Quantcast
Channel: LONDON CITY NIGHTS
Viewing all 883 articles
Browse latest View live

'Fruitvale Station' (2013) directed by Ryan Coogler

$
0
0

In grainy iPhone footage we watch cops wrestle a handcuffed man to the ground and shoot him in the back. The camera wobbles as the crowd lets out a collective gasp of disbelief. This is the murder of Oscar Grant III, a young black man shot dead by a cop early on New Years Day 2009. The release of this footage on Youtube led to protests and riots, the execution serving as a catalyst for years of seething resentment against institutionally racist police officers. 

In developments which won't come as a surprise to any Londoner, the BART police immediately threw up a smokescreen of misinformation, claiming that Grant was trying to assault them, that officers risked being "bruised" by him, and of course it logically follows then that on some level he deserved to be executed in cold blood. Eventually, after successfully arguing that he merely intended to taser Grant and grabbed the wrong weapon, the cop in question was convicted (by an all white jury) of the lesser crime involuntary manslaughter, spending just 11 months in prison before being released on parole.

How much is the life of a young black man worth in the USA?  By the looks of things, not much. The 22 year old Oscar Grant worked a series of low paid, menial jobs, had a young child by his girlfriend and had served a prison sentence for small time drug dealing; a depressingly familiar blueprint for the urban working class. What Fruitvale Station sets out to do is explain exactly why a life like Grant's is important, and underline the tragedy of the killing of the common man.

That Grant simply had the misfortune to be in front of the wrong cop at the wrong time means his story is necessarily mundane; Coogler repeatedly underlining the notion that Oscar Grant could be any young black man in California.  This means that much of the film is consciously down-to-earth - a domestic existence free of melodrama and narrative.  It takes some courage to make a film that, at times, is consciously boring, but crucially this is boring with a point.  

Even boring with a point can still try your patience on occasion, but fortunately Coogler has a great lead actor in Michael B. Jordan.  This is a multi-layered performance with a number of things going on at once.  First and foremost, Jordan has to make Grant into a sympathetic figure.  It's not enough to simply tell us how much his family cares for him and expect us to follow, the character has to earn the audience's respect.  Jordan does this by showing us a man in deep self reflection; we can almost see the cogs turning inside his head as he analyses what's wrong with his life and tries to figure out how he can pull himself out of his rut.  More prosaically, Fruitvale Station also shows us tiny, simple acts of kindness from Grant; helping out a woman with a fish fry recipe in a supermarket, successfully negotiating the use of a bathroom for a pregnant woman or cradling a dying dog in the street.

It'd be disingenuous for the film to hang a halo on Grant's head, presenting him as some innocent lamb being led to the slaughter, so we also see his less attractive side.  But here, most notably in a powerful flashback to his mother visiting him in prison, we see the violence in his life as a symptom of social infantilisation.  Discrimination and economic torpor all combine to subtly remind Grant that he is worth less to society than most.

For the most part the film sticks with this low-key, consciously aimless urban drama, spending a pleasant day with Grant as he arranges his mother's birthday party and carries out various domestic chores.  From an audience perspective though, the passing of time over this casually normal day is tinged with impending disaster.  Having opened with footage his death, we know that every step Grant takes moves him closer to his grave.  As we see the pieces begin to fall into place; the tiny decisions being made that will ensure his death we feel a dreadful gravity sucking us down; a chaotic whirlpool with Grant's bloody body dead centre.


When the final turns of the screw are being tightened it's almost unbearable and in a flash the night transforms.  The editing picks up pace as we close in on the bestial faces of spit-flecked cop chins as they bark "nigger" at their captives.  In their dead eyes we see no flash of humanity: as they force the men's faces down into the concrete there's only the dull boredom of routine.  These are men who speak in a vocabulary of brutality; they converse with the slap across the jaw, the punch to the guts, the grinding of teeth against rough asphalt.  This is sadism on autopilot, guided largely by muscle memory.  It's only when the gunshot goes off that they finally remember they are dealing with a human being, the whipcrack echo jolting them out of their programmed modes of dealing with black men.  As if seeing Grant for the first time they try to comfort him, rubbing salt into Grant's wounds - the tragedy of a man dying while staring into the apologetic eyes of his oppressors.

Fruitvale Station is undoubtedly propagandist.  It's an angry, personal film about the victimisation and discrimination of young black men, crystallised around the short, abruptly and unjustly terminated life of Oscar Grant.  Undoubtedly it warps the truth - I have no idea if the actual Oscar Grant bore any resemblance to Williams' portrayal of him - but these crticism are essentially pointless. The police oppress, harass and sometimes kill black man, and they often get away with it.  In these times well-made, smart and conscientious propaganda like Fruitvale Station isn't only correct, it's necessary.
★★★★ 

Edge of Tomorrow is on general release from May 30th.
- See more at: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2014/05/edge-of-tomorrow-2014-directed-by-doug.html#sthash.pEKJ80Qu.dpuf


★★★★ 

Fruitvale Station is on general release from June 6th
★★★★ 

Edge of Tomorrow is on general release from May 30th.
- See more at: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2014/05/edge-of-tomorrow-2014-directed-by-doug.html#sthash.pEKJ80Qu.dpuf
★★★★ 

Edge of Tomorrow is on general release from May 30th.
- See more at: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2014/05/edge-of-tomorrow-2014-directed-by-doug.html#sthash.pEKJ80Qu.dpuf
★★★★ 

Edge of Tomorrow is on general release from May 30th.
- See more at: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2014/05/edge-of-tomorrow-2014-directed-by-doug.html#sthash.pEKJ80Qu.dpuf
★★★★ 

Edge of Tomorrow is on general release from May 30th.
- See more at: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2014/05/edge-of-tomorrow-2014-directed-by-doug.html#sthash.pEKJ80Qu.dpuf
★★★★ 

Edge of Tomorrow is on general release from May 30th.
- See more at: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2014/05/edge-of-tomorrow-2014-directed-by-doug.html#sthash.pEKJ80Qu.dpu

'Jimmy's Hall' (2014) directed by Ken Loach

$
0
0

"Ken Loach doesn’t think very much of me. In a broadside against critics, he described us as “the kind of people who live in darkened rooms” and who don’t “engage in political struggle in the real world.” Well, nuts to you Ken Loach, maybe your invective applies to the toads that squat in The Daily Mail newsroom, or the snooty crypto fascists of the Express, Star etc. but not to me. And what’s more Ken, I really enjoyed your film for (I think) the precise reasons you intended."


★★★★

'Hamlet' at Riverside Studios, 31st May 2014

$
0
0

For a play about an indecisive loser whose half-baked plans get everyone killed, William Shakespeare's Hamletis actually pretty good.  It's my favourite Shakespeare - which is perhaps a bit of a cliched choice - but I've always felt Hamlet is as incisive in 2014 as it was in 1614.  Jealousy, anger, lust and guilt are part of the universal human condition, all fully realised in the sympathetic character of Hamlet.  Who can't sympathise with putting off an important project as long as feasibly possible, hurting people you care about with casual lies or just straight-up being a bit dippy, morose and self obsessed?

It's this relatable psychology that makes Hamlet so malleable.  From slight tweaks like Kenneth Branagh's 19th century imperial splendour in his 1996 adaptation, to wholesale modernisations like Michael Almereyda's 2000 contemporary reworking with Kyle MacLachlan as Claudius, CEO of The Denmark Corporation (also featuring Bill Murray as Polonius!) to the most popular modern take on the material: Disney's The Lion King.  Here, in Zoé Ford's adaptation, Elsinore becomes Her Majesty's Prison Liverpool.  Claudius is the warden, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are snitches and Hamlet himself is an inmate, the show opening with his graphic strip-search.

Oftentimes a Shakespeare production can become unstuck when it tries to crowbar the material into a particular setting, and I had my doubts that Hamlet would even make sense within a prison.  After all, Hamlet is a Prince and much of the narrative is predicated on him being able to move through the castle as he wishes.  His position also allows his increasingly bizarre behaviour to be tolerated by those around him.  How can this work when he's confined to a cell at the lowest rung of the social ladder?

When Hamlet gets really angry his hair goes a bit 1990s.
 Ford's clever solution is just to hand wave most of these problems away.  The prison setting thus becomes more about tone than location; the adaptation underlining the play's pent-up masculinity, homoeroticism and authoritarian misery.  This is conveyed by an impressively minimalist set.  The stage at the Riverside Theatre is wide and shallow, the stage walls painted in institutional two-tone with exposed electrical transformers powering the lighting rig.  Locations are delineated by three barred walls on wheels, moved around to create cells, corridors and offices.  This, combined with the high contrast lighting that throws chiaroscuro shadows over the actor's faces makes for a pressure cooker environment; a place where the bloody violence of Hamlet's final scenes feels even more inevitable than usual.

And boy oh boy is this a violent Hamlet.  In place of mannered, balletic rapiers duels these characters have brawny, visceral shiv fights.  When Hamlet duels with Laertes it's a bare-knuckle boxing match where elbows smash teeth from gums, blood streams from swollen cuts and bones are brutally shattered.  There's a protracted beating dished out by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern that's painfully drawn out, a symphony of thumping body blows and cries of pain.  In less capable hands this might all feel a bit gratuitous - a way to make Shakespeare 'cool' for the kids - but within the prison setting it feels appropriate, the caveman barbarism contrasting neatly with the flowery language.

Another weapon in Ford's arsenal is the frequent slippage of the Shakespearian 'mask'.  Characters frequently switch in tone between Shakespearian iambic pentameter and a casual, Alan Clarkish naturalism.  For example, during the 'play-within-a-play', the actors bicker at each other like teenagers stuck in a GCSE English lesson ,squabbling about whether kissing each other is 'gay' or not.  Similarly, the actors often slip out of the prose to make asides to each other "don't fuckin' look at me like that mate"or "I'll fuckin' av' you".  This, coupled with the nasal Scouser accent, gives Shakespeare's wordy tangled prose a vaguely Brechtian artificiality (something highlighted when the fire exit is thrown open and Hamlet briefly walks out onto a humid Hammersmith street).

You have to fight the urge to shout out "Get 'im Hamlet!"
Adam Lawrence's Hamlet is a sweatily intense nutter, muscles bulging from within a wifebeater and hair loosely slicked back over his head.  Lawrence's approach is to play up the weird discontinuity between the depressive/suicidal soliloquys and the hyper-masculine alpha posturing.  The sense that Hamlet is playing a role is a vital component of the play, Lawrence's disconnect between his actions and his internal monologue making him seem vulnerable and sympathetic even as he puts his knee through a someone's jaw.  Textually Hamlet is pretending to be mad, but Lawrence's Hamlet plays up actual madness - the actor maniacally pacing about the stage with bulging eyes, compulsively slicking back his hair and, at one point, bursting randomly into a snatch of Joy Division's Transmission.

Any Shakespeare adaptation that manages to sneak in Joy Division is okay in my book, but Ford's Hamlet impresses throughout. It's not perfect mind you, Gertrude is relegated to staring in mild consternation and I was never quite sure what Ophelia was supposed to be doing in the prison, but then the focus of this Hamlet is masculinity and violence. So, while unfortunate, it's at least understandable why femininity has been sidelined here.

This could so easily have been an enormous embarrassment: a bunch of high-falutin' public school boys playing at proletariat aggression, but Ford's production emanates an oppressive sense of menace that succeeds in not only breathing life into dusty prose but actually making it feel unpredictable.  Considering that Hamlet is a play everyone knows inside and out that's no small achievement - well worth checking out.

Hamlet is at Riverside Studios, Hammersmith:
Wednesday 28 May to Saturday 21 June at 7.30pm
Sunday 22 June at 5.00pm

TICKETS: £16 (£14 concs.)

'Cheap Thrills' (2013) directed by E. L. Katz

$
0
0

 We may want to be luminous beings but we're in the end we're just greedy beasts with simple needs.  To fill these needs; be they food, shelter or the latest fancy piece of consumer electronics requires money; and you're going to have to debase yourself in way or another to get it.  Whether you're biting your tongue and saying "Yes boss"to a bullying superior, giving a dead-eyed rictus smile to a moronic customer or feeling like a piece of shit on a shoe as you just ask for some from someone.  Money makes whores of us all, and it's this simple concept that Cheap Thrills builds on. How far would you go to fill their wallet?

Craig (Pat Healy) is a typical middle-class failure. Beginning with grand designs on being a writer, he realised tapping a keyboard doesn't pay the bills and has been (in his eyes) reduced to blue collar labour as a mechanic.  And now he's even been sacked from that.  Unbeknowst to his beautiful wife and newborn son the overdue bills are stacking up - and pinned to the front door of his crummy flat is an eviction notice.  Setting out to sink his sorrows in a dive bar he runs into Vince (Ethan Embry) an old school friend.  As the two men reminisce and commiserate with each other, they catch the eye of Colin and Violet (David Koechner and Sara Paxton).

Colin is an obnoxious middle-aged bro-type in a ridiculous porkpie hat that marks him out as a tosser the second he sets foot on screen.  Violet is a largely silent blonde beauty with the grace and demeanour of a praying mantis.  The two toss around dollar bills like confetti, casually bribing the barmaid so they can snort coke at their table and ordering tequila by the bottle.  Like moths to the flame Craig and Vince are drawn into their orbit, and a little betting game soon develops; $20 to the first person who'll down their shot. $50 to anyone that can make a woman slap them. $100 if you'll punch that bouncer in the face!  This is the structure of the rest of the film; and as the amounts of cash increase so to do the extreme acts needed to earn it, the characters spiralling haplessly into a bottomless whirlpool of crime, kinky sex and self-mutilation.

Cheap Thrills is a jet black comedy that splits audience sensibilities right down the middle.  One on hand these characters are somewhat sympathic, particularly Craig, who just wants to stop his family being evicted.  Even though he's a bit pathetic it's difficult not to identify with his situation, and part of you hopes he'll just get the hell out of there and leave these sharks behind.  On the other hand, the sadistic side of you wants to see how far this poor bastard will go for a couple of bucks.  As his quivering hand raises a blade to his own flesh we find ourselves silently willing him to gouge away, purely because it'll make for a more interesting movie.

The consequences of these bloodthirsty urges are that the audience finds themselves aligned with the rich couple egging them on.  This is a queasy feeling; these people are obviously evil and yet their humiliation game is amusing us as much as it is them.  That the film can effortlessly create this disjunct between what we'd like to feel and what we actually feel goes some way to raising it above your average gross out gore film.  Cheap Thrills is a movie with a social conscience, one that takes the question of how far desperate people will go for money to its grisly conclusion.

It's most obviously politically aware when it's delineating the class divides between the characters.  Craig obviously considers himself to be a temporarily embarrassed successful person, full of shame for squandering his education and presumed writing talent.  Vince, meanwhile, is more firmly working class.  He's a hedonistic waster, apparently working as a small-time debt collector for loan sharks.  Both can detect that, despite their past friendship, the two are operating in different class spheres, a sensation that causes ever more frictions.

Throwing that into sharp relief is the tasteless extravagance of Colin and Violet.  They're so stratospherically richer than both men that, from his perspective, they're socially identical.  They may as well be two ants bickering on an anthill as far as he's concerned.  What this results in is a microcosmic example of divide and rule, two working class men scrabbling for crumbs while the rich man peers down at them with amusement, totally safe from any repercussions.

Underneath all the blood, screaming and shit, Cheap Thrills is a rather straightforward economic allegory; something that quietly nudges us to remember our basic dignity when it comes to providing for ourselves and our families.  After all, what use is luxury if capitalism has rendered you numb, hollow-eyed and scarred: a shell where a human being used to be?

Katz has created a film that's the best of both worlds; successfully combining a punkish low-budget exploitation aesthetic with some high-falutin' ideas.  At times it's cringeingly disgusting watch, but it's solidly competent film-making with rock-solid performances from the leads.  It's probably not for everyone, but this is a great example of how to infuse low-budget schlock with politics without getting too preachy.  A nice surprise that's on the verge of being a hidden gem.

★★★★

Cheap Thrills is released June 6th.
★★★★

American Interior is released 9th May 2013

CEREBELLUM at The Macbeth, 3rd June 2014

$
0
0

Lately I've been on the outs with performance art.  The thrill of experiencing someone translating meaning into movement, sound and interaction has been deadened due to overexposure.  All too often there's the sense that these performances take place in a hermetically sealed box.  Artists perform to audiences of artists, everyone smiles and says "well done" and "won't you come to my next performance?" rinse, repeat, nothing is achieved.  There comes a time when you seriously wonder what the purpose of all this abstraction is.  Is it performance as a bicycle pump for the ego?  Is it a public form of therapy for the artist?  Worst of all, is it merely just a way to kill some time?

I believe art should aim to change the world.  It's not that I expect every performance to kick off a coup d'état, but at least there should be a fresh flickering of neurons within the brains of the audience.  Hitherto unconnected concepts become entangled with human motions, sound and music are linked to fresh visuals; mental metaphors spring to life within the flailing limbs of the participants.  I want art as electro-shock therapy, a jab to the brains of the audience that encourages them to evaluate their own behaviour in terms of what they see an artist accomplish.

This whirl of ideas has been clumsily spinning around in my head for a couple of days, so it was with some reservations that I headed off to The Macbeth for CEREBELLUM.  After all,  the last thing I want to do is show up and be a full on Negative Nancy.  Hoping to stave off any possible criticism I could have of the audience being the same old 10 or 12 East London performance art vets, I also brought a load of friends along with me. 

Charlotte CHW
  As if echoing my frustrations with stilted sterility, Charlotte CHW's piece Artist Submission was a jagged and aggressive assault on a canvas.  Hands and ankles bound, she wriggled caterpillarlike onto the stage.  Taped down was a large piece of paper, on top of that three pots of blue, red and yellow paint.  Lit by a strobe, the light of which mirrored the geiger counter/typewriter slam of the music, she thrashed around, covering herself and the canvas in paint.  About half way through the fucked up, discordant screech of a saxophone began to wail, sounding like someone had attached electrodes to the balls of whoever was playing it.


As the wet paint leaked through the paper it began to tear apart, causing damp, multicoloured flesh to grind against the splintered wooden floor of the stage.  As everything collapsed into destruction amid chaotic sounds it felt like an embodiment of frustration: "I'm going to both create and destroy at once".  With a hole torn in the paper and the combination of paints under the stage lights beginning to look grossly biological the piece took on a decompositional, putrid tone, an artist carving through a corpse.  After everything had wound down, Charlotte went back on stage and began to gather up the shredded, slick remnants of her materials.  As she began to roll it up it looked like zombie labia, a hole torn in the fabric of things.  Messy, chaotic and frustrated stuff:  I liked it.

Milche Grande
The discordant, aggressive atmosphere continued with Milche Grande.  He sat cross-legged, a panel of effects pedals and sound looping in front of him.  He turned himself into a one-man choir; emitting a distorted looping monkish chant that reverberated around the pub.  There was an element of the apocalyptic in it, the thrum of his words rising in and of the mix, overlapping with itself.  There were moments of intensity punctuated with calm, rise and fall sounding like sonic represenation of a fried mind.  Throughout this storm of sound he'd twist dials and gently depress pedals, causing the sound to morph and overlap the next; until it eventually sounded like a chorus of angry angels (that reminded me a little bit of Godspeed You! Black Emperor.

Dale Alexander Wilson & Chris King
In a similarly experimental muso vein were Dale Alexander Wilson and Chris King.  This was a little more gentle sounding; the music complementing artwork projected behind them.  In gently psychedelic imagery microscopic imagery twizzle and twists behind them, nicely complementing the music.  It's all pretty impressive stuff, as is their equipment, which bristles with wires and dials.  

Last on was Nuria Guix who, after her loud, spiky and aggressive predecessors, came as a palette-cleansing breath of fresh air.  It was about 11pm by now and the crowd had substantially dwindled, so everyone remaining sat up on the stage in a semi-circle waiting for her arrival.  The atmosphere of the pub took an unexpected turn towards the spiritual; we hushed up like a cult gathering.  Nuria kneeled, asked us to close our eyes and recited a short monologue that reminded us of who shared the air that we're breathing.  There's the old (annoying) joke phrase "You are now breathing manually"that causes you to become exquisitely aware of your lungs pumping in and out that seemed to apply here, making us feel organic, concrete and real.  As Nuria reminded us that we were breathing the same air as, among others, John Lennon, ourselves as a seven year old, Alexander the Great and our future selves, we lapsed into a calm, quiet (and by this point in the night slightly drunken) meditation.

Nuria Guix
 That the air we inhale shares atoms with all of humanity is far from the most original observation, but it's still absolutely right.  Anything that underlines our connection to each other is valid, and it's always good to remember that even though our sense of individuality is strong, it's ultimately an illusion. She also reminded me that being loud and forthright isn't the be all and end all of performance, that you can affect people just as much with a focussed and quiet moment.  

I still have some slow-burning issues with the general tone of performance art - I feel that its power to affect change is all too often squandered on masturbatory, ego-boosting performances that benefit only the performer.  Still, at least these frustrations were echoed in these aurally and physically destructive pieces at CEREBELLUM, married to a quieter piece that pointed towards new ways forward.  It was a night that I couldn't help but enjoy.

'A Catered Affair' at The Eel Brook, 5th June 2014

$
0
0

A Catered Affair is an odd duck of a musical.  For one it's fiercely claustrophobic; the action taking place almost entirely within a run-down Bronx tenement inhabited by a small cast grappling with resolutely unglamorous domestic situations.  Even the music is largely utilitarian, devoid of catchy choruses and upbeat numbers - functioning more as a vehicle for emotion than as anything to hum along to.  Whereas musical theatre is generally a vehicle for fancy-free escapism, A Catered Affair shoots for social realism.  

Adapted from Richard Brooks' 1956 film of the same name (written by Gore Vidal), starring the inestimable Ernest Borgnine and Bette Davis, this is a story of the postwar American working class and their struggle for middle-class respectability.  The space above The Eel Brook becomes a crummy New York room which we share with four members of the Hurley family: middle-aged parents Aggie and Tom (Maggie Robson and Howard Samuels), their daughter Janey (Aimee Gray) and Uncle Winston, Aggie's brother.  

The family spend their lives perched on the edge of a financial cliff, with Tom describing himself as "a man who finds dollars hard to come by". He drives a cab and scrabbles together enough money to save a few crumbs every month while keeping the family just above the breadline.  Further adding to their woes is the recent death of their son in the Korean War, the family collectively suppressing their grief for each other's sake.

Kicking off the events of the play is Janey's impulsive decision to marry Ralph, an upper-middle class academic. All Janey wants is a visit to the registry office with her immediate family in attendance, followed by an idyllic cross-country honeymoon.  Unfortunately everyone stickd their oar in on what they think a wedding should be and all too quickly the wedding plans balloon grotesquely.  As halls are hired, limousines are booked, gourmet food is ordered and hungry relatives begin crawl from the woodwork the costs mount ("why blow twenty years of savings on one party!?") and pressures both emotional and financial begin to mount on the family.

Maggie Robson and Aimee Gray
It's the kind of plot you'd be unsurprised to find cropping up on Coronation Street, and it's be commendable if only because of its clear-minded class consciousness.  The financial problems these characters face are all too easy for a modern audience to sympathise with.  Aggie and Tom suffer the problems of the 'Golden Generation', having weathered both the Great Depression and World War II.  Now, in the early 1950s things are starting to look up for America and these characters are desperate for their bite of a very affluent apple.

My favourite scene was a small one that most deftly and sensitively lays bare the consequences of urban poverty.  Janey asks her best friend to be her Maid of Honour, and she has to decline because she can't afford a dress.  Even if she could she'd have to also buy matching shoes and obviously her husband would have to attend, which would mean the rental of a tuxedo - more money.  Like a stone thrown into a pond the economic ramifications of decisions ripple outwards, straining the social fabric.  In frustration Janey comments "It's only money!".  It's testament to how well played this scene is that I actually cringed at the naivety and crassness of saying something like this to a woman for whom it's never only money.

All this political stuff chugs along in the background quite satisfyingly, and it's only when the material begins to deviate from this that problems begin to arise.  It's not so much that there's any obvious problems with the performances (though the 'Noo Yoik' accents are often a bit wobbly), rather that Fierstein's adaptation is slightly creakily constructed.  The emotional core of the play is the mirroring of the two central relationships, Tom and Aggie worried that their passionless marriage of convenience is a harbinger of what's to come for the deeply dippy teenage Janey and Ralph. 

David Anthony as Uncle Winston
Jammed into the middle of this is a neurotic gay uncle whose story feels largely extraneous.  Part of the problem is that in a story with a tight and admirable focus on characters monetary woes he's ambiguously wealthy one minute and relegated to sleeping on a sofa the next.  His main function appears to be to clown around on the periphery of scenes saying semi-outrageous things and throwing theatrical tantrums - a stark contrast to the buttoned-down realism of every other character.  This comes at the cost of attention to Janey's fiance Ralph, who deserves more than the cursory character development he gets.  He likes Janey and he wears glasses.  That's about it.

Still, there are some fantastic scenes here, most of them courtesy of Howard Samuel's quietly sensitive father/husband Tom, a man with a face like an well worn shoe who spends the entirety of the play looking like he's nursing a mean hangover  An obvious high point is the barnstorming I Stayed, a song which constantly threatens to tip over into melodrama but doesn't.  There's an argument that A Catered Affair would function better as a play rather than a musical, but the agonising sung/yelled/wept catharsis of I Stayed single-handedly puts paid to that.

Howard Samuels as Tom Hurley
In the confines of the space above The Eel Brook, this drama gains power purely from our proximity to it.  Sitting in the front row I felt less as if I was watching their lives through a lens and more that I was a fly on the wall, involved yet invisible.  A Catered Affair makes the most of the space, relying on us being able to spot the tics and grimaces across the character's faces - particularly in a fine bit of acting as Maggie Robson ecstatically dreams her perfect wedding.  It's not exactly a toe-tapping showstopper of a musical (ask me to whistle a tune from it and I'd come up short) - but its heart and sympathies lie in the right place.  A solid, compassioniate piece of theatre, but one which never quite reaches the exceptional.

A Catered Affair is produced by the London Theatre Workshop and performed at The Eel Brook, 65 New Kings Road, SW6 4SG

3 June – 20 June, 2014
20:00 – Tuesday to Saturday
16:00 – Saturday Matinees

'Futures: Art and Design Show 2014' at The Old Truman Brewery, 6th June 2014

$
0
0

Where on earth do you even begin?  Sprawled over the gargantuan interior of the old brewery is so much art it makes your head spin (and that's even before I indulged in the complementary beers).  It'd take the some serious discipline, time and patience to comprehensively catalogue this, three things I don't have. As I see it, the honest way to approach things is to let yourself get caught up in the drafts and currents of the rooms, to drift amongst the art and artists until something catches your eye.  Often it's easy to tell why something stands out, be it because it uses materials in a different way from everything around it or simply because it's pleasantly lit.  Other times it's more subtle, a photograph or painting that has some weird magnetism to it.  So here's what dragged me in:

by Katt Wade
In the midst of this mild sensory overload Katt Wade's spookily compelling stills caught me off guard.  To look at them, particularly the one pictured above, is to get the impression that you've seen something you shouldn't have.  The nondescript urban landscapes are strangely sterile, to the point where I wondered for moment whether these might be computer generated backdrops.  The massive flat grey of the ground extends upwards into the woman's clothes, giving the eerie impression that she's grown out of the asphalt.  Her stare, both accusing and sad, pierces right through the membrane of the photograph, and it's this stare that dragged me into its orbit.

by Husna Lohiya
Nearby something else was attracting me, but this time not through sight or sound - but rather smell.  Like a cartoon character lured in by a floating cloud of deliciousness I sniffed and got a dose of cardamom, tumeric and garam masala.  Following my nose I rounded a corner to find Husna Lohiya's awesome creation.  Laid out in whorls and spirals across the gallery space was a winding, sensuous pattern made with spices.  Against the pure white walls and industrial cement of the ground it practically shines off the floor.  The effect reminded me of the mandalas that Buddhist monks create from coloured sand.  Chatting to Husna she explained that she'd intended people to walk through it, smearing the pattern, something which again echoes the destruction of a mandala after it's completed.  I always enjoy art that engages smell and taste; and Husna's piece is that rare piece of art that can be enjoyed even with your eyes closed.

by Roberto Landin Baamonde
Rounding the corner you find Roberto Landin Baamonde's hermaphroditic sculptures.  They're enormous corpulent torsos, limbs and head shorn off to leave a bulbous mass in the middle.  I'm not sure if they're life casts of a rather fat man or some composite from the mind of the artist, but the overall effect is disconcerting.  They're strongly reminiscent of the Venus of Willendorf, one of the oldest representations of a human being ever discovered.  They're lit dramatically from above, the sharp spotlight throwing the textures and shadows into sharp relief.  Alongside these two there's a third, dissected and dismembered, suspended from razor wires like something out of Clive Barker's Hellraiser.  In a space largely filled by the small and intricate, these pieces stand out like an exclamation mark at the end of a sentence.

by Roberto Landin Baamonde
Almost functioning as a response to Baamonde's work is the alarmingly honest photography of Lauren-Becki Rowlands.  In a prime location, staring out across the gallery are her nudes.  These aren't the stock-shiny airbrushed android women of fashion, they're 'real', painfully so.  Blown up across a wall is a portrait of a nude woman with stretch marks across her belly, looking weirdly like some kind of medieval representation of martyrdom.  Her facial expression has the beatific echo of an icon too, staring off into the middle distance with a relaxed, yet poised dignity.  That the models don't have any makeup on, and their hair hangs unstyled across their faces adds to the effect.  They're quietly powerful, successfully indicting the viewer's expectations of conventional beauty.

by Mira Varg


Further along in the photography section it was difficult not to be drawn to Mira Varg's Fruit of my Mind. On a wall of flat, two dimensional photography her latex arms and legs violently emerge from the wall, threatening to ensnare passers by.  These rubbery, tactile limbs have designs printed onto them, the faces of smiling women or mechanical/organic drawings traced across the surfaces.  The slightly gross discolour of the material makes it look creepy, as if these casts are the remnants of a chrysalis, the husk from within which a butterfly has emerged.  Given that this is a final year show with most of the artists leaving the swaddling confines of academia for the wider world, this transformative element feels appropriate.

by Aleksandra Klicka

Elsewhere, the sex/death/muscle car aesthetic of Aleksandra Klicka (who has an excellent name for a  photographer) pressed all the right buttons for me. I love it when wholesome, masculinity becomes infected by the morbid death drive that lurks under the surface of our culture, especially the interplay of the straight, rigid aerodynamic lines of the car and the malleability of the female form in the centre.  The female body in the form of a sexualised corpse crops up throughout popular culture, particularly in fashion photography and it's a trend that's disturbing and interesting in equal measure.  In Klicka's photos the form is often further bisected by sharp shadows, as if reality itself has bad intentions for these women. There's a load of stuff swarming underneath the surface of these pictures, none of it particular pleasant.  But that's makes them so fascinating.

All of this is merely me dipping my toe in what this show has to offer.  It's a kaleidoscope of colours, ideas, sounds and imagination that it'd take a week to fully process.  My recommendation is to get down to it and see for yourself.  Everyone I met last night was friendly, open and ready to discuss their work, so if you want to meet the next generation of creative thinkers this is absolutely the place to be.  I can always tell how good a night I've had by how easy it is to write about it the next day.  This was a breeze to explain, and my only regret is that I don't have the space or time to do anything but scratch the surface.  

Futures is at the Old Truman Brewery, Brick Lane.  Open to the public on Sunday the 7th, 10am-6pm and the 8th and 9th 10am-7pm.

Cover picture by Shaun Evelyn

'Saturday Circus' at The Aeronaut, 7th June 2014

$
0
0

The Aeronaut is what happens when a circus crashes headlong into a pub.  It's the kind of place you'd expect to find on The Reeperbahn or perhaps nestled down a modishly raffish Parisian side street.  But nope -  this den of cabaret, swirling music and faint subversion is bang smack in the middle of the otherwise humdrum Acton High Street, within spitting distance of a gigantic Morrisons and two neighbouring  pubs who've gone for a far more traditional "pint of Kronenberg and a packet of salt and vinegar crisps please" aesthetic.  Bo-ring!

You can't fault the landlord for going all out on making this place stand out from the crowd.  There's a lovely pub garden stuffed with tiny sheltered booths, the pub runs its own micro-brewery which churns out their own delicious drinks - even the graphic design is second to none, going for a faux-Victorian/art deco style that looks stylish as hell.  All that said, it's the 'big top' performance room that impresses the most.  Under white and red two-tone canvas there's a sizeable stage with tables and booths nestled around it.  The crowd, composed primarily of groups of friends celebrating birthdays, weddings and anniversaries was primed to enjoy themselves - although I'm not sure they had much of an idea entirely what they were in for.  I certainly didn't.

The Aeronaut's performances land somewhere in the hinterland between burlesque and cabaret: not erotic, but rather rebellious in a cheeky sort of way.  These are performers booked for their skills, whether it be with your traditional juggling/trapeze-y type stuff, being able to do interesting things with their bodies or simply just being pretty damn funny.

Ria Lina
Our compere for the evening was Ria Lina, a tightly wound bundle of energy whose mission objective is simply to wake us the hell up.  Dressed in a very Weimar republic costume she quizzes the audience on who they and why they're here, biting back with sarcastic comments  As far as comperes go she's pretty damn successful, as she stalks between tables, machine-gunning questions at hapless punters you begin to dread her heading towards you, and staring around the audience I found people mentally formulating something basically intelligent to say. 

Jessiye Walters
First on was Jessiye Walters with a hoop routine.  It is, to say the least, an impressive start.  I've been to quite a few shows of this ilk so I'd like to think I can pick out a good hoop act by now.  I've come to the conclusion that it's less being able to spin the hoops - any mug can do that - and more about how well you can stop them.  Walters runs on clockwork precision; the hoops moving in perfect geometry around her body and stopping on a dime.  There's a moment where she tosses a hoop into the air and catches flips and poses with it in one motion that's so fast it's like a martial arts move, drawing a ripple of impressed applause from the audience.

Ian Marchant
Ian Marchant followed; working through an endearing ramshackle juggling routine.  Part of  the thrill of these kinds of acts is feeling empathy for the performer.  Marchant has to be a nice enough guy to make us want him to succeed on stage.  So as he attempts a complex trick: twirling a hoop on his ankle, spinning a basketball on his finger, balancing a tennis racquet on his nose AND juggling at the same time, we really hope he can pull it off.  The first two times he doesn't, the basketball spinning from his finger at a crucial moment.  "Damn", we think "if he can't pull this off it's going to be pretty embarrassing for both of us (but mainly him)".  He does, and our applause is borne of being impressed and relief.

Jackie Le
Up next was Jackie Le on an aerial hoop.  Though Le is obviously impressively skilled, this is perhaps the one act of the evening that doesn't really work in a pub (even a very circus-pub), simply for the fact that the ceiling just isn't high enough to create a real sense of danger.  That the performer could plunge to bone-breaking misery at any moment is what adds spice to an aerial act, but if Le fell from here she might perhaps sprain her ankle.  As she twists and turns I do feel a twinge of jealousy - I wish I could do things like that - and, at minimum, with the lights swirling around her she makes for an eye-catching spectacle.

Mixed into the middle is a performance by our compere where she drags people up from the audience to be backing dancers for Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie Yellow Polka Dot Bikini.  Pulling volunteers from this audience felt a bit like pulling teeth, I was a dreading being press-ganged into service myself.  That said, there was one wimp from the audience who got up on stage, went to prepare and promptly chickened out!  The whole thing was eventually saved by some guy called George, who managed - I'm still not quite sure how - to salvage some dignity from the situation, returning to his seat (and his date) with the crowd chanting his name.

Laurence Owen
Up next was, as far as I'm concerned, the undisputed highlight of the night: Laurence Owen.  He plays just two songs, one about Halloween costumes and one about the career prospects of a woman in a Disney film, both of which utterly slay the crowd.  In a night that's largely about physical feats, his are mental and literary.  Of the two, the best is the epic exploration of misogyny in Disney; not exactly a subject that leaps out as a crowd-pleaser, but as he switches characters and pumps out killer rhyme after killer rhyme the audience laps it up like starving children.  In a quickfire cabaret night like this he's the one I want to track down again as soon as I can.  His songs can't all be this good.. can they?

Iona the Contortionist
Closing out the night is Iona the Contortionist.  Acts like these always send a shiver up my spine and god only knows what it's doing to hers.  I am annoyingly inflexible, the idea of what it's like to bend into a pretzel with feet pressed over your face is kind of alien to me.  Wearing a slickly organic bodysuit I imagine I can see her organs moving around under her skin.  It's a mixture of horror and impressiveness - imagining the time, effort and pain that goes into being able to move like this.

If you're after a memorable birthday, or simply just want an night slightly out of the ordinary The Aeronaut is the place to be.  Mashing up pub and circus is a slightly odd idea, but it's one that works undeniably well.  I don't know Acton too well, but this has got to be one of the best things around - well worth an expedition to the hinterlands of Zone 3.

The Aeronaut holds performances 9-11pm every Friday and Saturday, £8 entry.  Try to arrive at 8ish to get a good seat.

'The Diary of a Nobody' at the White Bear Theatre, 8th June 2014

$
0
0

First published in 1888as a serial in Punch magazine, The Diary of a Nobody show us the humdrum domestic life of Charles Pooter, clerk in a non-descript, vaguely Dickensian finance firm. Orbiting him are his loving wife Carrie, his dissolute son Willie/Lupin and a gaggle of comedy grotesques.  It's a farcical comedy of manners that satirises the preoccupations of the Victorian middle-classes: Pooter is man on a quest for respectability, pitting himself against a capricious fate that takes a sadistic pleasure in hurling obstacle after obstacle into his path; from a raucous and randy bride-to-be for his dim son, to an Australian spiritualist determined to conduct a seance, to the comings and goings of his friends; Mr Cummings and Mr Gowing.

It's pun-laden names like these that reveal all too quickly where The Diary of a Nobody's comedy heart lies; in the silly, the groan-worthy and in all too painfully accurate English self-deprecation.  This is the kind of comedy whose natural home is on Radio 4 on a Sunday afternoon, perhaps sandwiched between I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue and Just a Minute.  They're polite laughs that come from a bourgeoisie gently satirising itself, a comedy that, at worst, ends up staid, static and toothless.

Thankfully Rough Haired Pointer's style immediately assuages most of these fears.  Though the setting is mannered and stiff, this production (like the actors within) is loose and gangly. a flail of limbs, wobbling scenery and action that amounts to just barely controlled chaos.  It's a show that feels on the verge of collapse.  As props skitter across the floor, scenery wobbles and costumes fall apart the show threatens to collapse like an overambitious souffle.  It never does and this unpredictability goes no small way towards injecting life into material that has the potential for comedic arthritus.


The serial nature of the original material means that the stage adaptation becomes, essentially, sketch comedy.  Carin Nakanishi, set and costume designer, seems to have grasped the sketch concept quite literally.  The entire set and most of the costumes are rendered in monochrome with the details picked out in a way that echoes the original illustrations.  It's an exceptionally well-realised aesthetic that's not only visually pleasing, but works beautifully in creating a Victorian setting on a (presumably) limited budget.

It's a little difficult to review the performances as we were informed at the start of the night that Shelley Lang was unable to make the show due to "an incident" (a rather ominous choice of words, I hope she's okay).  The brave and admirable solution was for the rest of the cast to cover for her at short notice, playing not only their bevvy of characters but hers as well.  I figure that things are jumbled up on stage when she's here, let alone when the rest of the cast is skating on thin ice.

As it turned out I only evers noticed one script on stage and it somehow worked within the ramshackle context of the rest of the play.  The lack of female presence gave proceedings a Pythonesque tinge, a group of men who know precisely how best to deploy their various personalities and physiques in the service of comedy.  The most obvious stand out is Jake Curran as the lead, a performance benefiting from his only having to play one character.  He's got a marvellous 'period-face' - his facial hair and bone structure making him look convincingly Victorian - something which, in combination with a killer deadpan stare, makes him a compelling lynchpin of sanity upon which to hang all the calamity.

Would love to live in a house decorated like this.
Jordan Mallory-Skinner is similarly excellent; playing Mrs Pooter with a waxy skinned, lizard-like demeanour.  Through razor-thin lips and narrowed accusatory eyes he plays the role as a woman frantically trying to suppress her feral urges.  Pleasantly, the Pooter marriage has a bedrock of genuine affection to it and the couple mostly enjoy each other's company  - reminding me of a 19th century Homer and Marge Simpson.

The only problem I have is with the length of the show.  I've never read the book, but it seems this adaptation takes in the whole 15 months covered in it.  When first conceived this material was designed to be consumed in bite-size chunks; each day a snapshot of life.  As there's no compelling narrative throughline and as things are so cartoonishly pitched it's difficult to really care about what's going to happen to these people.  As I said before, this makes the show essentially a series of comedy sketches and, as funny as they are, watching this many sketches featuring the same characters left me a little comedically exhausted.  Perhaps instead of a very funny two acts and an interval, the adaptation would have been better served as an extraordinarily funny, shorter one-act show.

That said, it's a minor criticism - and something 'merely' being very funny isn't really so awful.  This is an insanely talented group of individuals, all of whom click together on stage like clockwork.  It's fascinating to see them move around, paying close attention to how the others move and reacting to their jokes, mistakes and microscope decisions in each scene.  At best, it's almost as if this 126 year old material is being improvised on the spot.

The Diary of a Nobody is at the White Bear Theatre, 138 Kennington Park Rd
SE11 4DJ - 3rd - 21st June in the evenings.  Tickets available here.

The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet (2013) directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet

$
0
0

 Can you feel nostalgic for an myth? Jean-Pierre Jeunet seems to think so.  The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet is an amusement park ride through a dreamland Americana – a fantasy of gleaming silver trucks speeding down desert roads, friendly bums dispensing advice from railroad cars and steaming hotdogs so utterly delicious you’d risk it all for just one bite.

T.S. Spivet (Kyle Catlett) is a boy genius living on an idyllic Montana ranch on with his entomologist, beetle obsessed mother (Helena Bonham-Carter), cowboy throwback dad (Callum Keith Rennie) and Miss America hopeful older sister (Niamh Wilson).  T.S. is a young Einstein, able to turn his hand to any branch of science, from cartography, to geology, to acoustics instinctively.  Encouraged by a lecture he crept into he’s inspired to invent a perpetual motion machine. This wins him the Baird prize in science, which will be presented at the Smithsonian in a couple of days. Running away from home he engages in a wistfully bold cross-country journey to collect his prize, hitch-hiking, riding the rails to Washington – and learning about America on the way.

Jeunet’s idealised America is viewed from an outsider’s perspective; a collage of old movies, imported TV shows and advertising imagery that coagulates into a hyper-real, super-saturated USA+.  Everything is filtered through a European, continental prism, less a recreation of some lost Golden Age and more a dramatisation of the American subconscious. 


The film abounds with visuals, objects and ideas depicted so lovingly they take on a totemic significance.  For example, a juggernaut speeding down a desert highway is rendered in almost psychedelically colourful detail, a creature of glistening chrome, bristling with lights and colour.  A hotdog stand becomes a pool of light within the darkness, staffed by a friendly maternal lady – the hotdog itself the platonic ideal of what a hotdog should be.

There’s a dark side to all this though.  Most obvious are some rather pointed observations on masculinity all wrapped up in gun control.  The dangers of gun culture come briefly under the microscope in the guise of what it means to be an American man.  Similarly, media culture is lightly satirised – the film presenting various shallow modes of love springing from fame which compare unfavourably against familial love.

All this takes place in a highly artificial hyper-reality.  3D is largely an anti-piracy measure more than an aesthetic choice in modern cinema, desultory, effort-free post conversions that add nothing the norm in multiplexes.  Not so in T.S. Spivet: it’s a crucial component of the film.  There’s the odd showboating ‘jab things at the screen’ effect, but most of the time 3D is used for floating split screens into other worlds, or CG trips through the imagination of the characters.  In pure technical terms it’s a joy to watch, and at minimum it’s refreshing to see a director treating 3D as a medium rather than as an effect.


Sadly, being technically excellent is probably the best thing about the film.  This isn’t a film with any stinker performances, massive directorial missteps or scripting woes – it’s all largely competent professional stuff with the occasional glimmer of excellence.  The real problem lies in Jeunet’s sympathies and their political implications.

Hankering for some long-lost Disneyland past where children had rosy cheeks, the sunsets were always beautiful and everything was picturesque, sedate and white (there are no non-white cast members) is conservatism (and when it comes to T.S. Spivet’s Americana fetish, a particularly Republican conservatism).  Also of note is the complete lack of any non-white characters in the movie.  Similarly, the narrative of a young boy genius striking out on his own against public schools and publically owned scientific institutes has more than a whiff of Rand to it.  


This rather unpleasant strand reaches its zenith when the film tackles gun control.    By this point a child has died from being allowed to play, unsupervised, with a small calibre rifle.  It’s a moment where you expect the film to finally take a stand on an issue, showing us some of the unpleasant consequences of wallowing in frontier masculinity.  Instead the film essentially says “who are we to say what is right or wrong?” A lily-livered conclusion to say the least.  The final nail in the coffin is when the remaining few problems in the film are solved by a gruff cowboy punching a helpless man repeatedly in the face.

The irony of a Frenchman making a film that deifies American mythology to this extent is not lost on me.  This is precisely the kind of film that those who’d bark “cheese eating surrender monkeys” or coin the phrase “freedom fries” will absolutely adore.  It’s this kind of America that’s probably wistfully dreamt about by slumbering Fox News viewers, aching for a lost cowboy utopia that never really existed in the first place.

Perhaps this isn’t what Jeunet set out to accomplish, but accomplish it he has.  It’s a shame the film is so ideologically rotten because there are moments of genuine beauty nestled within it – even if it is a somewhat chintzy beauty.  If you do see it, it’s worth checking out in a cinema if only to enjoy the 3D aspects, but on the whole I’d stay away unless you have an unusually passionate aesthetic interest in American nostalgia.



★★

The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet is out June 13th

'Chinese Puzzle' (Casse-tête chinois) (2014) directed by Cédric Klapisch

$
0
0

 Capturing human interaction on film isn't as easy as it sounds.  Too often screenwriters and directors retreat into cliched dialogue and stock characters to the point where the people running around on screen feel as artificial as any rampaging CG monster.  But Chinese Puzzle serves up a blizzard of tightly observed interactions, shifting relationships and moments of honest emotion that all ring true. This is a great piece of cinema, one that really understands the complexities - the soaring joys and the crushing miseries - of modern love.


★★★★ 


Chinese Puzzle is on general release from June 13th

'Ellas' by Maripaz Jaramillo at Gallery Petit, 10th June 2014

$
0
0

The London summer is finally here.  How long it's going to stick around nobody knows, so let's enjoy it while we can  This onset of light, heat and happiness casts the city in a fresh light - makes for the perfect backdrop to the current exhibition at Sandra Higgins' Gallery Petit, Maripaz Jaramillo's Ellas.  These are paintings of women rendered in simple, bright chunks of colour - women almost literally radiant, like they're lit from within. 

Maripaz Jaramillo, born in Manizales, Colombia in 1948, has had a stratospheric rise through the world of Colombian art.  Following formative years at the Universidad de Los Andes in Bogotá, Jaramillo spread her wings and moved first to Cali "a hot sensuous city" to London to study graphic art at the Chelsea College of Art, then in Paris, before finally returning to Bogotá.  Over these years she carved out a well-deserved reputation as an eminent Colombian artist. Her recent projects include painting a portrait of President Juan Manuel Santos and his wife, and contributing a mural (in the same expressionist style as the Ellas pieces) to Medellin University.


Facing these paintings is like staring into a 100 watt bulb, a luminosity that practically requires sunblock.  These bright colours have some instinctive cheering effect on the brain, and, coupled with the sunlight beaming through the windows of the gallery, makes them thrum with life. I later learned the colouring of the yellow skin arises from a trip to Egypt.  There Jaramillo discovered that traditionally women are to be painted with yellow skin as they're supposed to stay out of the sun (and men in browner shades). 

This tradition isl news to me - and as a mark of where my tastes generally lie my first thought was of The Simpsons.  But this might not be so off the mark - part of the reason The Simpsons became so internationally popular was because the yellow hue of their skin allows whichever ethnic group is watching the show project their own nationalities onto them.  For example, in the Middle East they read the characters as Middle-Eastern and so on throughout the world.  


The universality of this tone has the same effect in Jaramillo's work; allowing us not to see these women as individuals of any particular nationality or ethnicity, but as representations of a universal feminine joy; the simplicity of their features allowing us to project our own memories and experiences of pleasure, laughter and exuberant energy onto them.  This subtle connection means the paintings conjured up  half-forgotten happy memories, the sight of a lover tossing their hair in a breeze on a sunny day, or the simple pride in making someone you care about laugh.

These slabs of colour, coupled with the minimalist approach to the features also reminded me of the work of Patrick Nagel.  Nagel is, to put it mildly, pretty damn unfashionable in 2014; the art of a hair salon in dire need of a renovation and of dusty old Duran Duran LPs.  Cheesy (and let's face it, kinda sexist) though his work is, there are certain aesthetic principles he shares with Jaramillo's Ellas.  Nagel's process was to keep reducing his images down to their most basic geometric elements - to see just how much you can get across with as little elements as possible, much as we see here.   But where Nagel's subjects have the definite whiff of the necrophile to them, Jaramillo injects more life - accentuating vibrancy and spontaneity rather than diminishing it.


That said, there's two works at the gallery that come from a very different, darker, place to the rest; These two, both entitled Maquina de la vida, are from 1973.  They're drawings of prostitutes, rendered in harsh monochrome - the only colours used serve to accentuate the sickly fleshiness of their bodies and their lurid makeup.  These demonstrate Jaramillo's progression as an artist from (in her words) "contempt for academia", "decay" and a passion for the "grotesque" into the optimism we see in her more recent work.  I like these older pieces, though they tickle a very different part of my sensibilities than the rest.  


Whereas the Ellas series grant divinity, the 1973 works drain it away - anchoring the prostitutes in an organic, corporeal mire.  There's a dead-eyed, zombie-like quality to the women, the artist making visible the scars of sacrificing humanity so they can make it through just one more client.  There's an aggressiveness to these two that's absent from the contemporary work; a forthright boldness borne of a desire to "address the fundamental problems underlying our society".


Perhaps the joyousness of the modern works contrasted with the despair of what came before indicates mission accomplished for the artist?  Perhaps it's that she's now happy, free and successful and wants to communicate this happiness to us.  Perhaps it's just her working from the truism that you catch more flies with honey.  Whatever the reason, the progression from darkness to light is fascinating to ponder.  So while the UV beams down upon us, try and get yourself to Chelsea and bask in this sensuous, radiant and optimistic exhibition.

Ellas by Maripaz Jaramillo is at Sandra Higginas Fine Art, Gallery Petit, Chelsea until 20th June 2014

'Punching Jane' at The Courtyard Theatre, 11th June 2014

$
0
0



 Punching Jane is a play about brawling 18th Century prostitutes.  It is awful.  Sat in the front row I watched proceedings with a rictus grimace, quietly amazed at how damn bad it was.  Eventually my amazement turned into astonishment as, miraculously, it got worse.  Bad theatre isn't especially pleasurable to watch; at least with a bad film you can reassure yourself that everybody involved has since moved onto better things and gotten over it.  Not so in theatre: you're watching people embarrass themselves right now. Every so often you catch a glance of desperation from the cast that seems to say "save me".  But both they and I know there is no saving them.  Not now.

The plot concerns a brothel "in the seedy backstreetsof 18th Century London".  The previous owner has died and his arsehole son has taken over.  His obvious twattishness is causing much consternation among the prostitutes: Jane, Mary, Molly and their manager, Mother Elizabeth.  The meat of the play concerns the tangle of ambitions as to who's going to end up running the brothel.  Is it going to be the clapped out and bitter veteran hooker Mary or the rootin' tootin' headbuttin' newcomer Jane?  Layered on top of all that is a load of bullshit interpersonal drama that owes more of a debt to Hollyoaks than it does to the mean streets of old London.

Most of the problems stem from the subject matter, which is inescapably trashy. After all, a tale of bawdy, bare-knuckle-boxing prostitutes, even if handled by the best company in the land, is inevitably going to be pretty camp.  The worst thing you could do is to go at it completely straight-faced - yet this is precisely what Punching Jane does.  The end product is roughly artistically equivalent to softcore porn, but without the sex.  


Nobody comes out of this smelling of roses.  I have most sympathy for the cast, who, while all awful to various degrees, have at least proved the aphorism that you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  Everything is mired in histrionics, as if the director just doesn't know when to stop telling his cast to go bigger.  The result is series of caricature performances that more closely resemble a night at Madame JoJo's Tranny Shack than anyrealistic portrait of femininity.  Rubbing salt into the wound is that most of this is delivered in embarrassingly bad Dick van Dyke-ish cockney accents.  The nicest thing I can say is that the women are fascinatingly bad, as opposed to the male performances, which are just regular brand bad.

But I suppose there's only so much you can do with a dog of a script that goes nowhere and says nothing.  This is excruciatingly bad dialogue, apparently assembled Burroughs-style by cutting up The Big Book of Victorian Sex Slang (or maybe just a dog-eared copy of From Hell) tossing the pieces into the air and seeing what random configurations they end up in.  So you have characters endlessly banging on about "bubbies" or,  memorably, their "south-mouth" *shudder*.  The quiet nadir is a short line late in the play where one character yells "you ungrateful ingrate!".  Think about this for a second, and realise that it got through (presumably) many script re-writes and at least one previous production without anybody pointing out just how dumb it is.

That said, picking out specific lines is a fool's errand: it's all bad.  The basic tone of the script is equivalent to something you'd expect to see sprouting from the first months of a drama degree.  The swearing and sex feels adolescently gleeful, as if the writers have just left school and sniggeringly realised that without their teachers looking over their shoulder nobody can stop them saying fuck, cunt, shit and piss as much as they want.


If there was one thing that I expected to at minimum to be passable it was the stage fighting.  After all, you don't stage a play about bare knuckle boxing without having a decent handle on how to convincingly clean someone's clock on stage.  Anyway, Ed Young, the fight director (and co-writer and actor), describes himself as a "specialist in combat for stage and screen".  After seeing Hiraeth Artistic Production's Hamlet at the Riverside Theatre recently and being deeply impressed by how tangible those blows were, I was primed for something special here.  This didn't hold a candle to it, being painfully over-choreographed without any sense of impact or reaction, more like watching a slow motion rehearsal of the real thing.  The one-on-one fights aren't so bad (and there's an argument that some of it is supposed to be playfighting), but the only reaction the final brawl drew from the audience was an embarrassed chuckle.

Finally a short word on set and costumes.  While obviously working from a restricted budget, they're (I guess predictably by this point in the review) dire.  All I'll say about the scenery is that it looks like someone has raided a skip and scattered the contents haphazardly around the stage.  As for the costumes, in a cost-cutting measure they've decked the male characters out in black rubber wellies.  As they clomp around the stage they look less like historical n'er do wells and more like they're down the farmer's market hocking expensive cheese. (The nicest thing I can say about the production is that the women's costumes are basically okay.)

From top to bottom, from side to side, any way you look at it, Punching Jane sucks - the only prostitution going on here is that of the cast's respective talents. Most tellingly of all, despite us being informed that this would be a 90 minute show with an interval, they just ploughed straight the whole thing in one go.  The only reason I can see for doing this is the fear that if they did have an interval, the majority of the audience would seize the opportunity to make a discreet exit.  I certainly would have.  This is hands down the worst play I've seen all year.

Punching Jane is at the Courtyard Theatre until 29th June, 19:30. Tickets £14/£11 (conc).

The Fault in Our Stars (2014) directed by Josh Boone

$
0
0

The Fault in Our Stars opens with a big promise: this isn't going to be one of those syrupy, schmaltzy Hollywood films about cancer.  No, this film is, according to our protagonist and narrator, “truth”: a story to be told without resort to cliche and sentiment.   

What a load of a bullshit! 

The Fault in Our Stars is, in reality, 'yer standard terminal illness tearjerker, with diseases that leave our principals looking California-photogenic 'til the end, tons of soft focus smooching in Autumnal parks and great big dollops of heartfelt, acoustic guitar indie music. It's a straight-up weepie, but it's a decently put together weepie, and successful to the extent that it actually wrung a tear or two from my cynical bones.

Our cancer-crossed lovers are Hazel (Shailene Woodley) and Gus (Ansel Elgort).  Hazel is smart, literate and funny, Gus is adventurous, brave and imaginative.  They even have a lot in common other than the fact that they're dying. After a meet-cute at a support group they quickly become entangled in each other's lives and we watch as their feelings and attachments to each other develop into real love.  It's pretty standard teenage romance stuff, though with the morbid twist that the primary bond is their impending deaths.  As the months tick away their respective conditions worsen, the film exploring the limits of romance when your body is consuming itself.

Like a hunkier Michael Cera
Unsurprisingly, a story of two cancer suffering teenagers finding love just as they're about to die is pretty damn depressing.  The script leavens this with black (well, beige anyway) humour, but there's never any ignoring the essential tragedy of the situation.  Woodley and Elgort are both decent enough in the lead roles; and successfully navigating the tightrope between cute and annoying (though they sure do wobble). They're ably supported by two heavyweights in the supporting cast; a bearded and grumpy Willem Dafoe and a sensitive Laura Dern as Hazel's mother.  This isn't a film defined by great performances (particularly a miscast Sam Trammel as Hazel's father), but Dern in particular brings her A-game, giving a masterclass in how to imbue a stock role with development and character.

The cancer movie has practically become its own subgenre of late.  My favourite is 2011's excellent 50/50, which possesses a sharp as hell script and a willingness to get its hands dirty with the nitty gritty of what chemotherapy and terminal illness do to a person.  The nadir is the execrable Now Is Good with Dakota Fanning, a piece of irredeemable crap so gloopily saccharine that I rooted for the leukaemia.  The Fault in Our Stars falls somewhere in the middle, textually up front about the realities of cancer, yet afraid to cinematically go the distance.

My suspicions are that this stems from adaptation difficulties.  In John Green's novel of the saem name, it's easy to identify with these character's personalities without having to grapple with the visual toll of disease.  It'ss up to the reader to visualise the characters a process allowing them a certain degree of self-censorship.  The problem Boone faces is that it's difficult from both a production and aesthetic viewpoint to get genuinely ill-looking actors; firstly because his hot, in-demand teen stars don't want to slim themselves down to a skeleton or shave their heads, and secondly because genuinely dealing with the disease runs the risk of overpowering a sweet love story with body horror.

There is also a pretty disturbing subplot about this guy in the shades getting his eyeballs surgically removed.
The solution is simply to handwave it, the result being that throughout the two lovers are photogenic, healthy looking, beautiful people.  In The Fault in Our Stars, the real way we know a character is going downhill is when they begin wearing what I dub 'The Woollen Hat of Death'– cinematic shorthand that an ill character is about to be brown bread.  Tactics like these (which I think stem from 1970s Love Story) come close to undermining the entire production; especially as they went to such lengths to explain that this isn't going to be like those other wimpy cancer films.

What saves the film is Josh Boone's exemplary grasp of how to manipulate the audience. The book it's based on is young adult lit, and I suspect the target audience of teenage girls is going to absolutely adore this.  Boone goes for their tear ducts like a man possessed, deploying every cinematic trick in his arsenal to squeeze every last drop of emotion out of the material. His prime weapons are an uncanny instinct for when best to deploy a pop song (specifically the recurring use of M83's Wait), an occasionally moving and poetic snatches of dialogue and some nice (if somewhat blunt) visual metaphors.  By the final scenes I could hear hankies being blubbed into and sniffles all around the theatre. Even I, a seasoned film critic, ended up with a little something in the corner of my eye.

Regardless of its many flaws, The Fault in Our Stars has to be judged a rough success simply on that front.  It's an unashamedly sentimental, manipulatively cheesy bit of cinema, but like a crap comedy that nonetheless makes you laugh, it must be doing something right.  It's certainly a vast improvement on Josh Boone's last film Stuck in Love, on the whole I'm glad that my wish that he'd be run over by a bus never came to pass.

★★★

The Fault in Our Stars is on general release from 19 June

'Jersey Boys' (2014) directed by Clint Eastwood

$
0
0

When I sat down to watch Jersey Boys I couldn't have given less of a toss about Frankie Valli or The Four Seasons.  134 minutes later I still didn't.  It's not that I don't like the music, but I find it hard to get passionate about middle-of-the-road 60s pop sung by a man who sounds like he's got his balls caught in a vice.  So this music biopic sinks or swim on its story and characters, with mixed results.  

Based on the hit musical, Jersey Boys on screen eschews most of the conventions of a the stage version, opting instead for treating the story a straight music biopic.  Fortunately the life of Frankie Valli is interesting enough in its own right, even disregarding the music.  This is a solidly blue collar examination of the music industry - with the emphasis on industry. Valli and his bandmates Tommy DeVito, Nick Massi and Bob Gaudio are workmen rather than artists, treating the production of pop music more as a professional craft rather than as any kind of higher calling.  

The vast majority of music biopics deify their subjects as enigmatic and individualistic geniuses; a tactic that allows us to admire them from afar and forgive them when they screw up.  Jersey Boys is a bit different: Frankie Valli and his bandmates are emphatically not  geniuses.  Instead they're guys with decent musicianship who've concluded that their best chance of a comfortable life is to play some songs, get paid and go home at the end of the day.

Taking place largely chronologically, we follow The Four Seasons from their humble beginnings as neighbourhood kids on the humdrum streets of New Jersey, through their gradual ascent to stardom, to the top of the pop charts and finally through their acrimonious separation.  There's more than a dab of the mob film in the mix too, and to my eyes it looks as if Eastwood watched Scorsese's Goodfellas a bunch of times in preparation.  Both films share a grubby, pop-inflected rags to riches optimism, that becoming successful means coming under more pressure and both come to the conclusion that their working class heroes are ultimately pawns in someone else's game.

Also it's a bit like That Thing You Do, which I've always thought was a tad underrated.
There aren't many directors with more of safe hand on the tiller than Eastwood, and he brings in the movie with a minimum of fuss and a professional straightforwardness.  There's very little in the way of stylistic tics or visual frippery here, just utterly competent film-making.  The closest we get to experimental are the character's frequent breaking of the fourth wall to directly narrate what's going on to the audience, Wayne's World style.  At its most audacious (which isn't saying very much), Eastwood has his characters speak to the camera mid-song so, for example we get the bass player explaining his precise grievances with the band mid-performance on the Ed Sullivan Show.

It's a similar story performancewise.  John Lloyd Young gives what is probably an accurate portrayal of Valli (though admittedly I have no idea how the real Valli behaves), managing to navigate between naivety and cynicism with as little fuss as possible, though he does pull off the on stage persona.  Slightly more interesting is Vincent Piazza as Tommy DeVito, whose maniacally egotistic behaviour instigates most of the drama in the film.  He takes us from loveable rogue, through tolerable scumbag and finally to pathetic moron in a nicely layered performance.  There are precious few heavyweights backing up this relatively inexperienced cast though, though Christopher Walken makes a game effort as a chilled out New Jersey mobster, he's not really given a lot to do.

That's Joseph Russo as Joe Pesci on the left.  Yes, that Joe Pesci.
It's all a bit perfunctory to be honest, a music biopic paint-by-numbers.  They go through all the old cliches of the genre; but what was exhilarating in films like Walk the Line is sadly lacking here, primarily due to a rather charisma-free protagonist in Valli and some less than heartfelt music.  They even, repeatedly, do the one creaky old musobio cliche I hate the most.  Paraphrasing; someone says offhandedly "Hey Frankie, you gotta walk like a man!". Cut to Frankie staring off into the middle distance with an inspired look in his eye. Cut to the band playing the song "Walk Like a Man" on TV.  Cut to a man in a suit handing Frankie a gold record; "You gotta 'nother hit Frankie!".  This is tired old bullshit.

I guess the word I'm searching for is mediocre.  Coming from a director with a pedigree as strong as Eastwood this is a disappointment.  As someone utterly neutral on the music I was expecting the film to explain why it's so great (like Walk the Line did), but Jersey Boys never comes close.  In fact, the film arguably treats being a musician and making music as a grinding, joy-free chore.  This makes it difficult to care, either about the characters or the music.  

Jersey Boys isn't a bad film by any means, but it's difficult to gauge any reason to actually watch it save for a pre-existing love of Frankie Valli.  It's just sort of there. Maybe the musical is better.

★★

Jersey Boys is released June 20th


'Cosi fan tutte' by Pop-up Opera, 18th June 2014

$
0
0

Up to now I've had a fractious relationship with opera.  I've always appreciated it, looked forward to it and on the whole just about enjoyed just about everything I've seen, but at the same time I've never really felt that burning passion that you see in proper opera lovers . One of my favourite films is Fitzcarraldo, and I've always envied the title character's passion for Caruso, to the extent that his mission is to build an opera house in the middle of the jungle.  So it's unfortunate that on the rare occasions I've been to the ENO I've never quite felt it.  

Partially this is because orchestral music has a soporific effect on me: no matter how much I'm enjoying myself it's as if I've been hit with a tranquilliser dart.  Partially it's because when I do go to the ENO they put me in the highest, most distant seat in the house, making the people on stage looking like particularly tuneful ants.  Partially it's because I often don't know what the hell is going on; "Why is that fat guy stabbing himself?" or "Wait, is that woman a ghost?".  All these reasons leave me with the queasy sensation that I'm the only person in the room not quite getting it.  But after seeing Pop-up Opera's Cosi fan tutte I can proudly say that I have genuinely enjoyed and appreciated an opera.  Not just any opera either, a proper one, by Mozart and everything!  

Formed in 2011, the company is dedicated to making opera "enjoyable and inviting", dragging it out of drafty establishment halls where red wine is served at £6 a glass by snooty barmen and into the obscure dives I'm more comfortable hanging out in; boats made of scrap metal; a garlic farm; tunnels under London; candlelit underground caverns.  Last night was in the slightly more prosaic (but no less pleasant) The Whip bar above The Running Horse pub, near Bond Street.

Eve Daniell as Fiordiligi
Walking into the bar I spied an old Victorian sofa in the front row and made a beeline for it, sinking into the comfortably squashed cushions.  Soon I had a frosty mint julep in my paws and with the evening sun streaming in I was happy before anyone had even warmed up their voicebox.  My mood only improved as I quickly realised that there's a huge difference between watching an opera singer trotting round a huge stage a hundred meters away and having them right in your face, staring straight at you, singing their guts out.  At this distance you can see their tongues trilling in their mouths, their chests rising and falling with the music, their cheeks vibrating as the music flows out of them.

And what music!  When a decent number of the cast are in full flow the music fills up this small room and spills out into the bustling London evening.  I don't have the ear to be able to tell an excellent opera singer from a 'merely' great one, but everybody in this cast throws themselves into the music with a combination of technical excellence and personality, priming everything with great heaping dollops of emotion and sincerity.  This is most clear in the two women the opera revolves around, Fiordiligi and Dorabella; their torn hearts and confused passions painfully palpable in their arias, particularly in Fiordiligi's despair as she slumps over a fireplace, trying her hardest to convince herself of her love.

Oskar McCarthy as Guglielmo
This despair aside, Cosi fan tutte is most definitely comedy (and a very funny comedy at that). In my experience, the further you climb up the cultural ladder the less funny comedies become, so I was surprised to not only find myself laughing a lot, but actually being encouraged to laugh (even over the singing).  Much of the humour stems from the wonderful title cards projected overhead during the performance.  These range from a wry description of the scene you're about to see, an aside to the audience gently mocking the opera's extremely questionable gender politics or just poking fun at the character's ridiculous situation.  For example; as the women decry the arrival of their foreign suitors we read "Nigel Farage told us this was going to happen!"or when the (super obvious) identity of a character is revealed; "Should have gone to Specsavers...".

Also (surprisingly given that the entire thing was sung in Italian), the plot was very easy to follow.  I chalk this up to a performance philosophy which understands that the precise words sung aren't hugely important, it's the way in which they're sung.  When I attend more conventional operas I get caught up reading the surtitles and miss out on the minutia of the music, so the lack of distraction here is very welcome.

Clementine Lovell as Despina
While the cast was uniformly fantastic, I've got to single out Clementine Lovell as one of the reasons I had such a great night.  As the maid Despina she's the comedy heart of the play. Even when she's not the centre of attention, you can glance over to her and guarantee she'll be doing something funny. One of the biggest laughs in the show was a simple facial expression by her, a "get a load of this guy!"flick of the head as another character puffed themselves up.  A definite highlight was her solo performance during It's a Maid's Life, a perfect showcase of a vibrant, chaotic, pleasantly playful character.

Pop-up Opera's raison d'être is to awaken new audiences to the possibilities of opera, and in this individual instance they've more than succeeded.  I'm incredibly happy that, hand on heart, I can now say I've truly appreciated and enjoyed an opera.  Up to now I thought it might never happen, but the professionalism, friendliness and sheer energy of their Cosi fan tutte was just the ticket.  I can't really imagine anyone that wouldn't enjoy this.

Cosi fan tutte is popping up over the place until 31st July. Tickets here

'Chef' (2014) directed by Jon Favreau

$
0
0

In 2010 Jon Favreau had the world at his feet.  With the rapturously received Iron Man having kicked off the gargantuan Marvel movie franchise he was  Hollywood's new blocksbuster golden boy.  As they began preproduction on the billion dollar grossing The Avengers he was the presumptive director, ready to ascend to the heights of a Spielberg or a Nolan.  Then it all went a bit wrong. The Marvel execs stuck their beak into Iron Man 2, constantly tossing Favreau last minute script revisions and crowbarring in plot elements for upcoming films.  This, coupled with financial wheeling and dealing resulted in a mess of a movie, a production so frazzling Favreau openly worried whether his career as a director was kaput.

And then he made Cowboys & Aliens.  Enough said.

Now, after three years away from the directors chair, he's returned with Chef.  Gone is the CG bombast, in its place a small-scale indie film about a talented artist stymied by thoughtless suits who want him to keep on putting out the same old schlock.  There's more than a whiff of autobiography here, especially as Favreau, writes, directs and stars. Getting back to basics with a tightly crafted personal movie like this is a kind of personal exorcism, taking ones demons and moulding them into art.


Favreau plays Carl Caspers, Head Chef at a prestigious restaurant.  This is a man entirely committed to food, devoting his entire day to sourcing ingredients, preparing menus and actually cooking it.  A few years ago he was the hot new chef in town, doyenne of the food critics and achingly fashionable.  But now, through little fault of his own, he's become complacent.  The owner of the restaurant is eager not to mess with a winning formula, meaning that Casper's been serving the same menu for what feels like forever - every time he attempts to mix things up a bit he's immediately shot down.

Things all come to a head when he gets a snooty review from an online critic (hmm...). Casper blows his top, ending up as a much-mocked viral video.  Sacked from the restaurant and hiding in reclusive disgrace he eventually concludes that he should run a travelling food van where he can have total control over what he serves.  And so we learn that the path to redemption is paved with ham and cheese toasties.  

In a bit of a perverse twist, much of what makes Chef enjoyable is also the reason why it gets a little tedious.  For example, the practically pornographic fascination with food preparation is obviously borne of Favreau's actual passion for food.  In the opening scenes of the film you watch him slice an onion up, his skill with a kitchen knife telling us all we need to know about both the character and the actor's skill.  But injecting so much of yourself into a film makes it feel Favreau cleaning out his closet, and the main subplot of connecting with his precocious son is served up with a few too many spoonfuls of sugar.


That said, Chef is such a breezy, optimistic and modest film that it's difficult to dislike. Favreau is a solid (though not exceptional) actor, but this role plays to his matey, intelligently masculine traits.  Fortunately he's ably supported by an excellent supporting cast including Scarlett Johansson, Dustin Hoffman Oliver Platt and an all too brief appearance from his real life best bud, Robert Downey Jr.  I guess when you're a Hollywood bigshot it's easy to corral A-listers for a day's shooting here and there.  That said, they're stars for a reason, and this stable of charismatic characters goes a long way to buoying up the film.  Heck, even the cute kid, Emjay Anthony, is tolerable enough.

Decently handled though it is, the bonding with his son element of the story is riddled with cliche.  What felt far more relevant to me was the way online critics are treated.  I saw this at a press screening, surrounded by others of my ilk, and as Favreau righteously rages against those that smugly sit behind a keyboard and dissect what others have poured their soul into there was a ripple of uncomfortableness across the room.  Favreau isn't so gauche as to broadside against all critics, but there is the definite sensation that the Oliver Platt character is a punching bag against which he can beat out his frustrations.  Maybe in future I will reflect before I dish out some particular cruelty... (nah).

Anyway, Chef is unlikely to attract too much opprobrium as it's pretty good.  It's slight and inconsequential, but the tale of a man discovering inner peace through hocking toasted sandwiches to hipsters just about works.  The passion for cooking burns from the screen; lending it the credibility that's a large part of why it works.  The film is undoubtedly some form of therapy for Favreau, but it's a pleasant and interesting enough therapy to eavesdrop on.

★★★

Chef is on general release from June 25th

Walking on Sunshine (2014) directed by Max Giwa & Dania Pasquini

$
0
0

Films like Walking on Sunshine make you think al-Qaeda might have a point after all. Like anybody else, I’ve got serious problems with the basic tenets of Islamic Fundamentalism, but it’s got to be better than this. Produced with a cynical eye towards snaring World Cup widows, this 80s jukebox musical is a stunningly accurate simulation of being manacled to a chair in a dodgy karaoke bar and forced to watch a bunch of jerks tunelessly disembowel pop standards.



Walking on Sunshine is released June 27th.

'Deux Chevaux: A Performance by William Mackrell', 21st June 2014

$
0
0

It's Saturday in London and the sun beats down on a grateful city.  In Hyde Park the crowds lobster themselves red, sucking down cider and munching expensive crisps.  Swans slide serenely across the surface of the Serpentine as rays of light glitter up into the sky.  A man is tethering two white horses to a Citroen 2CV.  It's everything you'd expect to find on a balmy June day in the park.  Except that last thing.

Hunkered down at the edge of the waters, surrounded by a gaggle of photographers, journalists, documenters and curious passers-by, a performance is beginning to take shape. Horses contentedly chew hay as competent-looking burly men in pastel polo-necks soberly assess a harness.  Men and women in hi-viz vests eye the whole affair with a vague professional suspicion.  An Irish Wolfhound trots about obliviously, an inscrutable expression on its face.  This soon will be Deux Chevaux; artist William Mackrell out to provide something out of the ordinary for the Saturday parkgoers.

As the horses are harnessed to the car it begins to roll through the park, hooves clop-clopping along the road.  Tourists whip out their phones to snap a quick one for the Instagram feed.  This is an old-fashioned sort of spectacle, a polite intrusion into everyday routine, something "you just don't see everyday".  To give credit to Mackrell the public are eating this up, the journey a parade of gooberish double-takes as the whole affair begins its long trundle around Kensington, Westminster and Chelsea.



Mackrell and co have a busy day ahead of them.  First the Serpentine, then a whistlestop visit around the big Museums, the Royal Albert Hall and various squares before finally wrapping up at Andipa Gallery for celebratory drinks.  Pulling something like this off smoothly and safely is no small order and on chatting to the organisers I learn that this venture has generated vast, teetering stacks of paperwork: applications, permits, explanatory letters and the other detritus of correspondence.  There's such a colossal amount of effort that's gone into this that the idea of making a piece of art about that has been floated.

For most of London's history, the primary method of transportation has been horse-drawn carriage, a privilege now generally only extended to the Lord Mayor and the Queen and her familial subordinates.  Their gilded, fairytale coaches draw gawps from crowds around the world along with coos of "aw, how quaint!".  Bullshit pageantry like this is embarrassing stuff; a medieval aristocratic albatross around the neck of a forward-thinking progressive cities. But, like some gigantic, wizened whale, London has picked up the barnacles of tradition and they're a tricky creature to shake.


Mackrell's piece subverts this high-falutin' ceremonial guff, replacing the chintzy baubles of establishment with Citroen's minimalist classic, the 2CV.  This is the car described as "the work of a designer who has kissed the lash of austerity with almost masochistic fervour". Curved and boxy, it's a tribute to the twin gods of mass production and budget egalitarianism.  The car, famously referred to as the "two horsepower" (deux chevaux) quickly became one of the iconic automotive designs of the 20th century, nestling snugly between the VW Beetle and the Mini.

In realising this nickname, Mackrell explains that he's "challenging the interaction of natural and mechanical power".  The combination binds together the two biggest engines of London transport from the last 1000 years, highlighting both the differences and similarities between the two.  Before things kicked off I stood next to the horses, enjoying that pleasantly nostalgic smell of horse-on-a-hot-day and waxed leather.  This scent was soon joined by another, as the horse interrupted my reverie by taking a splattering dump on the roadside. The horseshit stunk up the place pretty sharpish, but then if you're going to hang around horses you've got to expect this kind of thing.


As I wrinkled my nose, it struck me that the dividing the mechanical and the biological is a false distinction.  Car and horse alike produce waste; the real problem is how you deal with it.  Once we're on the road, horse and car symbiotically bound together, the distinction becomes even blurrier.  Mackrell steers the car, while a coachman spurs on the horses, which tug the car down the street.  Four brains, four wheels, 12 legs, four arms - car, horse and man bound together into one chimera.  As this Frankenstein's monster progresses through London it puts paid to the lie that is "natural and unnatural".  Much as in the horse-drawn car, we're an integral part of a wider, natural whole - the artificial elements within it no less natural than a spider's web or bird's nest. 

Deux Chevaux is a tightly wound bundle of meaning that does a lot with very little.  I'd heard that this has been attempted before, but only in static form - the gallery unable to get permission to actually move the construction through London.  As far as I'm concerned it only works in motion, the harmony of horse and car moving through London like lighting the touchpaper on a firework.  Even on the simple level of a spectacle, Deux Chevaux succeeds: brightening up what was already a pretty damn bright day.  Well done to everyone involved for conceiving, planning and executing this.

Thanks to Andipa Gallery for inviting me along.

Screen Robot Podcast Episode 9

$
0
0

My appearance on the Screen Robot Filmcast with Dominic Mills & Liam Dunn reviewing The Fault in Our Stars, Jersey Boys, Walking On Sunshine and others.

Hear me sing Don't You Want Me Baby!
Viewing all 883 articles
Browse latest View live