Search This Blog

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Now THAT'S Spam!

I've had one of my e-mail addresses for just a shade over ten years. Periodically, I get waves of spam e-mails, most of which are annoying. Every once in a while, though, I get one that defies both explanation and description. Some of these are nothing short of epic. The one I received today fits into that category:

From: Clayton Dingledein [e-mail omitted]

Subject: Buenos noches!

For+ykour+throbbing+manhood . . .

[web address omitted]

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

It jail !! With an friendly, serenely !! 
To swordsman favorably .,.
On my Hampshire attractions pretends.,. 
So dottles subsided, womanly,.
 
I have no idea what the product is, but I ordered seven of them.
Kudos, Mr. Dingledein! You are indeed a spammer among spammers. I hope that your seat in hell has a better view than everyone else's.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Why don't you just act, dear boy?

This is the phrase that Laurence Olivier supposedly uttered to Dustin Hoffman on the set of Marathon Man after the latter ran around the block to appear appropriately out of breath for an upcoming scene. Whether this is a true story or not, it depicts the difference between two major schools of acting thought.
One is that what appears before an audience must appear real, and the other is that it must, for all intents and purposes, be real.
A recent performance in Germany in which a group of actors decided to use real vodka in place of water for a play about a drunken binge ended in disaster.
You may recall the recent story of the actor in Aspen who accidentally stabbed himself on stage with a real knife.
My friend and fellow blogger, Jennifer Zukowski (who is also an author, professor, and ninja) has an entire section in her book, Stage Combat (linked below; You're welcome, Jenn), about the many dangers inherent in performing a real slap on stage.
When I see an actor perform a drunk scene very well on stage, I am thoroughly impressed. If I were to find out later that said actor had actually been drunk, I would definitely feel a bit cheated.
That's how I felt when I found out that Jamie Foxx had worn contacts in Ray that actually made him blind for up to fourteen hours a day on set. I'm not saying it wasn't still a great performance. It just wasn't a great performance of a sighted performer acting blind. (See John Malkovich in Places in the Heart or Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman.)
Generally, I'm not a big fan of having able-bodied actors perform disabled roles if there are plenty of equally capable disabled performers available. (I'm talking to you, "Glee.")
However, if it must be done then I'd rather see the employment of acting chops over cheap tricks.
Most importantly, what if Mr. Foxx, who had only a few days' or weeks' experience getting used to being blind (and he got to see again at the end of the day, remember) had taken a dangerous spill on set? What if he suffered an injury that kept him from working for weeks, or worse. All in the name of "keeping it real?"
That's not acting, that's exhibitionism or "stunt acting" in my opinion. and don't get me started on actors who insist upon doing even the most dangerous of their own stunts. That's a blog for another day. I will say this: if whether or not someone else's having a job the next day depends upon your ability to jump from a helicopter onto the back of a moving truck, use the stunt man - i.e. someone whose potential injury isn't going to shut down production for six weeks. Enough about that for now.
The article about the German actors/ "rocket scientists" who thought getting drunk for real was a good idea reminded me of the time that I was in a show with a couple of fencing scenes, and one night my fencing partner showed up with liquor on his breath lamenting that his girlfriend had dumped him for someone else. Later in the show, I apparently began to resemble this "someone else" and I found myself actually fending off an unchoreographed attack. I won, but let's just say that the "disarming" of my opponent wasn't pleasant for him.
The "magic" of theatre is that we present a seemingly uncontrolled sequence of events in a highly-controlled way. That bears repeating:
The "magic" of theatre is that we present a seemingly uncontrolled sequence of events in a highly-controlled way.
I am known for being meticulous in controlling any physical contact between actors onstage, whether it's staged combat or a romantic kiss. I'm not opposed to some physical improvisation within certain parameters, but I have found that about seven times out of ten, when an actor says during rehearsal that he or she was "okay with" an unrehearsed bit of contact from another actor onstage, the director (often me) gets a call at home later that night from the same actor with "a few concerns."
I've been accidentally punched, purposely slapped, thrown into furniture, kicked, stepped on, and more in shows where directors did not take an active interest in creating a safe, controlled environment on stage or where actors decided to play fast and loose with choreography or were overcome with zeal during a staged fight.
I've covered quite the gamut of circumstances in this blog entry, but I think it can be distilled down to one key idea:
When in doubt, just act.

Oh, almost forgot. Jenn's book. It's part of my library. I recommend making it part of yours.

Friday, January 29, 2010

Suicide is Painless

I read this article yesterday, and it has stayed with me. It's about a dance/theatre production called suicide.chat.room inspired by the real-life internet chat rooms that not many people know exist. (I certainly hadn't heard of them.)
The company is called Taffety Punk Theatre Company and they will be presenting the show in the D.C. area through mid-February. I know that I have a number of blog readers outside of the Denver area, so, if anyone out there gets a chance to see this, please let me know what you think.
I'm intrigued.

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Theatre vs. Theater - my take

In John Moore's most recent Running Lines Blog he took issue with the frequent use of "theatre" over the spelling "theater." Naturally, I had a comment or two to make about that, and, while I wait for my comments to be "approved by an administrator," I thought it would be fun to copy and paste them below:
I began using "theatre" over "theater" a few years ago, more as a means of demarcation than pretention. The English language is full of homonyms, and "theater" can mean the art form, the place where such an art form is performed, and a place where one can see Tom Hanks's face projected onto a giant screen.
So I switched back to the original "re" spelling when referring to the art form only. I keep to the now accepted Americanized misspellings for the venues.
And that's the truth of it. "Theatre" became "theater" through the phonetic spellings of the less educated. That's what happened to the "u" in color. People couldn't hear it, so they didn't write it. Eventually, dictionary makers gave up and said, "Fine! Both spellings are acceptable." Eventually the misspelling overtook the original correct spelling: a testament to the American philosophy of "Don't bother me with the details."
I worry that this will happen with more words as l33tspeak and an over-reliance on spellcheck further diminish the reverence that we have for our language.
Your pet peeve is that some people wish to adopt what is the original (correct) spelling of the word "theatre."
My language pet peeves include a growing disregard for the difference between "your" and "you're" and between "its" and "it's" and this new thing of writing "should of" and "could of" as a transcription of "should've" and "could've" (which, when written, really should go back to "should have" and "could have.")
It's laziness, and, sadly, the guardians of our language are more and more inclined to simply throw up their hands in defeat. (Not "there" hands or "they're" hands, mind you, but then fewer and fewer of us actually seem to care about that, either.)
I shudder to think that someday someone will be considered pretentious because they insist upon including all of the vowels in "srsly."

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

"Take Me To Another Place, Take Me To Another Land"

Okay, points for recognizing the song lyrics above. (Hint: the song title is mentioned below somewhere.)

Apparently, a touring production of Romeo and Juliet performed by a Toronto theatre company as written by  Shakespeare (oh, those crazy canucks) was a bit too racy for some of the folk in Nashville, Tennessee. (ahem.)
These people found some of the 16th century text a bit too bawdy for their liking and sent a letter to the company with suggested "revisions."
I am happy to say that the company, Toronto's Classical Theatre Project, elected to go ahead and present the play sans revision. (I knew I liked Toronto.)
Now, since I doubt that the offended parties are a true representation of the citizenry of Nashville, I am going to refrain from making any stereotypical jokes.
In fact, here is a short list of some of the jokes I will not be making here on this blog:

1. The company refused to change any lines, but compromised by adding a banjo and a washboard to the orchestra.

2. Next year's planned production of The Revenuer of Venice has been scrapped.

And, of course,

3. Should've just told 'em Romeo and Juliet were cousins.

None of those jokes will be appearing on this blog.

Ahhhh, I do not bite my thumb at thee, Nashville, I do but bite my thumb.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

That Shakespeare's a Wikkid Pissa

Okay, check out what they're doing in Boston. It might not be for everybody, and I'm sure it's not intended to completely replace the traditional theatre experience, but it's exciting and it's filling the seats - by taking risks, mind you, not by playing it safe.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Happy Robert Burns Day

Today is the 251st anniversary of the birth of one of my more famous ancestors and the man known as "Scotland's Favorite Son" and "the Ploughman Poet", Robert Burns.
"Rabbie" gave us such familiar poems as Auld Lang Syne, A Red, Red, Rose and the following:

My Heart's In The Highlands

Farewell to the Highlands, farewell to the North,
The birth-place of Valour, the country of Worth;
Wherever I wander, wherever I rove,
The hills of the Highlands for ever I love.

My heart's in the Highlands, my heart is not here;
My heart's in the Highlands a-chasing the deer;
A-chasing the wild-deer, and following the roe,
My heart's in the Highlands wherever I go.

Farewell to the mountains high covered with snow;
Farewell to the straths and green valleys below;
Farewell to the forests and wild-hanging woods;
Farewell to the torrents and loud-pouring floods.

My heart's in the Highlands, my heart is not here;
My heart's in the Highlands a-chasing the deer;
A-chasing the wild-deer, and following the roe,
My heart's in the Highlands wherever I go.