come from.  His series on patriotism focused on this.  He found this nagging feeling of patriotism, which inspires feelings of pride or allegiance or united ideology, prevalent in Russia in its ambiguity.  The country of Russia is physically large, which is part of the reason for the many differences in belief across the regions.  Another part is the segregated belief systems that have come to dominate Russia over the years.  Now Russians feel not only a confused sense of patriotism but a pressure to feel a certain way about their country because of the strictness of the political structure.  Friedman aims to capture the clandestine nature of political sentiment in the country through his series on patriotism.  In his talk, Friedman discussed how the way of displaying photographs in a gallery is not always ideal because different galleries have different set ups and the lay out of a series is never quite the same in a different space.  His solution to this was to have his photos on an interactive website.  On the website is a series of portraits of Russians he interviewed, and the accompanying recording of those interviews begins to play when the portrait is clicked on.  To make the series a more direct response to the question of “what is patriotism to Russians” Friedman has the portraits organized by age group and by questions asked.

Another aspect of Friedman’s work that assists in his story-telling is his use of black and white.  He points to color as a complicated factor to use in photography, and that is why he uses black and white in many of his photos.  It brings the viewer a finer focus on the subject matter and eliminates concerns that might interfere with the story of the image.

After the talk, there was a strong sense of intention in his work which is something I am not used to hearing from talks on arts in other mediums.  As someone not too familiar with photography, I found there to be a strong focus on content for Misha’s work, as it all has ties to the political.  His work is also strong in the sense that it has the communicative goal of telling a clear story, which makes his work read as informational.  It is easy to perceive the message in his work, and because of that the viewer’s relative take away from the work is relatively singular and successful in bringing together a community of people to observe and process the same information.

 

PREVIEW: Stamps speaker series, Photogapher Misha Friedman

For photographer Misha Friedman, analytical photography is not about capturing events and facts, or even reactions to these events and facts. Rather it is about revealing causes, asking complex and difficult questions and answering them with photographs.  Born in Moldova under soviet rule, Misha Friedman currently lives in New York.  He has a bachelor’s degree in economics and a master’s in Russian and Post-Soviet studies. His photography has won numerous awards, including a grant from the Institute for Modern Russia to sponsor the series “Photo 51: Is Corruption in Russia’s DNA?” which will be on exhibit at the Work Gallery (306 S. State) in May and June.

Interview: Robert Lawrence Nelson, Playwright and University of Michigan Graduate

robert

On January 24th, students took an Arts Outta Town trip to see the Detroit Repertory Theatre’s production of Sweet Pea’s Mama. This play tells the story of Coralee, a maid for Abigail and her family. Among other things, Coralee cares for Abigail’s grown developmentally challenged son, whom she affectionately calls Sweet Pea. On the day of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination, tragedy occurs in Abigail’s home that has a devastating effect on everyone.

Playwright Robert Lawrence Nelson is a University of Michigan graduate,and he shared insight with Arts at Michigan about his experience writing this play:

What inspired you to write a play set around the assassination of Dr. King?

I was 13 in 1968, the year that Dr. King was assassinated. Around that age, you start to form an identity of yourself vis-à-vis your community at large, and you start to see yourself in a sociopolitical context. You start asking these questions, who am I? What am I about? What’s life about?

Secondly, I was born and raised in a little coal mining town, which is 30 miles from the town of the play. The town in the play is Pikeville, Kentucky, which is a real town. And I was born and raised about 30 miles from there in a little town on the border of West Virginia and Kentucky, a very provincial town. I’m not African American, but I am Jewish, and up until the age of 12, it was an idyllic upbringing in a small town. Around the age of 12, kids start to take on the prejudice of their parents, and I’m keenly aware of what it’s like to be on the short end of prejudice. Again, I’m not African American, and I don’t know that particular experience, but I do know prejudice and anger and hatred.

Also, the maid in the play has a very strong relationship with a developmentally challenged son of a White woman, so much so that he comes to depend on her more than his actual mother. When I first moved to LA, I did catering work. One time, the catering staff was in the kitchen of a very wealthy family, and there was a toddler in the kitchen. He fell down and hurt himself and started crying. The mother had come in, and she was all dressed up for the party. She reached for him to comfort him, and he turned away and reached for the nanny. The mother was mortified. She didn’t say anything, and that image has stuck in my head all these years later.

And the fourth reason is, I’m kind of reluctant to say, but it really was a strong motivation for me to write this when the book The Help came out. I was excited because the author covers the general tableau that I do, and I was disappointed because she had gotten there before I did, as a writer. However, when I read the book, I was very disappointed in it. What struck me was that the author had encapsulated four hundred years of prejudice in this country in this buffoon of a character. And the other end of this spectrum, the white woman and the maid, they were pure as the driven snow. They were virtuous. And in my view of prejudice, forgive the pun, it’s not black and white. It’s very shaded. And I think I’ve done that in this play. The narratives of the two women, there’s an expressed disdain and unexpressed love.

Which authors have inspired or influenced you?

I think I’ve been informed quite a bit by Philip Roth and Arthur Miller. Again I’m Jewish, and both of those guys are. They’re a generation ahead of me, but they both kind of eschew their Jewish heritage in the writing. Roth writes iconoclastic Jewish characters, which he’s received a lot of flak from the Jewish community about, and Miller doesn’t deal with it at all, and so in eschewing their heritage, they’ve kind of embraced it. I’ll give you an analogy. It’s like an atheist who is a vehement atheist has a stronger relationship with God than people who casually believe in God. So for whatever reason, partly because I’m Jewish, I’ve been attracted to both of those guys.

What does your writing process look like?

Typically, once I’ve finished a script, my mind just kind of goes thinking about new ideas. And when I think about new ideas, I just mentally bat them around in my head. I’ll typically juggle four or five ideas. The litmus test for me, I would say to myself, if that were a movie or a play, I would love to see that, but would I love to dedicate the next whatever amount of time, weeks, months, of my life to it? Typically, what I choose to write chooses me. When I latch onto an idea that’s an insatiable itch where I can’t put it down, I know oh yeah, that’s it.

So once I’ve chosen that, I don’t start writing for a long time. I typically just take notes, stream of consciousness notes, for days, weeks, probably no shorter than 6 weeks and no longer than about 12 weeks. I’ll have notepads by my bed, notepads in my car, in the kitchen, in the bathroom. When a thought comes up, I don’t censor it. I write it down. In the beginning of that process, my notes are very amorphous, and I’m kind of wondering myself, well, is there a story here? Where’s this going? Who are the characters?

And I’m asking myself all these questions, and as the days and weeks go by, the notes start to take on a shape by themselves, organically, where I start to see the arc of the story, the arc of the characters, the obstacles in the way of the characters. I start to see all these story elements. And at some point, and it differs with every project, I kind instinctively know when it’s time to stop taking notes and start writing, and then I start writing.

What were some of the challenges you had when writing this play?

I don’t remember any specific challenges about this play, per se, but what I can speak to is the challenges I have in writing any play. You have to tread a fine line. You don’t want to be too explicit, because if you’re too explicit, you don’t engage. The audience is not pulled in. If you hand feed them the play, they’re not engaged. There’s not the X factor.

So you want to make it opaque enough where they’re questioning, well what’s going on here? What are the real motivations? At the other end of the spectrum, if you make it too opaque or esoteric, you’ll lose your audience, where they’re disengaged.

So I think you have to tread a fine line between two polarities. And it’s tricky sometimes, no matter how conscious you are of it.

 

Note: Stay tuned for a follow-up interview where Robert Lawrence Nelson answers questions that students had after seeing this play.

sweetpeasmama