I did not want to get into the legality of the cigarettes because I am not an attorney, but in their ban on the public indoor smoking of tobacco products, the Colorado Revised Statutes state: "'Tobacco' also includes cloves and any other plant matter or product that is packaged for smoking." (CRS 25-14-203)
Regardless of the legality, I wanted to focus on a simpler issue. The smoke from the mullein cigarettes is likely to bother some theatergoers and they need to be aware of that ahead of time.
First, Todd, let me thank you for a great review. It’s much appreciated. I wanted to say a couple of things, though.
The most important is that we’re NOT using real cigarettes. It’s illegal to smoke tobacco products in public establishments, even onstage. Telling people that is likely to keep them away from our show, and that’s not good. Instead, we’re using hand-rolled mullein which, when smoked, is used to treat respiratory ailments (http://firstways.com/2011/12/07/five-surpr…). I realize that you say you found the herbal smoke just as irritating, but for those who care about the difference, I’m hoping that after reading this you might be willing to print a retraction in next week’s edition so that it only endangers one weekend’s attendance, which, for a house our size, can mean a great deal. We planned to have the fan going, as well, but as you pointed out, the lights were using too much power. The building was wired in the 30’s, some of the wiring is unstable and it, not the crew, is having some problems handling our lights; the assumption that we would take the trouble to install all of that, which took weeks, and then not use that time to teach our board ops how to use it is just silly. I know critics have to play it close to the vest, but it wouldn’t hurt to ask about things now and again. We’ve addressed that issue now, at any rate; the lights are stable and the ventilation is back.
Regarding Blanche: I chose to interpret Blanche a little differently than some have. I don’t think she is a coquette (“a woman,” according to Merriam-Webster, “who endeavors without sincere affection to gain the attention and admiration of men”) – though she has her moments. She is deftly manipulative, to be sure, and often dishonest, but I’m not sure what you mean by coquettish; Blanche is a grown woman, not a debutante. A lady accomplished in the art of commanding male attention goes about it subtly: she certainly doesn’t have to show the effort. In my opinion, the notion that coquettishness got Blanche into trouble is a very shallow interpretation; Blanche is also a woman of penetrating intelligence, a characteristic that seems to be overlooked quite often in favor of her sexuality and personal frailties. The decline of her life has been brought on by things much darker and deeper than the empty desire to be admired. Her agenda is much more complex and a good deal more serious than that, and she tells us so.
Though Blanche is plainly unstable, I also don’t think she completely loses her grip on reality as early on as some people tend to assume. Remember: she’s not (…spoiler alert) taken away to an institution at the end because she’s crazy; she’s put there because her sister Stella doesn’t want to believe the horrible truth about her husband. It’s Stella who doesn’t want to face reality, not Blanche. The text doesn’t support the notion of her as someone who is completely, irretrievably insane. Nothing she says in the previous two scenes before she is finally taken away is actually that crazy. Some of it is lies, some is wishful thinking, some of it is truth – but she knows she’s lying when she lies. In fact, in the last scene with Mitch, just two scenes from the end, she’s more brutally honest about herself and the reality of her life and choices than she has ever been. She doesn’t let go of reality until AFTER her final confrontation with Stanley. I’ve seen very fine actresses descend into the maudlin and succumb to the impulse to ‘play crazy’ in this role, and frankly I consider it the most ham-fisted and least imaginative choice.
Tennessee’s own sister was put away and subjected to one of the first wave of an epidemic of pre-frontal lobotomies performed mostly on women, not for being insane in the true sense of the word but for having some behavioral and possibly chemical issues and for being inappropriately sexual, and he never got over what had happened to his dear Rose, whom he called “the best of us;” when you place Blanche in that context it becomes clear what he was trying to tell us about her. Mostly she’s just a desperate woman with nowhere to go, in a world which has no place for her, who uses the appeal that has gained her such admiration in the past to try to find some safety, and whose behavior becomes more outrageous and departs further and further from propriety as she fails. She may retreat into idealism or outdated notions from time to time, but in many ways Blanche is incredibly strong and much more realistic than we give her credit for. In fact, I think it’s important to consider that the trip to the asylum isn’t the end of Blanche’s story; it’s just where we leave her.
I’m not protective of my own performance as much as I am of Tennessee and of Blanche; nor am I offended by your review: you were very complimentary, and I appreciate that. I’m not so arrogant as to think that I got this exactly right: no actress ever really does; it’s far too deep and dense a role for any one performer to find and do justice to everything that Williams put into it. It’s kind of the Lear of female roles that way. Tennessee used to tell each actress he worked with on this role that she was his favorite Blanche, because there were so many ways to interpret it; each interpretation is going to focus on some of the nearly endless facets of this profoundly complex character and see them differently than another performer – or reviewer – might think they should. In the world of interactive media, however, reviews have become opportunities for interesting artistic discussions rather than the one-sided pronouncements they once were, and I think that’s great for everyone, including the audience. Criticism is an art; their work, like ours, is open for interpretation and evaluation.
There’s infinitely more to Blanche than most people who don’t delve deeply tend to see. Williams has given us a portrait of a woman of substance in serious trouble and out of control, not a weak, delusional flibbertigibbet whose vanity and flirtatiousness have brought her to a deservedly bad end. We’ve accepted a set of givens about women and sex and sanity in the past that demean and dismiss women in general and Blanche in particular. I think looking beyond that makes for a much more interesting experience.
As a prop mistress for this show, I too want to clarify that real cigarettes are not being used for this production. We are using hand rolled mullein. Also, Mr. Wallinger came on a night when the building electrical shut down in the beginning of the show. He implied that the light techs might not have known what they were doing. Our light tech is indeed very capable and was having to make fixes during the show. The electrical issue has since been resolved.
Thanks for your comment. The cigarettes may not be tobacco-based, but they're real in that they're lit, unlike e-cigarettes or baby powder-based stage cigarettes. To me, the smell and irritation were indistinguishable from that of tobacco cigarettes.
To clarify one important error, the production is NOT using real cigarettes. It’s illegal to smoke tobacco products in public establishments, even onstage. Instead, they are using hand-rolled mullein which, when smoked, is used to treat respiratory ailments.
I should clarify that I said 'the concept of Blanche's journey is OFTEN treated un-gently'. I've also seen it done beautifully. Don't want anyone thinking I've hated every production of this I've ever seen. Who knows, too, whether we'll succeed at it; we can only try.
I didn't like this film nearly as much as the first. It was formulated to provide continuous action and any of the character interaction that makes ST special was just incidental during heavy action where it garnered no laughs at all from the early-bird viewers I was with. "Star Trek Into Darkness" was designed to appeal to a mass audience, the lowest common denominator. From my perspective, that was a huge mistake for the future of Star Trek, but not for Abrams wallet.
I really enjoyed the first film because it did a great job at being a classic Star Trek reboot, bringing back the characters, their quirks, and their interrelationships which was a significant and important part of the original series.
This is a Star Trek that apparently needs explosions every ten minutes to keep the audience interested, most of whom are not Trekkers. Hot blonds and Kirk having threesomes and endless "booms, bangs, and pows!" is the equation for getting teen males in the seats and having the ridiculous love story between "NuSpock" and "NuUhura" gets the teen girls in the seats. Having Kirk act like a whiny emo kid keeps all of them in the seats because now they can identify with him. "Parents suck! LOL!"
This is a predictable formula action film with predictable formula dialog utilizing characters and even plot lines that someone else created mixed in with some great special effects. This is 180 degrees from what Roddenberry created: daring ideas, imaginative concepts and innovative characters and dialog with lackluster special effects, the best that they could do. CGI has allowed bubblegum where once intelligent plots were required.
The Indy couldn't find ONE single photograph of this Unique art and artist to grace the article with, so as to help familiarize the reader with what you are talking about, and possibly stir up interest in the Show, the Artist, the ART?????
Heaven forbid one might use VISUALS for an article regarding VISUAL ART....Dur.
Saw the preview of Drowsy Chaperone last night and it was so much fun! The entire cast was terrific, the orchestra fabulous, and Scott Levy just made the show--he was the best part! Went home singing with a smile on my face...what more could you ask for.
I know this if off topic, but that's an adorable dress in the photo! Any idea where it's from? (Also: thanks for the info about the show; it sounds wonderful)
Calling the reviewer blind and suggesting he be medicated is a super mature response to a bad review. Pfft.
Todd is simply wrong about our running time; The Wild Duck runs reliably 2 and 1/2 hours as advertised (including intermission), which is actually 15 minutes shorter than the recent London revival. Obviously he thought the play went on forever, and it's true that there is a lot of play here, and very long build up to a climax, but all of this is crucial to its shattering climax and cumulative power. Ibsen has not written a play which depends on audience empathy with his characters, whose limitations are immediately evident. Instead he has created an astonishing mix of melodrama, symbolism, irony, tragedy, satire, poetry and realism. The villain thinks he's the hero; his feckless victim thinks he is a romantic tragic figure. Blind idealism and life lies still abound. Todd thinks the material doesn't hold up but I suspect while snoozing he was weighing it very lightly:the play really is a masterpiece--the more time we have spent with it the more we have been rewarded, and our experience has been shared by actors and directors and audiences for the last 100 years. We are very proud of our beautiful production, and we encourage Todd to see the show again after he has polished his glasses, adjusted his prescription and found his white cane. I will be happy to help him find his seat and show him the light :-)
First: A definition of hagiography: noun, the writing of the lives of saints.
Saw the movie recently; thought it was excellent and worth seeing. Go.
Any movie about baseball is worth seeing. How sad to see today's game, full of steroid strongmen, greedy agents and idiot owners (Luria, anyone?).
By comparison to some of today's clowns, like A-Rod, maybe JR was a saint.
you didn't mention isaac green's name in 5564 to toronto? what a crappy thing to do to a kid that played his heart out.
Hi! The link to the csfineartscenter.org seems to not be working...
Great review because I couldn't agree more with you. I personally am sick of the Hollywood RRR syndrome = Remake, Relaunch, Re-Release.
Horror movies suffer the most from the RRR's. That or the endless sequel's.
Wrong Turn 5, seriously? Final Destination 5...
My favorite part of this remake was when the credits finally started to roll.
Sam Raimi should be ashamed of himself for allowing this to happen.
This is a great story and I applaud the people involved in this movie making process.
Olympus has fallen Movie Download
Download Olympus has fallen Movie
Olympus has fallen Movie Download : http://www.downloadolympushasfallenmoviewa…
Download Olympus has fallen Movie : http://www.downloadolympushasfallenmoviewa…
This one is not to be missed! Seriously!!
You needed a "supposedly" in front of Qin Shi Huang as well. His "search for immortality" is an unverified, and I suspect malicious fabrication about the world's greatest peacemaker and nation builder. He was discredited by his political successors, and my guess is that is one of the several dozen bits of nonsense that were attached to his alleged "history." The full story of Qin Shi Huang is found in The School of Sun Tzu, available here:
All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation