We really don't care about theatre do we?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (980 of them)
sorry we're not naive enough for you

s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:19 (nineteen years ago) link

amateurist & i are discussing this in good faith, aimless, it's kind of annoying to have what we're saying totally dismissed for some dumbass reason just because we don't agree with you

s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:20 (nineteen years ago) link

oh, i know.

some "fixed setup" films do sort of selfconsciously evoke a "theatrical" quality, or even overtly beg comparison to theater: oliveira, etc.--or to "primitive" cinema (angelopoulos). and certain kinds of framing (even outside the context of a long-take style) can evoke theater, "performance" too with fruitful results. but lots of fixed-setup films really don't evoke theater at all. it's impossible to imagine hou or jia films as anything but cinema--the natural settings, natural lighting, etc. are absolutely critical.

anyway yeah so i think cinema can do a lot with "theatricality" and i don't think calling a film "theatrical" is a very convincing slur (unless you're writing in 1905, maybe).

i'm repeating myself and possibly not making sense.\

XPOST

s1ocki, i didn't find aimless's post dismissive. anyways i'm not a film student or anything. i'm not sure about agree/disagree--i don't think i dismissed aimless's post or embraced it fully. i just sort of responded to it.

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:22 (nineteen years ago) link

my "oh, i know" was a response to yeah i didn't say long-take, i said one-setup

!!

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:23 (nineteen years ago) link

haha i just gathered that phil-two is talking about the ALW musical! my grandma loved "memories"

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:23 (nineteen years ago) link

sorry that kind of steamed me for some reason

s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:24 (nineteen years ago) link

i have an image of s1ocki as a caffe latte

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:24 (nineteen years ago) link

now it's gone

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:24 (nineteen years ago) link

s1ocki are you on aim? (i'm on aim for the first time in like 7 months...)

amateur!!!st (amateurist), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:25 (nineteen years ago) link

yes!!

s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 24 October 2004 19:27 (nineteen years ago) link

one year passes...
Did anyone see John Patrick Shanley's Doubt? I did, last night, since the stars (Cherry Jones and Brian F. O'Byrne) are leaving Sunday. Better than I expected, given my last two experiences with Pulitzer-winning drama (The Young Man from Atlanta and, yikes, Topdog/Underdog) weren't at all satisfying. Perhaps a tad 'clever' in its "You think you know what happened? Oh no you don't" structure, but the dialogue and acting were sharp. Having had a Catholic education may help.

Seen anything else? New Yorkers, Albee's Seascape?

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:25 (eighteen years ago) link

Or just that it's intriniscally hard to talk about on a global forum like this, performances being site and time specific?

that's probably it, coupled with the world's general philistinism. I wuv the theatre and wish i went to it more often. The last thing I saw was a monster production of Titus Andronicus before Christmas.

DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:27 (eighteen years ago) link

I like the idea of monsters acting in plays.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:29 (eighteen years ago) link

RARRRR! OH NO, I HATE MY CO-STAR AGAIN!

DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:36 (eighteen years ago) link

Theatre is brilliant, and there's really no reason not go more, esp. for those in London, and even here in provincial Oxford, which is awash with half-decent student productions as well as some great Sheakespeare. But last year I only caught a very good As You Like It and a seven-thumbs Waiting for Godo, which is poor. The last time I went near a theatre was to see Just a Minute when it was last in Oxford (hardly a visual spectacle, works better if you shut your eyes unsurprisingly) and next time I'm going is to see The Mighty Boosh in February.

We need a rolling Theatre S/D thread really, but as you all say, nobody cares.

Johnny B Was Quizzical (Johnney B), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:47 (eighteen years ago) link

i agree DV, theatre is probably the most vital art form there is now, the level of creativity and expression is incredible. it's a shame that the thread devolved into people talking about cinema again.

xp i care

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:47 (eighteen years ago) link

theatre is probably the most vital art form there is now

Yes, but why? (I'm not being flippant.)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:48 (eighteen years ago) link

Yeah, there are a number of folks who care here in NY and London... even if the commercial stuff is too damn expensive ($42 in the last row of Doubt, and that was half off!). The cost is the main reason people feel so disconnected, however hard they try to attend cheaper and fringier theatre.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:51 (eighteen years ago) link

I'm not the biggest fan of Mike Leigh's movies, but I'm curious about his current plays in both London and NY (though apparently London tix are impossible?). I've also never been to theatre at the BAM before, and want to try to change that this Spring. And maybe the Roundabout's Harry Connick, Jr. Pajama Game or Nellie Mackay Threepenny Opera, though I was primarily interested in Edie Falco, and I should probably be thinking more about new stuff than revivals, which account for much of my theatre-going experience.

speaking of revivals, though, when I was in LA, I took my grandmother to one of the Reprise! shows, which had great original choreography and housed in a small enough theatre (at UCLA) that the amplification (live orchestra) wasn't overbearing. one of the leads, Tami Tappan Damiano, was moderately impressive too. they also do one-weekend shows with some medium-sized Hollywood types (when I was there - Working, with among others Camryn Manheim).

gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:12 (eighteen years ago) link

The off-Broadway Mike Leigh play (Abigail's Party) with Jennifer Jason Leigh is a revival. The UK TV version from the '70s is very uncomfortable and mortifying, in a good way, mostly.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:24 (eighteen years ago) link

I should see more theatre. Even if it's just to see friends' shows.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:25 (eighteen years ago) link

The cost is the main reason people feel so disconnected, however hard they try to attend cheaper and fringier theatre.

I basically prefer fringier theatre... partly this is the indie kid in me, but I think also that fringy theatre is more true to what the theatre is all about. It's still more expensive than I'd like it to be... why can't they just replace all actors with cheaper non-unionised Eastern Europeans?

The thing I hate most about the theatre is that in general you have to book in advance and can't just show up on whim to things like you can with other things.

DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:26 (eighteen years ago) link

most of the revival stuff i've seen is 50s or older

gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:27 (eighteen years ago) link

i know you ain't ned. i think that the theatre became so marginalised under the onslaught (sp?) of Film and TV that it seemed quite pointless and conservative for a long time, this is still the general public's impression of what theatre will be like: not quite as good at realism as theatre or film, so what's the point? the point is that theatre fought back by going beyond realism, it's that kind of theatre (devised theatre especially) that i find so vital. if you do compare it to film then i think it's film now that looks conservative in comparison now.

when i say "beyond realism" i mean it in the most mundane way that you might not find interesting at all, that's cool. for example, in film a table is always a table but in the theatre that exact same table could be a table, a bed, an autopsy slab, a raft, a shelter, or any number of things. e.g. a Robert Lepage play i saw where a washing machine doubles up as a space ship (not as ridiculous as it sounds). there are any number of things you can "only do in the theatre" whereas the public perception is that theatre is limited in some way, compared to film. i think it's the opposite. this needs lots of examples & i don't have the time to go into it now but i'll come back to it later.

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:33 (eighteen years ago) link

any news on the august wilson cycle at the tricycle, london?

theres a bunch of interesting stuff on in london, and here in the provinces we've got "the romans in britain" next month in sheffield, dario fo's "mistero buffo" in april, and in leeds the trinidadian "three sisters" at the WYP, which i was reading about the other day.

I love the crucible, but the last thing i saw there was a hmmmm version of "much ado about nothing"

saw the history boys too in sheffield which was excellent, although i thought the set was a bit showy.

i dont understand going to the theatre in london, from what my parents go through it seems as though you have to book tickets a year in advance or something?!?!! up here i just turn up generally.

mind you, that yforward planning allowed me to see the full 9 hours of "coast of utopia" at the national which was pretty fucking special, if a bit harsh on yr ass

ambrose (ambrose), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:39 (eighteen years ago) link

xpost to myself

ok - i think the the table thing is an example of something that opens out wider possibilites for theatre, i dont mean it just like "props in the theatre can be many different things and that's why it's important" but as i said i'll give more examples later.

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 16:42 (eighteen years ago) link

Jaymc, you have no excuse not to see theatre because you live in Chicago where it's plentiful. I miss that about Chicago. It's really not cost-effective to see theatre anywhere else, outside of the odd West End 1/2 price special.

ng-unit, Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:04 (eighteen years ago) link

You are absolutely right about that.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:05 (eighteen years ago) link

Yeah, I would be at that Neo-Futurists' complex at least monthly if I was in Chi.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:06 (eighteen years ago) link

And I live three blocks away from the Neo-Futurarium! Except "Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind" is a pale imitation of its peak 5-10 years ago.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:08 (eighteen years ago) link

i saw nathan lane and lee evans in "the producers" on the west end and i bought the tickets that day by queuing up at drury lane at 11am. i only had to wait for an hour or two. the show later that night contained the most amazing moment i may have ever witnessed at a show. lee evans, as the nervous accountant, shows up at the times square apartment of the monstrous theatrical producer played by nathan lane, and he's looking for a job. after satisfying himself that evans isn't a cop, lane embraces him with gusto, takes his coat, and hurls it in the air towards the couch as he carries on chattering. the coat flies over the couch and manages to catch precisely on the coat-hooks mounted by the door of the set, some twenty feet away! the audience gives a great gasp. the two men turn to look, and see the coat nestled there, hanging perfectly by its collar. they look at each other, unable to speak. the moment is utterly frozen and no one has any idea what will break the ice. nathan lane makes a quick hand-dusting motion and, jimmy durante style, rasps "still got it!"

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:18 (eighteen years ago) link

Well I saw "Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind" in summer 2001, so maybe i caught the peak's dying embers! It was way funnier than I remember Second City being around 1991.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:21 (eighteen years ago) link

The whole "beyond realism" thing gives a very misleading idea of what theatre has been about historically. There were only about ten minutes when Realism was a big thing in theatre, basically around the time that Strindberg et al. were driving for naturalism and so on. Before that, theatre did not play the realist game, nor did it afterwards.

realism SuXoR.

DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:35 (eighteen years ago) link

really? we're on a thread where people are talking about going to see both the new Mike Leigh play and "The History Boys". i can't see the point in either of them, to be frank. i agree that realism sucks though, certainly as far as the theatre is concerned.

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:43 (eighteen years ago) link

"Realism" is a problematic term in all the arts, ie I don't know what it means. Welles quoted someone (Picasso?) in F for Fake that art is a lie that reveals the truth. But didn't the Group Theater and those other cats in the '30s fancy themselves 'realists'?

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:49 (eighteen years ago) link

i can't see the point in either of them, to be frank

the point for me would be the same as that for going to London in the first place

gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:53 (eighteen years ago) link

also i guess that early Ibsen & Shaw and so on were fairly realistic (and influential) . i wasn't takling about realism/naturalism as a movement (i'm sure you know more about that than i do) but more that they were real situations presented realistically on stage without melodrama etc. i don't want to get bogged down in the semantics of it mainly because i don't know enough about it.

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:54 (eighteen years ago) link

i saw a show recently where certain bits of stage business were taken care of in proudly unrealistic ways i.e. a man drives a car into a lake and this is signified by a spotlit hand popping out of the wings that throws a cupful of water directly into his face

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 17:58 (eighteen years ago) link

Jaymc, you should see a Plasticene show if you haven't already. Very intelligent and VERY physical. 500 Clown also highly recommended. Redmoon. Curious Theatre Branch. Theatre Oobleck. Walkabout. Steppenwolf Garage.

ng-unit, Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:23 (eighteen years ago) link

though apparently London tix are impossible?

it's at the national, right? they keep back a certain number of tickets for every performance and sell them for a tenner (i think) on the day. the seats could be anywhere. they start selling them at 10am iirc, the only time i did it i got there for about 8, was the third person in the queue, spent a pleasant couple of hours reading, chatting and peoplewatching and got a front row seat (not as great as it sounds as the stage is at head-height) for the philip pullman/archbish rowan 'platform' debate (that wasn't a tenner actually, it was £3 or something. anyway it was brilliant). so er, yeah, if you get up early you can get a ticket.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:40 (eighteen years ago) link

(xpost) Cool, thanks for the recommendations. Eazy (who posts mostly on the Chicago thread) has worked with the Curious Theatre, I know. Although I also know they were in dire straits recently -- something to do with having to vacate their space, maybe? I'd also like to see something directed by Sean Graney of the Hypocrites, since I hear his name tossed around a lot.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:41 (eighteen years ago) link

oh yeah. the reason i don't go to more theatre in london is because i am poor like a church mouse and i can get into gigs for free or cheap.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:42 (eighteen years ago) link

xpost: Yeah, Sean Graney is a very clever director (and writer) -- I imagine that he spends a lot of time with the texts. I'm not sure if his Edward Gorey show got dusted off for this holiday season, but it's a winner.

ng-unit, Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:48 (eighteen years ago) link

Where are you now, ng-unit? When did you live in Chicago?

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:51 (eighteen years ago) link

Was that "The Gorey Details"? I remember it as highly fanciful, w/ hilarious song lyrics and good physical comedy.

Laurel (Laurel), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 18:56 (eighteen years ago) link

I live in D.C. now, but I was in Chicago from 1993-June 2005.

I think the title of the Gorey show was "Dispirited Diversion for Christmas," but I get a little confused since the Hypocrites also adapted "The Curious Sofa" as a toy theatre piece. That also ruled.

ng-unit, Wednesday, 4 January 2006 19:10 (eighteen years ago) link

Oh! Nevermind, I should have realized it was a seasonal thing.

Laurel (Laurel), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 19:14 (eighteen years ago) link

After your review, I would like to see any show called "The Gorey Details." Fanciful is a big plus!

ng-unit, Wednesday, 4 January 2006 19:26 (eighteen years ago) link

i saw Goat island's "Last Night Was Only A Comedy" fairly recently, aren't they chicago based? anyway i didn't think much of it at all at the time but it's really stuck with me. i'd like to see more of their work.

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 21:45 (eighteen years ago) link

Hmmm, I've never heard of them, but it appears they are indeed from Chicago. One of the company members used to be in the Neo-Futurists.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 4 January 2006 21:47 (eighteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.