Choreography Project #1

Adam Mohrbacher

Reviewing the Arts

Spring 2009

Choreography Project #I

Last Friday at the Dance Center of Columbia College Chicago human bodies flew through the air framed by elegant lighting and ingenious bits of prop work and set design. The dance show Choreography Project #1 was composed of seven dances of great variety and passion. These individual dances were all very well choreographed and performed and each one worked well as a stand alone piece and as a small segment of a larger artistic statement. The dances avoided becoming repetitive because each one was able to define itself both in its aesthetics and in the thematic material that the dance was trying to convey. The dances covered a wide range of topics including drug addiction and the power of spirituality. 

The first dance of the night proved to be the most unimpressive of the bunch. This was the only piece where you were unable to truly get a sense of what the choreographer or the actual performers were attempting to convey through their movements. This was also the only dance where the costumes of the dancers were not only unhelpful in relation to conveying some deeper theme or enhancing the overall experience. The dancers in this piece were dressed in what appeared to be jeans and a variety of old T-shirts. This aesthetic choice was not only ineffective but downright offensive. 

However, despite this dreadfully slow start the show picked up steam in the following number. This piece was an impressive and lyrical ode to the struggle of overcoming addictions. The dancers were all dressed in black and white striped shirts with black overalls over these shirts. Their movements were slow and drugged out. As the piece progressed they became more violent, more chaotic, as if they were attempting to break free or crawl out of some hole that they had fallen into. This piece really set the overall tone for the remainder of the show, in terms of quality. The other pieces were also very impressive and most included one or more striking visual props to help clarify the theme and intention of the piece. One, in particular, was a dance that focused on the power of spirituality. The stage for this piece was kept relatively bare, but there was one single bright light in the corner of the stage. The dancers in this piece repeatedly made movements which suggested that they must always return to this light to find a sense of inner balance and peace. This was another example of how the show used simple but staggeringly effective props and ideas to communicate its messages.

For the casual dance fan or a seasoned veteran of the dance community this particular show was more than worthwhile of someone’s time and effort. Dance on its own can often become a very cryptic and removing experience. For me it has often been something that I relate to on a very basic level. I can appreciate the physical abilities of the dancers and enjoy the complicated movements that they make. However, I am often lost when it comes to deciphering the actual themes or deeper messages involved with a dance piece. This was not something I struggled with during my viewing of Choreography Project #1. I was blown away by this powerful and beautiful show.

Breaking Down Orlikoff

Breaking Down Orlikoff’s Sunshine Cleaning

In the most recent issue of our beloved Columbia Chronicle newspaper the calm,  and methodical film criticisms of Mr. David Orlikoff are frustratingly transformed from conventional to a staleness that feels obligatory. His most recent film review concerns the recent release of Sunshine Cleaning, a new “indie” comedy that Orlikoff chooses to consider and chronicle in an extremely bland and arid manner. 

For the first portion of the review Orlikoff fills the page with a series of thoughts concerning the qualities that make up a true independent film, and how Sunshine Cleaning fits in with other trendy “indies” of recent years.  Most of the information presented in this section is essentially a big no-brainer to anyone with an even casual interest in contemporary film. Five entire paragraphs are devoted to Orlikoff’s ramblings about how Sunshine Cleaning is another addition to the recent procession of films that includes Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Lost in Translation, Sideways, Little Miss Sunshine, and finally Juno. Orlikoff continues on throughout this section to state that Sunshine Cleaning is similar to these past films because they are not truly independent works. They are the response from the mainstream studios to make a financial profit by marketing to a specific section of the film going population. Again, none of this information is revelatory, and none of this information is relevant to a discussion concerning the merits of Sunshine Cleaning.

The beginning of the review is so trivial that it makes you wonder whether or not Orlikoff was simply scrambling to fill or meet his required word count. It is difficult to see where this recycled information is needed to enhance or solidify any of the vague points that are made later on in the review. It seems that the point of the initial five paragraphs is to point out to the reader that Sunshine Cleaning is indeed a good film, but it is a film that is buffered by intense studio backing. This could have been conveyed in little more than a paragraph. Did we need to be dragged down memory lane of the past six or seven years of studio produced “independent” film? Apparently this was not only beneficial but essential and it provides an awkward transition for when Orlikoff finally gets around to reviewing the actual film.

As we move away from cryptic gibberish about the definition of an independent film the review becomes not only lazy but strangely lifeless. There are multiple paragraphs that touch upon each individual character and a simple rendition of nearly the entire plot of the film. There is not one word of the quality of any components of the filmmaking process, such as the effectiveness of the acting, directing, cinematography, or editing. We are told that the film has characters and should be about characters, but what the heck does Orlikoff want us to understand from this observation? Perhaps he is trying to reveal that this film is more of a character study than a narrative driven film, but his true feelings regarding almost every aspect of the film seem to be completely hidden. 

Finally, he concludes his article by stating that “... the good outweighs the bad, and the missteps seem to be unfortunate miscalculations from a crew as tenderhearted as the characters.” First of all, what missteps? From the review Orlikoff only mentions the age of Oscar as being an issue, and that somethings in the review ..”just don’t work”. Also, is the fact that there appears to be no “malice” anywhere in the film make it a truly worthwhile experience to sit through or fork over your ten dollars for? And where does Orlikoff’s rating of four out of five come from? Where and what is he basing this assessment upon? There seems to be maybe one single paragraph in the entire review that contains a measure of legitimate film criticism. And what is the most significant point that this man chooses to focus on? The age of one of characters and how it comes off as being slightly unrealistic. This review is a sham and casts a dark shadow over the art of film criticism. Orlikoff and the Chronicle itself should be ashamed for the appearance of such an article in their weekly publication. 

The Graduate: A Film for Then and Now

Mike Nichols’ 1968 classic, The Graduate, is a stirring, hilarious, and intimate portrait of American life at the end of the 60’s. The film provides a fascinating examination of the relationships and conflicts that exist between individuals separated by age and class. The main protagonist of the film, Ben Braddock, in a quest to cure his oppressive boredom and disgust with the soulless qualities inherent in his parent’s generation, launches himself into an affair with the wife of his father’s business partner, Mrs. Robinson. This beautiful film is a great example of a media text which is specifically geared towards a specific population, namely the youth population. 

The film, when viewed in its historical context, is symbolic of the dissatisfaction and rebellion which was brewing amongst the youth population in 1968 America and was destined to explode in the early 1970’s. The film remains a perfect statement about each generation of youth and remains relevant today where we find ourselves struggling with disturbingly similar issues. The film explores how each generation strives desperately to not repeat the mistakes of their parents and how each person hopes that they will be able to carve out their own unique place in the world. “The two different generations are also reflected in other dualities: the two rival women (young innocent daughter Elaine and the older seductress Mrs. Robinson), the two California settings (Los Angeles and Berkeley), South and North California cultures (materialistic vs. intellectual), and finally the devision in Benjamin’s character (morally drifting and indecisive vs. committed).” (Dirks).

The themes and ideas explored by The Graduate and the struggles of the main character, Benjamin, are easily relatable to many college students as they attempt to answer serious questions about their identity, their past experiences, and their future plans. It seems to be a reciprocal process for each generation to view their parent’s generation in a extremely negative and critical light. Early on in the film Benjamin is pulled aside by his father’s business partner, Mr. Robinson, and told that there is a great future in “plastics”. This statement can be interpreted as a comment on how Benjamin perceives the lives and behaviors of his parents and their friends. He interprets their lives as being  devoid of any real warmth or purpose, and although they are shiny on the surface, these lives are actually artificial and insincere. Benjamin clearly displays feelings of isolation and apathy for the activities of his parents. In one scene his father relentlessly pushes Benjamin to come out and show off the new scuba suit that he has bought and forced Benjamin to wear. Benjamin is nearly forced into the family’s swimming pool and he sits at the bottom of the pool quietly alone in his own blue world. He mutely stares up at his family and his parent friends who are above the water line.    

This timeless film still holds relevance to the state of America in the present day. As our world lies in current economic, social, and political ruin my generation can only look upon the horror that our parent’s generation has brought about with genuine shock, disgust, and perhaps if we are lucky, hope. We must hope that we can inherit this awful mess of a planet and work to make the world a better place. On a much smaller scale, Benjamin Braddock sees hope for his own personal future through Mrs. Robinson’s daughter, Elaine. After engaging in a torrid, exhausting, stressful, and somewhat depressing affair with the sexy yet pathetic Mrs. Robinson, Benjamin sees Elaine as something untouched, innocent, and full of spirit. However, it is almost by accident that Benjamin discovers that Elaine is someone whom he could forge a real connection with.  During one scene Benjamin is forced into taking Elaine out on a date. He intentionally behaves in an extremely rude and even offensive manner due to Mrs. Robinson’s warnings that she does not want Benjamin involved with her daughter. Because of his crass behavior Benjamin moves Elaine to tears and this triggers a extremely important character change inside of Benjamin. Benjamin realizes that Elaine is someone who has not surrendered to many of the qualities that Benjamin observes in his parent’s generation. She is someone who is the prime of her life and is ready and able to experience pain, hope, desire, fear, and most of all love. This is exactly what he needs to break him out of his daze and set him out on a more direct path to a sense of happiness.

The Graduate does not necessarily provide many answers to the questions it raises, but the general idea of wholeheartedly pursuing your own source of happiness and hope is explored in a terrifically complex manner. The film’s final statement on this idea comes with the final scene, where Benjamin steals Elaine away from her nasty parents and her arranged marriage to the odious Carl Smith. As the two run away from the church they board a strange bus which appears to be traveling to the middle of nowhere. The couple sits and laughs at their good fortune of finally escaping the harmful influences of their parent’s generation but slowly their smiles fade away right before the film ends. The film is smart enough to recognize that a rebellious reaction to a certain lifestyle or pattern of thought doesn’t really provide any sort of definite answer. I believe that with this final scene the final point of the film comes across. Everyone, including our parent’s generation, and their parent’s generation, and their parents generation is trying to make their own path through life the best they can, and nobody knows where their life choices will take them. Benjamin and Elaine’s struggles are not over by any means. They are responsible for making their lives how they want them. However, they have finally taken positive steps to live their own lives and move away from exterior influences. 

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/graduate/

http://www.filmsite.org/grad.html

Professional Sports: What's the Deal?

Adam Mohrbacher

Reviewing the Arts

Spring 2009

Professional Sports: What’s the Deal?

When I was young baseball was my life. I lived for the weekly games on television, I wore baseball themed shirts and hats, even the pictures that I drew in my notebook were primarily centered on baseball players making plays in the field or blasting home runs over the fence. Many of my waking hours were devoted to this one single sport and I was an active participant of school and city baseball leagues for nearly a decade of my life. I remained enthralled with the sport until I entered high school and everything regarding my perception of this activity experienced a sharp and definitive transformation. 

 

As I grew older my infatuation with the activity of watching and playing professional baseball began to dwindle. I developed the viewpoint that all professional sports were a simple fruitless distraction. I began to feel that individuals who were passionate about consistently watching and following the progress of their chosen team throughout each respective season were silly and stupid for being interested in such a worthless activity. This perspective is something that has been maintained and even strengthened to the present day. I believe that professional sports, and the money, time and sensationalism involved, is one of the most brainless, ego-centric, and overall greed-infested aspects of our society. This institution and the people who commit their own time, money, and efforts to it, are devoid of any real benefits to the human spirit.

 

However, upon closer inspection of the culture and practice of watching and following professional sports teams I begin to understand the how and why behind the unbridled joy and enthusiasm that many people possess. Watching sports plays into one of the most basic and primal human emotions which is the need to see conflict and the emotionally satisfying experience that can be attached to having “your side” win the “battle”. To some there is a certain dramatic quality to be found in sports. There is a quality which to some would be the equivalent of the drama found in a good book, play, or film. Sports also seems to be another arena were human beings can come together and share a common interest. There is a tradition of camaraderie and friendly rivalry that exists in these types of environments which is an extremely attractive quality for most people.

Essentially, sports serves as just another form of leisure and entertainment. Many of the reasons for why I find films, television, and novels so enjoyable are reasons that you could also apply for someone who is an passionate fan of professional sports. It is another form of entertainment which helps to being individuals together and promotes relaxation and lively discussion. I am simply a individual who fails to see the drama, the excitement, the passion, and the appeal of a tradition that has consumed so many.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_people_watch_sports

www.funadvice.com/q/sports_60538

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports

Dave Chappelle's Block Party

Dave Chappelle’s Block Party

From the farmlands of Ohio to the cramped streets of New York City, Dave Chappelle’s Block Party is a concert film which reaches deeper and makes surprising comments about the importance of art and community in the lives of individuals. The viewer watches as Chappelle begins to organize a spur of the moment hip-hop concert on the streets of New York City and we explore the significance of the concert’s location and the meaning behind the people on and off the stage. 

The film is meaningful on a variety of levels. First, it provides us with an entertaining and riveting concert set piece, with engaging performances by Kanye West, Mos Def, The Roots, and the reunited Fugees. Michael Gondry proves to be an exceptional if unlikely choice for the project. He structures the film in a non-linear fashion and the action jumps around from the actual concert performances to scenes which focus on Chappelle’s efforts to organize the event, to segments which explore the musical performers, the concert attendees, and finally the neighborhood where the concert takes place.

With this structure the audience is able to gain a unique perspective to what Dave Chappelle was hoping to accomplish through his free concert. Throughout the film Chappelle attempts to obtain an audience from a variety of different locations, ethnic groups, and overall walks of life. He then strives to provide for them a concert, filled with musical performers which are meaningful to him, that will entertain, and inspire as many different individuals as possible. His scenes in Ohio, which is one of the unconventional places he goes to promote the concert, are hilarious and fascinating. Throughout these scenes he often attempts to recruit older white individuals, many of which had never even listened to a hip-hop or rap song, to attend the concert. Gondry does an excellent job of then showing these same individuals having a blast at the concert later on in the film.

The film is even more interesting when viewed in its appropriate historical and social context. At this point in his career Dave Chappelle had recently signed a staggering $50 million dollar contract to produce two more seasons of his phenomenally popular show The Chappelle Show. However, in May of 2005 Chappelle shocked the entertainment industry when he promptly left the production of the 3rd season of The Chappelle Show and went to South Africa. His decision automatically triggered reports of mental illness and substance abuse, but according to Chappelle his decision was more motivated by a need for internal personal growth than any outside factor. He had become disenchanted with the idea of celebrity and was entirely unsure whether or not his comedy was a helpful or hurtful factor on the issue of race relations. His departure and his subsequent trip to Africa was a voyage of discovery and an attempt for Chappelle to rediscover how he viewed himself as both a man and as a comedian. 

Chappelle’s actions and overall performance throughout the film depict a man who is uncertain about his current position in mainstream entertainment. The film and his concert seems to be about Chappelle hoping to redefine just who he thinks he is and what he hopes his work and art can do for society and interactions between races. The premise of the film is so deceptively simple that it is easy to forget the symbolic importance of the event that is chronicled. The concert is a perfect mechanism for Chappelle to explore the ideas and themes that drive him. The concert was designed to help produce unification between the races, and to hopefully reach a large and varied audience, both in actual concert attendees and viewers of the film. There seems to be some important significance behind the decision to cast Michael Gondry, who has a appeal to various groups who may not be followers of Dave Chappelle.

The film and the concert seem to be attempting to produce an authentic and different perspective to the genre of hip-hop and rap music. Chappelle strives to produce a different sort of rap concert, one which is not prone to the stereotypical tendencies apparent on countless music videos. To Chappelle, this is a concert which can cross racial lines and hopefully can display positive effects upon the community. There is one segment of the film where Chappelle and the crew enter a house near the concert site and discuss a variety of topics with the house’s eccentric owners. On the topic of rap music the owners hold a strong negative stance but later on they are captured by the camera and seem to be enjoying the music. This is clearly the main goal of the filmmaker’s realized, which is to reach and hopefully touch people from all arenas of life with music that has long been regarded as belonging to a very limited population.

With its funny, smart, and entertaining sense of style Dave Chappelle’s Block Party is enormously effective film which makes several subtle yet profound comments on race relations, the transcendent power of art, and the aspirations of its star, Dave Chappelle. Filmed and released around an extremely turbulent time in Chappelle’s professional and personal life the film is a chronicle of Chappelle struggling to come to grips with where he hoped to go with his life and with his art. The film and the music it displays preach the importance of art, acceptance, and community involvement. It highlights just how important these things are in all of our lives, and how at the end of the day there is only one real race, the human race. 

My Best Friend's Wedding

Adam Mohrbacher

Reviewing the Arts

Spring 2009

Review: My Best Friend’s Wedding

With her long mane of tasseled curls and her large toothy sparkling smile Julia Roberts has gracefully been the queen-bee and main attraction of American romantic-comedy films over the past two decades. Ever since her breakthrough role as the stripper with a heart of gold, Vivian Ward, in Pretty Woman, Roberts has specialized in playing well-meaning women who just seem to be confused about this thing called love. 

The Julia Roberts 1997 “rom-com” My Best Friend’s Wedding is no exception and contains a lead character with classic “Julia Roberts attributes”. Here, Roberts plays Julianne Potter, a cute and cynical food critic living in New York. She appears to be quite content with bopping around the “Big Apple” with her gay friend and closest confidante, George Cownes, who is played with remarkable wit and flamboyance by Rupert Everett. Complications arrive with a fateful phone call from Jules long-time best bud, Michael O’Neal, played by Dermot Mulroney, a sports writer who announces that he is planing to be married in just a few days. This announcement unlocks a wave complicated and strange feelings inside Julianne, and she begins to wonder wither or not she actually has had feelings for Michael during their entire ten year friendship. Ignoring George’s pleas for her to see reason she rashly decides to head to Chicago and attempt to break up the wedding. Of course, in classic romantic comedy fashion, hilarity and chaos ensues.

The main plot of the film is one that has been seen throughout countless fluff films over the years but My Best Friend’s Wedding remains a fresh and innovative entry into the romantic comedy genre because it has so many positive things going for it. First, the film is more than worthy of attention because it is a comedy that is actually funny. The script effortlessly squeezes humor from a wide variety of sources wither that be Roberts tumbling off her bed with the news of Michael’s impending nuptials, or Michael’s finance Kim, played by Cameron Diaz, weaving her car through Lake Shore Drive traffic with crazy speed. The greatest comedic moments of the film come from a segment where Jules gay best pal, George, flies into Chicago to offer her advice and hopefully wean her away from trying to break up a perfectly healthy couple. However, the tables are turned when Roberts maliciously incorporates George into her schemes and claims to Michael that George and her are about to be married. This is done to clearly ignite Michael’s jealousy but George grows frustrated and brutally humiliates Julianne.

The acting in the film is uniformly strong from the entire main cast with the highlight clearly being Rupert Everett’s performance as George. His screen time in the film is brief but he makes such a brilliant impression as essentially Julianne’s conscience that his presence is felt long after he disappears from the screen. Roberts’ performance is also strong because it is actually a layered role. You get a sense that this is a woman who only thinks she knows what she wants. She easily conveys the idea that Jules is really unsure of pretty much everything, especially her own feelings concerning Michael. The film is also technically strong with great photography of Chicago and special consideration for little moments of beauty, such as the tennis court filled with golden balloons where Jules and Michael talk near the end of the film.

My Best Friend’s Wedding is essentially a film built upon very traditional ideas,(you never know what you have until its gone, love hurts, ect.). However, the script and the terrific cast help move the film forward and make it a rewarding as well as entertaining experience. For all of the jokes and silliness on display, (the classic spur of the moment rendition of “Say a Little Prayer for You”), the film also has ample amounts of heart and really does capture the overwhelming confusion, joy, and pain that comes along with being, or thinking that you’re in love. This is a true accomplishment and makes My Best Friend’s Wedding a worthy addition to anyone’s film collection, not just romantic-comedy or Julia Roberts fans. 

Living out Loud Review

A simple, quiet and mature study of adult relationships forms the heart of writer and director Richard LaGravenese’s 1998 feature Living out Loud. The film stars Holly Hunter as Judith Moore, a freshly divorced and emotionally vulnerable woman with an penchant for day dreams, who strikes up an unlikely relationship with Pat Francato, a short, lonely doorman who is struggling with his own recent tragedies. These two very different individuals attempt to help each other heal and develop a sense of meaning to their lives, but lingering emotional baggage threatens to destroy their quest for a life filled with balance and clarity.

For some, Living out Loud will be a trying experience because it is far more of a character study than a plot driven film. Basically the screenplay gives us the basic predicaments that the two main characters are faced with and observes the behavior of these characters as they attempt to sort through the trials and tribulations of modern living in urban America. The story line, if there is such a thing in the film, is a meandering mess, with the viewer simply observing Hunter cruise through town and attempt to sort through her damaged past and attack her future with new resolve. Some of her attempts to start anew have a real sense of purpose and heart, such as her chance meeting with Pat, who is played by Danny Devito, in a rare dramatic turn. Their scenes together have a quiet yet affecting chemistry to them and the two characters develop a very interesting and even moving friendship. Less effective are various disjointed scenes which seem to exist only to show Judith trying to “find herself” or “heal”. These scenes include Judith getting an erotic massage from a chiseled hunk, and a ridiculous sequence where Judith drops some form of ecstasy and then winds up at a warehouse lesbian club where a sporadic and surreal dance number is staged and Judith ends up connecting with her former “self”. 

For all its narrative shortcomings, Living out Loud is still a worthwhile film for several reasons. First, the performances of Devito and Hunter are consistently excellent and they help keep the film moving forward despite the fact that there really isn’t a story line to push the action. Unfortunately, Hunter’s character, Judith, is really the only character who is allowed to have a full story arc, and is the only character who seems to really change throughout the film. Devito is not given enough screen time to give a completely realized performance. We don’t get a true sense of the man and what he hopes to get out of life. 

The film also provides an interesting and truthful depiction of just how frustrating life and relationships can truly be. The film treats its characters with respect but is unwavering in its depiction of how sad it can be when a major life event or relationship has come to an end and individuals are forced to start again. It is an excellent point to make and something that everyone needs to remember and respect. Life is full of hellos and goodbyes, of starts and ends. It is easy to despair if a particular aspect of life does not pan out, but it is never to late to strive again for true happiness.