I recently wrote my first official theatre review — even of a professional company, check it — for a new organization a friend of mine is starting up: the Utah Theater Bloggers Association. This is the text of that review, which is in response to Salt Lake Acting Company’s current production of Too Much Memory (show details are below). Anyway… Here is my review of the show…

As a theatre artist, one of the things that is most exciting to see is to see a blank stage. A blank space is a like a new day — it’s open to any kind of possibility, any range of story or action or happening. Kevin Myhre’s starkly simple set design for Too Much Memory at the Salt Lake Acting Company was no exception. For most of the play, the stage is literally blank, empty except for a few scattered chairs and cushions, and a few painted flats far upstage. While the audience was filtering in, the main square of playing space was being measured out, its edges outlined in orange spike tape. Cast members warmed up within view of the audience, chatting with each other and preparing for the show. Once the lights shifted and the performance began, all of the actors were within sight, even if they were not directly on stage: they all stood or sat just beyond the borders of the playing space. It was an instance of theatricality that told me that I was privileged; that I was about to witness something being created.

Too Much Memory is described as “an adaptation of an adaptation of a translation” of Sophocles’ classic tragedy Antigone. Director Meg Gibson (who co-wrote the play with Keith Reddin) keeps the action of the play taut and muscular; the familiar events happen at a brisk pace. There are moments when I wondered if things weren’t happening too fast (the entire play lasts just about seventy minutes) but the pace seems to be very much a part of how things are supposed to be. That the media, ubiquitous and supposedly hungry for truth, alters our sense of time and reality. Do the events of the play take place over several weeks, days, or mere hours? In this case, does it matter? I was reminded of Sophie Scholl, a young woman who spoke out against the Nazi regime only to be tried and executed for treason, all within a span of days. Like Sophie, Antigone wants to be heard, but her cries are hushed by the autocratic machine of her Uncle Creon’s government. Because things are happening so fast, everything is intense. This isn’t a weakness, not in the slightest; however, sometimes that intensity was overtaken by volume, and I could have done with a few more moments of quiet ferocity, particularly because such an intimate space invites it.

The play begins with an introduction to the cast by the Chorus (Lane Richins) a definite homage to the original Greek style. At first, I felt the Chorus’s asides were out of place; despite their “Greek-ness” the attempt to be conversational and familiar didn’t quite ring true. Richins is very open and affable in his performance; he speaks to the audience in modern English, going as far as to make references to Salt Lake City geography and the Book of Mormon. However, when we get to the scenes — the first being a fervent argument between Antigone and her sister Ismene — the characters speak with a heightened, almost poetic syntax. I knew right away that when Antigone spoke, I wanted to listen because she spoke eloquently, and with reasonable power. Despite Richins’ fine performance, I struggled with the necessity of the Chorus; he felt tacked on, trying to give a modern spin on a story that didn’t need a narrator and already had plenty of spin. I did enjoy his frankness concerning the play’s inevitable tragedy. Also, there is a late moment in the play, near to the climax, when the Chorus is suddenly sheathed in blue light and speaks, almost trancelike, in the same poetic language as the rest of the cast. It clicked for me, as if he was suddenly struck by the gravity of Antigone’s situation. While I can appreciate the attempt to bring the play not only to a contemporary time but directly to Salt Lake, I wished that same gravity could have been evident in the narration earlier on.

Antigone (Nicki Nixon) is in a spot of trouble. She has willfully broken a law that her Uncle Creon (Morgan Lund) has put in place: her dead brother, Polynieces, is a traitor and as such should have no proper burial. Antigone, under cover of night, goes to her brother’s body and covers him with handfuls of dirt. It’s an act not only of familial love and duty, but of protest against the war that killed him. Despite the advice of her older sister Ismene (Stefanie Londino) and her fiancé Haemon (Austin Archer) Antigone feels strongly that she is in the right and revisits her brother’s body a second time, only to be apprehended. What follows then is an intense tug-of-war between public and private, uncle and niece, politician and protester.

As Creon, Lund is by turns fatherly and tyrannical; his rich, full voice both warms and warns. Creon is not comfortable as the villain, though he acknowledges it as his role in things. He wants peace, and he wants his son Haemon to be happy; he knows the latter hinges on Antigone. At the same time, Nixon, making her SLAC debut as Antigone, is young but not naïve. Her choices are very calculated; is she burying her brother for his sake, or to make a charged political statement? I like the idea of Antigone as a schemer rather than a whiner, and Nixon stands up to Lund with tenacity, planting her feet and stating a cause rather than taking the easy road and playing petulance. Nixon’s performance is an intriguing mix of innocence and cleverness; she is definitely not a spoiled princess looking for something to do. One of the play’s most powerful scenes comes when Antigone learns of the manner of her impending death from soft-hearted soldier Jones (a charmingly awkward and relatable Justin Ivie), and the full weight of her actions breaks through the veneer of her partisan agenda. While I admired Antigone the martyr, I wanted to hug and comfort Antigone the child; I wanted to stand up and protect her somehow, though I knew I could not. The scene made my 33-year-old self feel old, inert, and helpless, which is, I think, the point. Well done.

Another memorable performance — and this production has many — was that of Teri Cowan as Creon’s wife Eurydice. She appears in only one scene, but she makes the most of it, giving Creon an earful about the way he is handling the Antigone situation. Eurydice’s break from her supposed silence is a welcome theatrical shift — we see the Chorus and other cast members react “offstage” with surprise. Cowan is regal in first lady purple, reminding her husband of all she has done to support him in his position of power, simultaneously reminding the audience that politicians — and their wives — are human beings, after all.

There are some lovely instances of theatricality within the play. One of the most effective is a love scene between Antigone and Haemon that results in their drawing a chalk outline of a body in the middle of the stage, that remains for the rest of the play. It could have any number of meanings — the lovers being one; the figure of Antigone’s slaughtered brother; the difficult position of the government — and that’s why its constant presence is so powerful. When that chalk outline is somewhat impassively washed away — when we as an audience are told to return to our world of actual lovers and murders and governments and realize that we are indeed inundated with too many ways to remember too many things — Well. Again, I wanted to interfere. I wanted to stand up and protest. Part of me wishes I had.

Too Much Memory plays through February 28: Wed/Thu at 7:30 PM, Fri/Sat/Sun at 8:00 PM, with an additional performance Sundays at 2:00 PM. Performances take place in The Upstairs Theatre of Salt Lake Acting Company, located at 168 West 500 North in Salt Lake City. Tickets are $22. For more information call (801) 363-7522 or reserve tickets online at SaltLakeActingCompany.org. Audiences should be aware that the production includes strong language.

The other night I had a dream that I swear is straight off the cutting room floor at LOST. Seriously. It was a dream, so I can’t recall all of the details, but here are the ones I can recall… Needless to say, I woke up all creeped out. It was great.

I’m in a small, enclosed room. It’s humid and dark. I reach out to run a hand along a wall, and my fingers brush unfinished wood. I can see faint light outside, shining between the planks. I look around the room; there are a few pieces of battered furniture and old papers are scattered on the floor.

There are three of us; a woman I don’t know, actually more of a girl, smaller than me and thin. Very thin. Then there’s me, and there’s Jack — I’m dreaming of Matthew Fox. Huh. But it is him, standing there in his seven o’clock shadow and stained T-shirt and cargo pants, rustling through the papers on the floor.

I have a strong sensation that we are not alone in the room. I turn in a slow circle, and see no one but the girl and Jack.

Something catches my attention in a corner, and I go to take a closer look. Pushed up against the wall and partially hidden by the height of the nearby desk is a chest, covered in stretched leather and adorned with tarnished brass fittings. It’s maybe a square foot in diameter, and it’s seen better days. I wonder what’s in it, so I open the lid, which creaks. It’s a dream, so I can’t recall what was in the box. Gold? Frankincense? Myrrh? It’s fuzzy to my dream eyes, but I have the distinct feeling that the contents are pretty amazing, whatever they are. So I take out my phone to take a picture.

Though Jack and the nameless girl have gone outside, I know I’m not alone. I turn again and I see someone run, very fast, through the periphery of my vision. I try to follow him or her, but have no luck.

I step outside, barefoot in the twilight and the grass. Jack’s got a shovel and is digging at the corner of the building. I look at where Jack is digging. There, at the corner, is a cluster of gravestones, old and dark and lichen-covered. The one nearest to us is mossy green in color — the lichen, or the stone, I can’t tell — and three stone frogs cling to a stone vine that crawls up the side of the marker and over its top.

I approach him, to show him the photo. I hold out the phone, and he and I both look. The view of the chest is obscured by a small child, a towheaded boy who was not there before, looking straight up at me with empty eyes. Jack and I both jump. And I wake up. And — yikes.

If you are round about the theatre department at either UVU or BYU, you will likely see one of these in the next few days:

It’s very possible you’ve already seen it on Facebook or Twitter. Do I regret this? No. Am I sorry? No. Do I want you to come, and to tell all your potentially actor-minded buddies? Why, yes indeedy, I do!

(Also, I think it turned out rather pretty, so there is that.)

So there’s been a lot of buzz lately about a certain film featuring CGI blue-skinned peeps battling against the American imperialist machine. You may have heard of this little film: the well-named Avatar.

I saw it a few weeks back, in 3D IMAX, which is apparently the only way to see it. I didn’t dig it. I could go into vast detail here, but the arguments are all out and floating about. I can admire and acknowledge that the film is a technological achievement, yes. Kudos to director James Cameron for successfully making a boatload of money (no pun intended). That being said, I didn’t dig the film. The writing did nothing for me, and I personally want the 3D fad to go away. That’s all I’m going to say about that. If people like it — and man, do people like it — then, you know, great for them.

But now I’m going to get up on a soapbox that is getting to be all too familiar for me. The interesting thing about so many people loving and adoring Avatar is not necessarily that they do — it’s how brassed they get at people (like me) who don’t like it. Message boards, Facebook posts, blog entries — they all say basically the same thing: If you don’t like Avatar, something is wrong with you. You’re emotionally stunted. My favorite at the moment: If you don’t like Avatar, you’re heartless. Wow. Wow.

I had no idea that a person’s emotional worth could come down to something as trivial and subjective as their opinion about a work of art. That’s amazing to me. Mindblowing,even. Perhaps it depends on the work of art, but still. Seriously? As a filmmaker, am I heartless because I don’t like a film other people like? Huh. To think, where have I been? Thinking art is subjective, that the point is to touch the people you can touch because there’s no way you can please everyone. To think I live in a country where we’re all about freedom and expressing our opinions, and that people can like what they like… That’s me being naïve. Of course you can like what you like; how else can people judge how emotionally unhinged you are?

Why do people insist on absolutes? Aren’t they just boring? Aren’t stories interesting because they’re complex, because characters are complex? Aren’t we as human beings too emotionally deep and illogical to come on all on one side and not on another? Isn’t that what makes us fundamentally human?

The irony of this particular conversation is that I have no problem with people liking Avatar; go for it. Like it, eat it up. If it affected you emotionally, then great! That’s what art does, right? I may not like the film, but I can’t deny that it’s successful. However, when my taste is called into question — not just my taste, but my emotional stability — something’s wrong with that picture. The irony being that it’s rather heartless and emotionally stunted of people to claim to know anything about me based on one educated opinion. Problem is that we do this, all of us, all the time.

Saturday night I saw an Austrian film, Lourdes, at Sundance. It’s a quiet contemplation on miracles and faith. Can a miracle occur? If it does, how long does it last? If it doesn’t last, was it never a miracle to begin with? Are only perfectly pious people able to be miraculously healed? Is a miracle only a miracle if it’s officially recognized by a religious organization?

The film was quite lovely, and had some very surprising comic moments. Thought the filmmakers are Austrian, the film was shot in France and the language spoken in it is French. Like Avatar, the film’s protagonist is a young person confined to a wheelchair who, as a result of some kind of miracle, is able to walk.

I felt that the characters portrayed where very real people, dealing with very real questions of faith. “Why should So and So get healed instead of So and So?” Why was I able to get up this morning when others in the world were not? Why was Haiti devastated by a natural disaster instead of some other country?

One of our faults as human beings is that I think we often ask the wrong questions. Do we need to know why Port-au-Prince is ruins? Shouldn’t we just be thinking about ways to help, though we’re far removed from the tragedy? What makes a miracle a miracle is not the fact that we know why — it’s that it happened in the first place. Trying to explain it away, trying to overanalyze its moving parts — that’s where we get mired. Trying to define the undefinable, to explain the inexplicable.

But some people seem to yearn for absolutes. Black and white are absolutes, aren’t they? Right and wrong. Night and day. Good and evil. Alive and dead. Coke and Pepsi.

I’ve been intrigued by miracles for a good part of my writing career, if not my life. I like to ponder questions not necessarily of why miracles happen, but how they happen, and what the lasting impact of a miracle ends up being. I guess I like that not even a miracle taking place is enough to say that it took place: people have to believe that it happened. That’s a whole ‘nother kind of mystery, and I find it fascinating. Anyway.

So tonight, watching the Golden Globes, I found myself wondering if I could make random people in the world uncharacteristically angry by giving grandiose awards to movies and movie stars I like rather than the ones they like… Hmm. It gave me pause. At the end of the telecast, when Ricky Gervais was looking rather brassed (take it to mean pissed or drunk; perhaps a combination of the two) and Avatar had just been named the Best Motion Picture Drama, I drafted a tweet and sent it off:

@young_victoria Maybe I should start my own award show. I shall send Emily Blunt a box of Junior Mints with a card that says “YOU ROCK.”

And I thought, “Maybe I should start my own award show.” I mean, I’m opinionated, right? I get passionate about the things that I like. The problem is I can’t afford to give out fancy little golden statuettes; not even just one. Silly little student loans. So a box of Junior Mints (something I love nearly as much as I love Emily Blunt) seems both appropriate and practical.

Now, naturally, these awards are biased in a number of ways: for starts, I can only nominate things and performances I’ve seen. And that shorter-than-people-living-in-L.A.-or-N.Y.C. list gets shorter because there are things I’ve seen this year that I don’t like. Also, the categories are probably random and ridiculous… but this is my blog, right? So I can be random and ridiculous all I like. Ta frakking da. Without further ado to say much about…

MEL’S YOU ROCK SO MUCH HERE’RE SOME JUNIOR MINTS AWARDS:

Favorite actress in a bio-drama: Meryl Streep in Julie & Julia.

Favorite actress in a bio-drama that isn’t Meryl Streep: Emily Blunt in Young Victoria.

Favorite actress in TV series that I miss because it was unjustly cancelled several years back: Amanda Peet in Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.

Favorite Joss Whedon show currently getting cancelled by Fox: Dollhouse.

Favorite Joss Whedon show ever cancelled by Fox: Firefly.

Favorite comic book that will get made into a bad movie because Joss Whedon walked away due to creative differences with the producers: Wonder Woman.

New comedy I’m looking forward to checking out online because I haven’t had a chance to keep up: Better Off Ted.

Favorite actor who never seems to get any award love though his show wins everything: Jon Hamm in Mad Men.

Favorite fictional U.S. President: Josiah Bartlett (Martin Sheen) from The West Wing.

Most underrated film composer: Thomas Newman. Little Women, Finding Nemo, American Beauty, Road to Perdition… The list goes on and on, and yet he’s yet to win an Oscar. I can listen to Little Women over and and over. I was really glad to see Michael Giacchino (sp?) win for his tearjerking score (Up), but where’s the love for Mr. Newman?

Most deserving studio when it comes to all the awards and moolah it wins: Pixar.

Best impression of a jelly fish by an actress at the Golden Globes: Chloë Sevigny.

Best award show host: Neil Patrick Harris.

Anyway, this is a pretty ridiculous entry, and those awards are all very random… Maybe I will try to set something more formal up next year. Anybody have any additions you’d like to make? You don’t get to dis my choices, BTW, or my taste. Well, I guess you can — just no Junior Mints for you. Ha.

melissa leilani larson.

playwright, screenwriter, and sexy intellectual...

my life — in tweets

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

mel’s archives

Blog Stats

  • 885 hits