TO Fringe Review: Georgia and Leona & This is About the Push

Posted on by Brian in Fringe, Reviews, Theatre | Leave a comment

Funny how your opinion of one show can be changed by seeing another one. I came out of Georgia and Leona thinking it deserved a pretty solid 4-rating. Then I saw This is About the Push and actually changed my mind.

I liked both these shows, though. Georgia and Leona is a show of two separate monologues taking turns on stage. The first is that of Georgia (on the left in the promo photo above), who is inspired by a visit from her old friend Donna and the news that Donna has suddenly gotten married to reminisce about the past between them. The second is that of Leona, who, on the occasion of the second anniversary of the death of her friend Carl, was given a stack of old letters he wrote.

The two don’t interact at all, but there is a sort of kinship between them you can feel. Occasionally they’ll repeat bits of dialogue that the other has said. Both have become isolated by their pasts to some extent, Georgia emotionally so from growing up an orphan and her desire for a simple, stable life, Leona physically after her friend’s death shocked her into quitting her job and moving to a remote country home. Their stories are both pretty poignant on the subjects of friendship and love, and both actresses, Misha Bower and Lara Mrkoci (also the playwright and director, respectively), do a great job with their roles.

I did, however, experience a bit of a lull in the middle; clocking in at 75 minutes (note: not the 90 minutes your Fringe program states), it’s hard to keep an audience at rapt attention throughout in a show that’s lacking a bit in serious dramatic tension. Maybe it was that this was the middle of the afternoon and my third show of a six-show day, but my mind wandered more than a little in the middle of this show before coming back for the bittersweet conclusion.

The biggest reason I bumped that show down from a rating of 4 was because the show I saw right afterwards, This is About the Push, seemed to pack as much interesting storytelling into a play that’s half as long.

This is About the Push is sort of a deconstruction of an office pool party from the perspective of the wife of a recently-promoted low-level manager. It has that sort of 50’s Mad Men vibe that a lot of people seem to be suddenly nostalgic about nowadays, but Push uses it to good effect. Three women are discussing this party afterwards, and all the things that seemed innocent to the lead start to look rather sleazy and improper in retrospect. Kimwun Perehinec’s unnamed protagonist is questioned ruthlessly by two other unnamed characters, played by Jennifer Villeverde and Naomi Wright, who also take turns playing various roles of other male and female guests at the party.

All the women gossip and talk about how important their husbands are, while the men are all closed-off and business-like. The protagonist continues to insist that everyone was so nice and nothing bad happened, even as the story unfolds of how the big boss paid her a little more attention than appropriate, and how once the children went inside and the women all stripped down to jump in the pool the rest of the party went out of their way to make her look foolish and things took a bit of a sexual harassment-sort of turn. For the sake of “the push” for her husband’s career, though, no one really wants to talk about that. The way that everyone in the show repeatedly speak in platitudes about everything and everyone being “nice” and “lovely,” with no one saying what they really think, is almost haunting.

The show is pretty up my alley as someone who likes a careful consideration of what’s been said and strategizes about how to get messages across as part of my job and education, and at 35 minutes this was by far the shortest show so far on my Fringe schedule, a definite plus on a six-show day. This is to say that my rating might be a bit inflated for those reasons. Still, This is About the Push is one of my favourites of Fringe so far, and as this is a workshop production of part one of what will eventually be a three-parter, I’m certainly interested in the next two parts.

TO Fringe Review: Carnegie Hall Show! & S&P and Sega Geniuses Vs. The World

Posted on by Brian in Everything, Fringe, Reviews, Theatre | 1 Comment

photo courtesy the National Theatre of the World website

Let it be known that I think good improv is a really tough thing to do. I admire people who attempt it. It’s great fun when it’s successful, and it’s kind of painful when things aren’t clicking.

It’s tough to review too, since it’s so different from one night to the next. I really like the Carnegie Hall Show. I didn’t like S & P and Sega Geniuses Vs. The World much. Your results might differ entirely.

First, the good: the Carnegie Hall Show, put on by locals The National Theatre of the World, is a good show with a lot of laughs. They’ve been doing this show on a weekly basis for something like a year and a half now, so the chemistry between the performers is top-notch. Noon on a Saturday isn’t the easiest time slot to fill, but after a funny song from “Billable Hours” star Brandon Firla (having local actors sing in their show seems to be one of the show’s schticks this Fringe) and a declaration from Ron Pederson that he was already drunk, they were off.

The first half of the show, the premise being a “retrospective of the greatest ever improvised scenes” on a particular subject, was a bit scattered; the topic taken from the crowd was sunscreen, kind of a tough one to get into, but the cast certainly tried, tossing out scenes of the origins of sunscreen from Roman times when “Romulus and Remus were battling Ramses” for control of Rome and trotting out commercial ideas. The second half, a “radio show” improv with a title of “Theatre of Crickets” sponsored by “Johnson’s boar loin,” also taken from audience suggestions, was funnier. Chris Gibbs stood out as particularly good throughout, though fellow cast members Naomi Snieckus, Matt Baram and Pederson all had inspired moments as well. I highlighted this show as one to see before the festival and was not disappointed.

S & P and the Sega Geniuses are two separate local improv groups. The premise was that each troupe would take half of the hour long show, and they each spoke to an audience member before their set for ideas. The two women who were interviewed talked about what they did for a living, what they liked to do on a date, etc., and theoretically the improv was to flow from that.

However, after an hour of random, scattered scenes I was perplexed. The interviews did provide a lot of material, but neither group really seemed to draw much inspiration from them. The first lady they spoke to was genuinely a bit odd; it somehow came up that she didn’t like to eat with her bare hands, and went to great lengths to explain that while she worked for a design studio, she wasn’t a designer. This led to S & P’s funniest line, when one of the performers stated that he worked in a restaurant, but wasn’t a restauranteur. However, the all-male group seemed to think it was funnier to have two of them pretending to make out on stage, run a few scenes on tired cliches about relationships, and inexplicably have some dull characters in an office scene who mostly just said “all right” and “ok” in moronic voices find a portal to another dimension, which really went nowhere.

Sega Geniuses managed to do a little better with their material, which came from a woman who worked a dull office job to support her real passion of stage managing and didn’t like her roommate’s boyfriend. Still, there weren’t a whole lot of laughs to be had, and the last scene when they decided they were doing a production of Oliver Twist, despite the “director” appearing to not know any scenes from Oliver Twist, dissolved into some mild jokes about the lead being a paraplegic and loudly declaring “I’m EQUITY!” Again, there was probably some good material to explore from the interviewee, but it didn’t really shine through in the improv. I wonder if the two groups were a bit worried about offending the two people they interviewed; it’s one thing to take abstract suggestions from the audience in improv, but it would be hard to take specific things from an audience volunteer and make people laugh at them without being mean.

TO Jazz Review: Xylopholks, July 3, HMV

Posted on by Paul in Concerts, Toronto Jazz Festival | 2 Comments

Toronto – This was one of the more surreal concert experiences I’ve seen in my time … and the fact that the performers were wearing funny animal suits was one of the less bizarre parts of the afternoon.  First off, the venue itself was strange and they knew it – playing in the corner of a music retailer behind a big Clint Eastwood poster is a bit weird, but to their credit, Xylopholks just rolled with it and enjoyed it.  Laughing between songs, talking to the crowd as they passed in and out during their set (“Is that bubble tea?”  “Ice Cream?  That’s a much better idea than what we’re doing”) and wondering whether it was OK to sell their own EP while playing inside a place that sells music, these guys were having fun and it showed.  And they’re  pretty good musicians too.

Xylopholks play songs from the 1920s ragtime repertoire (as well as a brief snippet of the Inspector Gadget theme) … and yes, they do so while wearing animal costumes.  If you don’t know how to differentiate 1920s ragtime from other forms of music, perhaps Seymour from Ghost World can help you with that.

It was fun, often fast paced, and at times reminded me of the music from the old Looney Tunes cartoons.  I ran into Mark during their set and we both agreed it was pretty good.  But by talking while they played, were we committing concert douchebaggery? Or do those rules fly out the window when the band is playing in front of a display of Star Trek: The Next Generation boxed sets?

Based on their style of performance and various Youtube videos, it seems these guys operate primarily as buskers, which works well for them (other than the fact that they must have been sweating profusely inside those costumes).  Various people stopped by to check them out, some only for a minute or less, but all of them seemed to leave with a smile on their face.

TO Jazz Review: Keith Jarrett, June 30, Four Seasons

Posted on by Mark in Concerts, Toronto Jazz Festival | 3 Comments

Toronto – There are a few ways for a musician to be successful in this world. Some artists strive to keep music a personal journey. Most take this path with the understanding that they won’t be the next U2 or Lady Gaga. Their creativity remains intact, but often at the expense of commercial success. On the other end of the spectrum, there are musicians that have learned how to cater to the wants and needs of the masses. Good examples of this camp include U2 and Lady Gaga. They’ve developed the necessary skills to create music that people like, and to those individuals, the riches flow.

However, it is possible to walk the line between being a commercially successful artist, and one that still commands the respect of their peers. It’s a rare bird that can garner fame, fortune, and be a source of musical inspiration. Keith Jarrett is one of those birds. His solo performance in 1975 entitled The Köln Concert is the best selling piano recording in history; it also established him as juggernaut on the musical landscape. His mastery of both classical and jazz music has allowed him to travel to places mere mortals only dream about. He is universally and uniquely respected in the jazz community and is one of the most celebrated pianists in the world.

“I know the tickets were expensive. But tonight, money doesn’t matter” [overheard from concert goer]

Keith and his trio played the Four Seasons Centre last Wednesday as part of the jazz festival Grandmaster Series. Its a fitting title, because Keith truly is the grand daddy of living grandmasters. When he came out on stage and began to play, the entire crowd was pin drop silent. When Keith Jarrett sits down in front of grand piano, there’s no longer any doubt that you’re standing in the presence of someone truly brilliant. Fans know that with this particular brilliance comes some idiosyncrasy; Keith is well known for throwing the occasional tantrum. The Keith Jarrett moment at this concert involved stopping one piece because a single note sounded to him like it was yelling “help!” During intermission they swapped out the piano with a replacement.

I chatted with a gentleman who had seen Keith play years ago and felt that the music they now produce is more edited, a little more restrained, and a little more refined. In addition to technical mastery and an unparalleled understanding of the piano, Keith plays with a raw passion that is inspiring to see. He grunts, and groans as he carves out melodies in such a genuine display of emotion that it’s hard not to get lost in it all. The way to listen to Keith Jarrett live is to try not to analyse the technical mastery, but just feel the emotion. I honestly don’t know where I was for most of this concert.

If there was one thing that was a bit underwhelming, it was seeing the empty seats at the Four Seasons. Keith Jarrett commands a rather hefty price tag. The cheapest seats were $50, at the very top of the hall, and sold out ages ago. Move slightly closer and you pay $90 and even these seats were sold out some time ago. But the vast majority of the tickets in the hall rang in just shy of $140. This kept the crowd limited to the truly comitted. I just wish that the barrier of entry to seeing such a fantastic musician wasn’t so fantastically high.

Highlights of the evening included the three encores Keith played. The crowd was incredibly charged after the set. It was satisfying to see Keith, after coming out to bow a few times, rub his hands together, nod to let us know the he’ll play a little more, and walk back towards his piano. His first encore was particularly charged with some sophisticated blues and an amazing groove. The rest was tasteful and sweet.

Inspired.