Of course I saw The Conspirator. A movie about the Lincoln assassination starring James McAvoy? Yes, please! I quite enjoyed it. I thought it did a great job portraying the events of the night of the assassination accurately. (Except for one major piece: For some reason, they had Booth shoot Lincoln during Harry Hawk's line. This makes no sense; many people know that he shot during the laughs that ensued. The confusion created by this was an important part of the plan.) I learned after seeing it that the American Film Company, who produced it, is all about historical accuracy. I know less about Frederick Aiken, the lawyer who represented Mary Surratt in her trial, and I spent chunks of the movie wondering how much of the script was actually taken from the transcripts of the Surratt trial.
The thing that's gotten me in the reviews of the movie are the comments of its overt politicalness. The choice of the movie--the desire to tell this story at this moment in time--is definitely political. The decision to try the conspirators in a military tribunal, not a civilian court; the use of the war to take away civil liberties--yes, Robert Redford and the AFC knew what they were doing. The subject matter speaks for itself.
But I've read numerous reviews that mention certain details in the movie as being political, like showing the fact that the conspirators were held in jail while wearing hoods makes the movie political. No, it makes the movie accurate. If anything, the movie didn't include enough of how rough the prisoners had it. They wore those hoods almost 24 hours a day. They were only allowed outside when Lewis Powell (I think--it maybe was someone else) tried to kill himself and a doctor basically said, "Hey, you need to let these people out a little." So the prisoners got an hour a day in the yard. Yay?
The movie certainly did its job in making me think. It never takes a firm stand on whether Surratt is guilty or not; the theme of the movie is really, "They should've gotten civilian trials." I will say that it's pretty sympathetic toward her. Now, volunteering at Ford's Theatre, there are certain questions you get a lot, and the relative guilt of Mary Surratt is one of them. My general thought has always been, "Well, she took those guns out to the tavern the day of the assassination; she probably knew about it, and therefore should've said something." (Would she deserve to die for that? Even if we knew 100% that she knew? Another debate.)
But now...I don't know. The arguments about the testimony in the trial resonated with me. I don't know how good those arguments actually are; Aiken, the guy making the arguments, is the movie's hero, so obviously they come off well. Naturally, I need to read more about this to clarify my thoughts.
Overall, the movie is definitely worth your time, even if it's just to stare at dreamy James McAvoy for 2 hours.
Related, I actually attended the premiere for this movie. It was at Ford's and I was lucky enough to asked to usher. So yes, I came into close contact with James McAvoy and Robert Redford and Robin Wright. AND I managed to avoid looking like an idiot. Triumph! I only wish I could've gotten closer to Kevin Kline. Ah well.
Also, I realized that this is the one time that it makes sense to applaud at the end of a movie. The credits rolled, we clapped...and the actors were there! They heard! It made sense to clap! Huzzah!
Friday, April 22, 2011
Sunday, April 17, 2011
How to succeed...in life
There's a lot about Daniel Radcliffe that's impressive. He really seems to have a good head on his shoulders; he gives awesome, amusing interviews; and he really seems to have done a great job thinking about his life post-Potter. Doing Equus, and following it up with the musical comedy How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying on Broadway...and then a period scary movie, The Woman in Black. Really smart--here's a guy who's obviously thinking long-term. And he has the chops to pull it off. I've been impressed with his work in the Potter movies.
He works in How to Succeed, too. I went up to New York yesterday and caught the matinee. Overall, the show was a lot of fun. There's something incredibly enjoyable about seeing a show with a lot of dancing that makes you feel good (I imagine the current Anything Goes revival is similarly fun--I mean, Sutton Foster!). The show isn't perfect by any means--for one thing, there are a songs that just do not advance the plot ("Coffee Break"? "Paris Original"? Why?). And then there's J. Pierrepont Finch, our "hero". We follow his journey through the ranks of the World Wide Wicket Company, from window washer to the executive boardroom. This is a character we know NOTHING about. Quite literally, all we know is that he's ambitious. He wants to succeed in business. And...that's all. Dude is a blank slate. Of the characters in the show, he's probably the least developed. Which is saying something.
It makes a perfect role for casting a celebrity. Daniel Radcliffe is someone that a majority of the audience already sympathizes with; we walk into the theater rooting for him. And he's clearly having a good time. He doesn't have a strong singing voice, but the role doesn't require one. His American accent is fantastic; late in the show, he has a line about World Wide Wickets being all American, causing the audience to laugh. It actually took me a minute to realize why everyone was laughing. Me: [pause] "Oh yeah! He's British!" I do admit that I kept thinking he should be wearing glasses, and a few of his gestures struck me as very Harry Potter, but that's probably because I've spent, what, 10 years watching him play the same role. It's not that the gestures are Harry Potter; it's that Potter is the only thing I've seen him in. He manages to keep up with the other dancers--I particularly enjoyed the "Old Ivy" sequence and his chipmunk impression. Bottom line: He manages to carry the show.
Naturally, the audience was full of fangirls. The cheers for Radcliffe's entrance were ENORMOUS. I was happy to discover, though, that the audience was that enthusiastic about everything. They gave John Laroquette a similar cheer at his entrance (though I refuse to believe many of them ever saw Night Court), and there was a lot of laughing and applause throughout the show. The screams during the curtain were kind of crazy--but they were coming from an audience that was standing before the curtain call even began. I can't imagine what it must be like for the other actors to be in this show, but if the audience is always that enthusiastic, I bet it's a fun job.
I particularly enjoyed Rose Hemingway making her Broadway debut as Rosemary Pilkington, Ponty's love interest. She was adorable. Tammy Blanchard as Hedy La Rue was not the vamp I expected her to be; honestly, when she made her big entrance, I was like, "What? She's wearing basically the same thing as the rest of the secretaries and doesn't seem that much more endowed than them." Her performance was fine, but...eh. I wasn't blown away. And couldn't really see what made the men fall all over themselves, other than it was in the script.
I also didn't like "A Secretary Is Not a Toy" as much as I do on the 1995 revival recording. I was sad they cut the bit with the men typing, and one of my favorite lines ("A pad is to write in, not spend the night in") was sort of glossed over. I also think I like the "How to Succeed" reprise used in the '95 revival at the top of Act Two more than "Cinderella Darling", which apparently was in the original. It did have tap dancing, though, which I appreciated.
Also appreciated were the adorable boys in the cast. Even the villain--Christopher J. Hanke as Bud Frump--was super cute. It didn't hurt that they were all wearing those early 60's-style suits, and a bunch were in glasses. Sexy!
In general, the staging was great. I loved how "Company Way" was done, incorporating the mail into the choreography in fun ways. (Plus, that's one of my favorite numbers.) And shoving more and more people into the elevator in "It's Been a Long Day" was a great move--playing it for more laughs than I would have thought.
I highly recommend the show. Part of me felt weird about blowing the money in this ticket--like, I should see something serious. Or more out-there, like Book of Mormon. But there are times that you just want to have fun. And this pulled that off.
(You can get a great feel for it through the preview footage, available here.)
He works in How to Succeed, too. I went up to New York yesterday and caught the matinee. Overall, the show was a lot of fun. There's something incredibly enjoyable about seeing a show with a lot of dancing that makes you feel good (I imagine the current Anything Goes revival is similarly fun--I mean, Sutton Foster!). The show isn't perfect by any means--for one thing, there are a songs that just do not advance the plot ("Coffee Break"? "Paris Original"? Why?). And then there's J. Pierrepont Finch, our "hero". We follow his journey through the ranks of the World Wide Wicket Company, from window washer to the executive boardroom. This is a character we know NOTHING about. Quite literally, all we know is that he's ambitious. He wants to succeed in business. And...that's all. Dude is a blank slate. Of the characters in the show, he's probably the least developed. Which is saying something.
It makes a perfect role for casting a celebrity. Daniel Radcliffe is someone that a majority of the audience already sympathizes with; we walk into the theater rooting for him. And he's clearly having a good time. He doesn't have a strong singing voice, but the role doesn't require one. His American accent is fantastic; late in the show, he has a line about World Wide Wickets being all American, causing the audience to laugh. It actually took me a minute to realize why everyone was laughing. Me: [pause] "Oh yeah! He's British!" I do admit that I kept thinking he should be wearing glasses, and a few of his gestures struck me as very Harry Potter, but that's probably because I've spent, what, 10 years watching him play the same role. It's not that the gestures are Harry Potter; it's that Potter is the only thing I've seen him in. He manages to keep up with the other dancers--I particularly enjoyed the "Old Ivy" sequence and his chipmunk impression. Bottom line: He manages to carry the show.
Naturally, the audience was full of fangirls. The cheers for Radcliffe's entrance were ENORMOUS. I was happy to discover, though, that the audience was that enthusiastic about everything. They gave John Laroquette a similar cheer at his entrance (though I refuse to believe many of them ever saw Night Court), and there was a lot of laughing and applause throughout the show. The screams during the curtain were kind of crazy--but they were coming from an audience that was standing before the curtain call even began. I can't imagine what it must be like for the other actors to be in this show, but if the audience is always that enthusiastic, I bet it's a fun job.
I particularly enjoyed Rose Hemingway making her Broadway debut as Rosemary Pilkington, Ponty's love interest. She was adorable. Tammy Blanchard as Hedy La Rue was not the vamp I expected her to be; honestly, when she made her big entrance, I was like, "What? She's wearing basically the same thing as the rest of the secretaries and doesn't seem that much more endowed than them." Her performance was fine, but...eh. I wasn't blown away. And couldn't really see what made the men fall all over themselves, other than it was in the script.
I also didn't like "A Secretary Is Not a Toy" as much as I do on the 1995 revival recording. I was sad they cut the bit with the men typing, and one of my favorite lines ("A pad is to write in, not spend the night in") was sort of glossed over. I also think I like the "How to Succeed" reprise used in the '95 revival at the top of Act Two more than "Cinderella Darling", which apparently was in the original. It did have tap dancing, though, which I appreciated.
Also appreciated were the adorable boys in the cast. Even the villain--Christopher J. Hanke as Bud Frump--was super cute. It didn't hurt that they were all wearing those early 60's-style suits, and a bunch were in glasses. Sexy!
In general, the staging was great. I loved how "Company Way" was done, incorporating the mail into the choreography in fun ways. (Plus, that's one of my favorite numbers.) And shoving more and more people into the elevator in "It's Been a Long Day" was a great move--playing it for more laughs than I would have thought.
I highly recommend the show. Part of me felt weird about blowing the money in this ticket--like, I should see something serious. Or more out-there, like Book of Mormon. But there are times that you just want to have fun. And this pulled that off.
(You can get a great feel for it through the preview footage, available here.)
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Reevaluating Pradon
A good 10 years ago or so, I became obsessed with the most recent Jesus Christ Superstar, the one recorded for DVD. Glenn Carter was Jesus; Jérôme Pradon was Judas. I found Pradon captivating, but I wasn't blown away by his voice. And by that, I mean that I liked his performance despite his voice. (Witness his performance of "Superstar," which perfectly illustrates my point. The moments that he interacts with Jesus are very layered.)
Recently, I found out that he played Javert in Les Mis in the West End back in the early 2000s. I knew that he had been in the show in France, and he was in the 10th anniversary concert (as one of the students).
(Side note: He was in Assassins in France?! WHAT? What role? Wikipedia, help a girl out! He has the charisma to pull off Booth, but I need this information!)
(Huh. Czolgosz. Interesting.)
I was intrigued immediately. Thank God for YouTube, because I immediately pulled up clips of him in the role. And I was really pleasantly surprised. Here he performs "Javert's Suicide":
I'm impressed. He's not the best Javert I've heard, but he definitely pulls it off. Watching "The Confrontation", I think it's that Javert is much more suited to Pradon's voice than Judas is. Judas is too high; clearly, Pradon excels in a lower register.
It's always fun to find somewhat random actors to follow. Apparently Pradon is currently performing in Mamma Mia, as Sam. It would be interesting to hear him do ABBA.
Recently, I found out that he played Javert in Les Mis in the West End back in the early 2000s. I knew that he had been in the show in France, and he was in the 10th anniversary concert (as one of the students).
(Side note: He was in Assassins in France?! WHAT? What role? Wikipedia, help a girl out! He has the charisma to pull off Booth, but I need this information!)
(Huh. Czolgosz. Interesting.)
I was intrigued immediately. Thank God for YouTube, because I immediately pulled up clips of him in the role. And I was really pleasantly surprised. Here he performs "Javert's Suicide":
I'm impressed. He's not the best Javert I've heard, but he definitely pulls it off. Watching "The Confrontation", I think it's that Javert is much more suited to Pradon's voice than Judas is. Judas is too high; clearly, Pradon excels in a lower register.
It's always fun to find somewhat random actors to follow. Apparently Pradon is currently performing in Mamma Mia, as Sam. It would be interesting to hear him do ABBA.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
