Newspaper Articles Comments turned off

Arcadia (Performance Review)

By Andrew on April 26th, 2010

Originally written for the issue published March 12, 2009.

If you consider the difference in eyebrow elevation between Jerry Springer: The Opera and Arcadia, you might deem Hart House’s 2008/2009 season to be somewhat strange. This year has seen the obligatory Shakespeare, bananas, transvestites, and now a scandalous idyllic country home. Quite a motley assortment on reflection, and Arcadia caps the whole season off wonderfully.

Arcadia follows the lives of the residents of Sidley Park, a house in the English country side, two hundred years apart. In the early 19th century, the house belongs to the Coverlys. Thomasina Coverly is the thirteen year old daughter of the house who is precocious and intelligent far beyond her years, largely due to Septimus Hodge, her tutor. Hodge is as much a scholar as he is a devilish rake, and engages in numerous affairs with the residents of the Park during his stay. The wife of a minor poet Ezra Chater is one of the many objects of Septimus’ affection, and the resulting trysts between the two are what lead to a mysterious series of events attempting to be uncovered by the patrons of Sidley Park in the present.

A hermitage was built in Sidley Park during Thomasina and Septimus’ time at the residence. Hannah Jarvis is a present day author investigating the significance and elusive hermit of the building, while Bernard Nightingale is at the same time pursuing similar answers, with additional connections to Lord Byron. Both work apprehensively together and with the assistance of Chloe, Gus, and Valentine Coverly, the current generation of the family that presides over Sidley Park. Through the bickering and arguments, the five intellectuals gradually find the answers they are looking for.

Arcadia is a highbrow performance clearly written with the intellectual crowd in mind. The subject matter is varied and dense, and likely more than a little arcane for most people. Those who don’t know their laws of thermodynamics from their theodolites may be in for a rough time. Epistemology, Newtonian laws, classicism vs. romanticism, chaos theory, and determinism are just a selection of the topics discussed at length. While the programme does offer a helpful handful of lines giving a quick definition of the more obscure subjects, Arcadia makes no concession for the audience’s ignorance. The first exchange of the play revolves around “carnal embrace,” and if you don’t know what that is, you probably shouldn’t attend a performance.

Despite the erudite subject matter, the characters are remarkably quite engaging even if their pursuits seem somewhat alienating. One scene has Bernard getting into a heated debate with Valentine Coverly over the merits (or lack thereof, according to Bernard) of scientific knowledge and inquiry. Both characters care deeply about their intellectual passions, and neither are willing to compromise. Even if the finer nuances of this argument are for the most part lost on the layman, the emotional force is still present and powerful. Arcadia often manages to engage both thought and feeling as it illustrates the dichotomy between the two, and succeeds impressively.

Newspaper Articles Comments turned off

U of T Drama Festival

By Andrew on April 26th, 2010

Originally written for the issue published  March 5, 2009.

“A Weekend of Competitive Theatre” is what was on the programme at Hart House Theatre this past weekend, and competitive theatre is precisely what the audience got. Between the thunderous applause a rather deceptively small crowd managed to generate and the criticisms of festival adjudicator Ron Cameron-Lewis, the 17th Annual U of T Drama Festival took the stage at Hart House theatre on February 26th – 28th showcasing the talents of U of T’s aspiring playwrights. Although the festival is seventeen years old, this year marked only the eighth occasion in the history of the event where every performance had been a student production. A selection of nine brand new original plays were showcased, three per evening, all contributed by the drama societies of St. Michaels College, Victoria College, UTSC, and UTM. Although I was only able to attend the first evening’s performances, I feel confident in stating that those three shows offered a good barometer as to what one could reasonably expect from the remaining nights.

The first production of the evening was Whodunnit?, a typical murder mystery spoof written and directed by Andrew Pignataro of St. Michael’s College. Par for the course in these plays, a member of high society throws a dinner party on the stormiest day of the year. Bodies start to pile up as the evening drags on, and the remaining dinner guests alleviate their boredom by trying to discover who the killer is with the help of a world famous detective whose car just happened to break down outside the mansion. Whodunnit? is built almost exclusively on dramatic irony. The killer is deliberately made known to the audience immediately, and the characters are kept oblivious until they wind up with a meat cleaver sticking out of their back. While it’s tempting to write this off as a lack of inspiration on the writer’s part, there are moments of excellent humour in both dialogue and behaviour that instantly quash this criticism. The only area where the performance starts to lose points is in regards to the frankly awful sets and the generally stilted acting.

After the jerky mayhem of Whodunnit? came the inescapably heavy Crosses from writer/director Jon Mandrozos of UTSC, a play that deals with HIV and heroin. Crosses is a mostly true story, as Mandrozos’ director’s notes indicates, illustrating the miasma of feelings one is presumably filled with upon realizing they might have HIV from using contaminated needles. The performance was staged using only three talented actors, a couch, and other small furnishings, which effectively created a tight and earnest set. Unfortunately, that’s where the praise ends. Given the massive voids between lines and a lack of physical movement around the set, the pacing quickly became choppy and disjointed. So much so that the lack of any appreciable meaning behind the title of Crosses led me to joke that Pause for Dramatic Effect might have been a more appropriate title. The overbearing use of swearing also lessened the integrity of the script. Instead of using the occasional expletive to accentuate dramatic lines, it came off as the puerile notion that vulgar language automatically translates to maturity.

The final performance of the evening was To Audience With Sincerity by Laura Delchiaro of Victoria College Drama Society, a play about the quandaries of university students. To Audience With Sincerity is concerned with the life of Allen, a person so consumed with his own philosophical pursuits that he’s begun to alienate the people around him (this occasionally includes the audience, which he frequently addresses). As far as the narrative goes, that’s all there really is to say about it. There are other bullet points about the works of Edgar Allen Poe, The Beatles, Facebook, etc. but their function is predominantly to add flourish and context to the proceedings. The acting was strong an technical effects were strong, and the set design was flat-out remarkable compared to the plays that came before it. In general, To Audience With Sincerity was doubtlessly the most impressive production of the evening. The only missteps lay in the occasional dialogue stumble or muddied line. Outside of those nitpicks, there were no other flaws in the performance that can’t be chalked up to mere inexperience.

Newspaper Articles Comments turned off

U of T Film Festival

By Andrew on April 26th, 2010

Originally written for the issue published January 29, 2009.

Since its humble beginnings in 2002, the U of T Film Festival has grown to become a premier destination for local aspiring filmmakers to cut their teeth and exhibit their material. Last year’s Festival was a four night affair that proudly presented around 100 short films and two feature length movies. 2009 marks the eighth year of the Festival, and the organizers intend to up the ante with a six night celluloid extravaganza with plans to increase the number of short and feature films on display.

This year’s Film Festival is sponsored by a motley handful of partners, each member dedicated to bringing a unique element to the proceedings in order to create as diverse and engaging an event as possible. The Hart House Film Board, which has been with the UofT Film Festival since its first year back in 2002, presents its annual Film Board Gala¸ a juried screening of the best shorts the Hart House Film Board has to offer. They are also responsible for the Super 8 Circus, a stream of twenty-four silent Super 8 films put to live music by the jazz ensemble Book of Gnomes.

The Hart House Art Committee will host UofTube – a recently added programme that airs YouTube-style short films – as well as The Debutante Ball, which is a collaborative video assembled in various workshops by lead artist Oliver Husain.

Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals & Transgendered of the University of Toronto (or: LGBTOUT) recognizes and presents the sexual diversity side of the Festival, and as such will be showcasing a programme of short queer-themed works in association with the Justina M. Barnicke Gallery.

The Cinema Studies Student Union will also be taking their Free Friday Films event to the Friday evening of the Festival, as well as hosting a Spotlight on Cinema Studies programme to display the works of CINSSU students. Additionally, they will play host to the second annual Shitty Film Contest, which honours the shittiest films with the shittiest prizes. To be a touch less profane, the Shitty Film Contest airs the worst minute-long films and rewards them with appropriate prizes (all in good fun, of course).

Last but not least is the Frontier College screening of Amal, the breakout feature length film directed by recent U of T graduate Richie Mehta. Amal was shown at a handful of festivals in 2007, including the TIFF and the Karlovy Vary in Czech Republic, before having a limited theatrical run over the late summer of this past year. The film was considered to be one of the best Canadian films of the year and received much critical acclaim. Many even consider director Richie Mehta to be U of T’s next Atom Egoyan or Babak Payami.

The 2009 U of T Film Festival is shaping up to be one ambitious event with a copious and varied catalogue to satisfy all manner of filmgoer. Over the years the Festival has expanded to become a somewhat international affair that occasionally exhibits work from over seas, but rest assured that the vast majority of the featured content is home-grown local material from U of T students and Toronto in general.

The Festival will continue accepting all submissions up until February 4th, but be aware that there is a strong preference for shorter films that are in English or feature English sub-titles. There is no question that this would be a great place for aspiring filmmakers to gain exposure and showcase their talents, and all those interested are encouraged to make a submission.

Additionally, there is a demand for entries into the first annual Sweding Contest in light of the 2008 film Be Kind Rewind. This competition calls for brief three minute long movie parodies with prizes for the cream of the crop.

For the spectator, the Festival runs from March 9th to the 14th. Tickets for all students are $5 per evening, and $8 per evening for the general public. Friday March 13th is free to all courtesy of the CINSSU.

Newspaper Articles Comments turned off

Butt Out

By Andrew on April 26th, 2010

Originally written for the issue published February 26, 2009.

Recently, the Toronto city council has taken steps to ban smoking within nine meters of Toronto playgrounds in an effort to preserve the health of children. Just last year, smoking has been banned in restaurants. Mere weeks ago, smoking was banned in vehicles carrying children. Now, it seems that you can’t even enjoy a cigarette on beautiful day while out in the park without running the risk of being slapped with fines.

The ban that was passed by council in a 31-6 vote on January 27th further restricts where in the city smoking is legal, although now it appears as if smoking is socially unacceptable altogether. As more and more laws against smoking are passed, those who light up seem to be thought of as criminals as opposed to just average people enjoying a lifestyle choice that perhaps isn’t all too healthy.

It might seem like an extreme depiction, but rest assured that it is indeed the desired effect. Howard Moscoe, one of the 31 councillors in favour of the regulation, claims that the bylaws are self-enforcing. “We have made smoking socially unacceptable,” he brags. If that is true, then doesn’t the bylaw seem like a waste? The purpose is simply to remind people that no one likes a smoker, a fact to be driven home by the 833 playgrounds about to be outfitted with new no-smoking signs. The estimated $16,000 cost must be a small price to pay to antagonize the smokers of Toronto.

No official list of the splash pads, wading pools, and playgrounds where smoking is now banned has yet been released, and ambiguity is sure to arise over how close to a play area is too close. This bylaw appears to be the type that no one wants to enforce anyway. The city simply hopes that a fine around $305 for smoking near children is a gamble no smoker wants to take. Outside of that, the responsibility ultimately lies with the parents and children. The success of the bylaw will lie with them, and how far they’re willing to go to protect the lungs of the young.

Newspaper Articles, Performance Reviews Comments turned off

Urinetown (Performance Review)

By Andrew on April 26th, 2010

Originally written for the issue published February 26, 2009.

It’s hard not to be a little offset after hearing the words “Urinetown: The Musical”. While musicals are generally enjoyable, the notion of a vulgar musical evokes a rather bitter taste thanks to the recent “Jerry Springer: The Opera” debacle. While enough time has passed to once again be open-minded towards the concept, it’s still too soon for me to be optimistic. Imagine my surprise then when Urinetown turns out to be a completely self-aware satire that is thoroughly enjoyable yet entirely benign.

A twenty year drought has led to a terrible water shortage, which causes great concern over water consumption. As a result, a mega-corporation called Urine Good Company (UGC) steps in to regulate the bathroom habits of the population. Private lavatories are a thing of the past, and everyone must now use public amenities and pay to pee for the sake of mediating water usage. Unfortunately for the population, the UGC runs a fairly dictatorial ship, and it isn’t long before the citizen’s rebel against the UGC’s iron rule.

The rabble’s revolt is apprehensively led by charming everyman Bobby Strong, a strapping young lad whose father was hauled off to the mysterious Urinetown for breaking the seal in the middle of the street. No one knows exactly what Urinetown is, except that people who are sent there are never to be heard from again. Bobby Strong eventually falls for the beautiful Hope Cladwell, daughter of the oppressive Caldwell B. Cladwell, who is president of the UGC. Hope, on the other hand, is torn between her love for her father and her growing feelings for Bobby.

Urinetown is narrated by the combined efforts of the corrupt Officer Lockstock and street urchin Little Sally. The two admirably perform narrative duties as well as offering the audience everything from amusing asides, minor plot predictions, and even pointers on how to write effectively for the stage. They also frequently debate the direction of the plot and the merits (if any) of naming your production “Urinetown”. The production’s best moments are when the play steps out of itself to directly engage with what the audience is thinking, and often these moments belong to the banter between these two characters.

Don’t interpret this as meaning that the play itself is substandard. While admittedly the story itself isn’t anything too remarkable, save for a few novel narrative choices, the presentation more than compensates for this. Urinetown boasts some excellent song and dance pieces, notably Act One’s “Mr. Cladwell” that formerly introduces the audience to the principle antagonist. It’s this number’s light-hearted tongue in cheek self-awareness that simultaneously sets the mood for the evening and assuages any lingering doubt that you made the wrong plans.

If nothing else, the individual moments are what make Urinetown a solid performance. Between the comedic powerhouse of Officer Lockstock and Little Sally, the generally successful lampooning of mainstream Broadway, and the cynical ending that manages to retain an ecological message, Urinetown is a biting musical that rises above the sum of its parts to the tune of a jaunty piano.