Improving on Shakespeare?: Verdi's Otello

Met Opera Live HD broadcast of Verdi's Otello yesterday had its ups (Renee Fleming is a great Desdemona, beautiful voice and delicate presence), Iago (suitably gruff but also lyrical and conniving), Cassio (a Met star on the rise no doubt), if you could overlook the shortcomings of Botha's Otello - the voice seemed thin and strained (he had missed 3 previous performances with illness, so that may have been a factor), acting very clumsy - and HD is no friend to a nonglamorous presence like Botha: you're better off in the 20th row rather than seeing the sweat pool and the makeup run. In fact, HD will or maybe has changed the way operas are cast and staged - the singers have to look and act the role, not from 100 rows away from from 10 feet away. Even Fleming, great though she is, pushes the line of credibility when you try to imagine her and Botha as a couple of love-struck newlyweds. Anyway, still a great production musically and all the Met production values are there - and a lot of fun to watch the backstage prep in between acts. Otello is a true rarity, an operatic adaptation of Shakespeare that improves, in some aspects, on the original: obviously Desdmenona's great 4th-act scene and the willow song take a small moment in the play - and the strange incident in which Desdemona recalls a servant from her childhood who dies of love (so odd that she even mentions her name - a character we will never meet - but vivid in our minds as Barbara) - Verdi expands on this with amazing beauty - which is the great gift of lyric opera - taking a dramatic moment and opening it emotionally. In other ways, the adaptation is not an improvement: though the opening scene, as the crowd in Cyprus watches Otello's ship arrive in a storm, is exciting and beautiful, but, to gain unity of place, Verdi sacrificed the scenes in Venice - and as a result we never quite get that Otello is completely ill at east with the sly Italians, and that they're a bit contemptuous of him: they knew they had to hire a stud to be their general, but it doesn't mean they have to like him or let him marry their local beauty - still a familiar theme (in war, and in sports). So in the opera, Otello just seems stupid but in Shakespeare he is more subtly played as a general who doesn't understand the cues in the world of civilians.

A quiet film that will astonish you: Pariah

I wasn't sure I'd like Dee Rees's "Pariah," and I would definitely say don't be put off by the graphic nature of the first scene, in a black Lesbian NYC nightclub - it is by no means an exploitative or sensational movie - it's a very low-budget indie and, like most good indies, it tells a very simple story about a few characters leading ordinary but troubled lives: in this case it's about a teenage girl just coming to terms with her own sexuality, and by the pressure she feels on all sides from so-called friends who betray her and misunderstand her, by fellow students who are cruel and mocking, and most of all by her parents, a black family in, I think, maybe west Harlem or Morningside Heights, the mom in particular with social aspirations - the parents are not bad people, but they don't know how to react to their daughter's growing and evolving sexuality, which leads to some real conflict between them and finally a tremendous family fight. Within this very tight little plot structure there's a lot of emotion and drama, and you'd have a heart of stone if you don't feel for the young girl - but it's by no stretch schmaltzy or sentimental - feels as real as a documentary. Truly a film that knows exactly what it wants to accomplish and does so perfectly. Not a big knockout film but a quiet one that will astonish you I think. Too many people would write this off as a film that wouldn't appeal to them because of the subject, but the subject isn't homosexuality, it's life and maturity and families and race and class and education. Memorably, at the end, the young girl, about to leave her familiar life, says she's not running away, she's choosing. Very smart conclusion to this surprisingly strong film.

Hitler, Shylock, flower power - and The Piper

Musical in workshop production at Harvard, The Piper, written and directed by Christian Fohrby, co-author Richard Plum, was a charming and intriguing show that still needs a lot of polishing but has a lot of potential as well. We've gone to a # of Harvard shows over past few years at invite of the Wolks, and would say that The Piper may be the most fun of all = not only because it's clearly Susanna Wolk's best role, as we've watched her acting get better and better and her voice mature into a beautiful instrument, but also because of the energy and creativity and openness to ideas and discussion (the cast included stickies in he program, asking audience for comments). This version of the Piper legend does focus on SW's role, the Mayor's daughter - she is the emotional center of the play, and as the process moves forward I would think the writing team would want to build on that. There are several elements to the Piper legend. Most familiar (actually popularized in the 1970s or so with a very bad pop song) is that of the Piper as the Tambourine Man who leads the younger generation off to a different land, drawing them away from the families - as every generation goes through, and particularly in the Vietnam era when the cultural divisions were so stark. This is the version most closely aligned with this production: the Mayor's daughter hates her hometown, everyone looks alike and dresses alike, no one has an original idea, the parents just want to make $, and the politicians all are phony - she sees the Piper as an escape - the stranger comes to town - but she can't make the break with him. I hope the production will build on this theme and not just leave the daughter alone in the spotlight at the end lamenting her plight. To me, the most striking and scary moment in the legend, at least as I remember it, is the Mayor's daughter leaving with the kids but - does she turn to look backward? - and not making it over the mountain - she's the only child left behind. Piper could do something with that, too - which brings me to the biggest gap in the production. No rats? and no kids? We really need to feel the full population of children early on (as AW noted to me) - and more important feel the emptiness once they're gone. There are two other Piper versions (at least), and The Piper steers away from these darker elements, but they might be worth thinking about: Is the Piper an avatar of Hitler - getting rid of the "rats" and making the society so much cleaner and better - but with a huge price to pay? Or, a third version: the piper is like the wandering Jew( or perhaps the illegal immigrant?), he comes into Hamelin to do the dirty work that no one in Hamelin will take on - he conducts his business but then nobody will pay him a fair wage because he's weak, different, foreign. And, like Shylock, he exacts his revenge. Some things to think about as this intriguing production moves forward.

A four hour movie in which every moment is beautiful

Last night finished Raul Ruiz's 4-hour epic "Mysteries of Lisbon," making four nights of it - actually really like the film, despite many things. First of all, the byzantine plot, full of Dickensian coincidences and improbably reveals, is very hard to follow - it would really help to have read the novel or seen a cribsheet or seen the film twice - and the narrative made more difficult by characters who change appearance somewhat over the course of the long narrative, by overdubbed narrative voices that are hard to identify, and the general confusions of know piecing together the many complex family relations, some of which are not explained until late in the movie. So - don't worry about that, and just enjoy the movie scene by scene and moment by moment. Ruiz does an astounding job with bringing this world, mid-19th-century Portugal (with forays into France) to life. Though the movie is very short on action and though most of the scenes are very simple, constructed around dialogue, often with just two actors in frame, with relatively few closeups, Ruiz frames every single scene beautifully and imaginatively: the scenes in the chateaux, the ballrooms (will remind of Visconti), the occasional scenes out in the open with carriages crossing a wide green expanse (reminds of Renoir), and most of all the dialogues in rooms: in the school early on, in convents and monk's cell, many in rooms in the chateau or a hotel - each one vivid and many having very odd elements that set them off and surprise us: the many eyes watching the dialogue between the priest (Father Dinis) and his mentor, when they think they're alone; the creepy footman in one of the palaces who prances across the polished floors on tiptoes, a scene shot mostly as reflection in a mirror. Some of the court scenes are as strange and elegant as one of those huge Baroque canvases, a Velasquez maybe. Despite my warnings above about difficulty of following the plot, you can get enough of it even on first viewing, and the mysteries do become more or less clear at the end; though it's not as great and profound a series as, say, The Best of Youth, and not as great an adaptation as some of the British adaptations of Dickens, especially the recent Bleak House and Little Dorrit, it's a memorable film and an access, for most Americans, to a time we know little about and to a source not that till now was unknown at least to me.

Portuaguese soap - but a very good movie none the less - Mysteries of Lisbon

It's maybe too easy to dismiss Ruiz's four+-hour project, "Mysteries of Lisbon" (2010?) as a glorified soap, and it does have the complex web of loves and hatreds and betrayals of any soap - but there's a lot more to it, I think, at least from the first half (Part one). First of all, the production quality alone makes it worth watching - Ruiz does not work at an exciting pace, it's leisurely and majesterial, but that tone perfectly suits the material, a story that unfolds gradually - set in mid-19th-century Portugal, basic plot summary: wealthy young woman falls in love with a 2nd son of a Count, but her father refuses to allow the marriage because he will inherit nothing; she (Angela) and he continue their relationship; she becomes pregnant, gives up baby, father of baby flees, and her father forces her to marry a wealthy suitor. She's very cold to the suitor - she has turned inward and against the world - and he treats her cruelly. Meanwhile, boy raised as an orphan, under tutelage of Father Denis, who seems to know everything and everyone; mother finally sees her son - around time the husband dies, confessing his sins - and she forgives him, realizing she never should have married. She leaves her son and enters a convent. Priest playing a central role, as we move toward part 2: how does he know so much? Why is a fierce self-made wealth Lisbon guy defending Angela (Countess of Santa Barabara) against slander? Lots of things to explain and relationships to develop in part two. The film at its best reminds me a bit of great Italian series The Best of Youth in its focus on character and its broad historic scope. Mostly it's appealing because of its unusual - to American viewers - look and setting. It's of the Masterpiece Theater quality - in its ballroom scenes (which reminded me a little of The Leopard), its scenes in the convent and the school and the various mansions, and most of all in the beautiful outdoor sequences, carriages moving across an open plain, for example. It has the strange sense for me of looking very familiar - we've all seen many 19th-century costume dramas - but just slightly off: it's neither England, France, Italy, nor Spain - Portuguese architecture and landscape are just slightly different and interesting to behold. We'll see how well the strand come together in part 2 - some of the elements are pretty confusing (apparently its based on a well-known novel of same title - but the novel probably had a lot more material, and it's a challenge to weave all that into a film or series, even at 4+ hours.)

Tip for U.S. film producer: pick up the rights to Sleepless Night

The 2011 French-Belgian film "Sleepless Night" (Nuit Blanche, actually) is just about a perfect genre film that completely satisfies on its own terms - it will never be mistaken for The Seventh Seal or The Godfather - it's just a great cops-drugs-gangsters action drama, with a super-tight plot, lots of twists and turns, enough but not too much ambiguity (slight spoiler here, but I could never be sure, even after the film, whether the main cop was truly working undercover or if he was a crook - I think the latter). Simply put, story about two cops who rob a drug runner, shooting him to death in the process, leading to an investigation. When a Sicilian mobster nightclub owner - a truly ugly an sinister guy - learns that the cop has the Rx headed for him hie grabs the cop's preteen son and holds him in the huge nightclub he runs until the cop returns the Rx. So this becomes a story about a bad guy trying to do whatever it takes to rescue his son - and the father-son relationship adds a human dimension to the story and draws us in emotionally. The whole story takes place within 24 hours, and most of it during the nighttime hours in the club, so there's a great sense of unity of time and place, very unusual in contemporary movies. The pace is lightning fast, some terrific fight and flight scenes, tension throughout every moment - and also lots of incidental humor, especially the scenes in the night club's restaurant kitchen (the staff reactions as they watch two thugs grapple in the kitchen is hilarious). Main cop - christlike? - has a scary knifewound in his side through the whole ordeal - he can't go to a hospital for fear of being linked to the killing. The only reason this film has flown below the radar is that it's in French with no familiar actors and with rather drab settings; I would guess some smart producer will buy the rights and make an American version, set in Las Vegas or LA - and they'll probably ruin it. Or maybe not.

A completely tense series from start to finish: Homeland Season One

Season 1 of "Homeland" did not disappoint in the least - unlike so many other series, it kept me thinking and engaged and tense right to the last moment, and had enough unresolved plot lines and hints and suggestions of further developments to keep my thinking and waiting without leaving me with the feeling of a plot in search of itself or a blatant, pandering cliffhanger. Claire Danes great throughout the season and outdoes herself in last episodes, when her bipolar disorder comes into play and becomes a major plot point: the conspiracy she sees all around her could very well be, to others and even to herself when she realizes how sick she is, just a paranoid fantasy - except we know she's onto something, though we're not entirely sure of all of the parameters of the conspiracy. We certainly understand why her CIA colleagues and others would elieve she's just mentally deranged. I had suggested two big plot outcomes in earlier posts - neither of which came to fruition - but I still suspect these elements might be developed further in Season 2: (spoilers): We know that Estes was involved in a cover-up because he didn't want it known he gave the OK to drone bombing of civilians. Is it worse than that? Is he actually taking funds from Al Qaeda? Second, we know that "Isa" was killed in a drone attack on Iraq; is it possible that Abu Nazir sacrificed his own son to the cause? We still don't really know how the terroristis communicated with the "turned" POWs Brody and Wallace (?), and I for one am not ye completely convinced that Brody would turn against his country because of the drone bombing that killed children. There may be more to this yet. In any case, of all the thriller series I've seen over the past few years, several of which involve domestic terrorism (Sleeper Cell one of the best), Homeland is by far the best crafted and probably the best acted as well, at least among the leads (yes, I have come to kind of like the rumpled and mumbly Mandy Patinkin as Danes's mentor and father-figure).

A new old-fashioned British spy film: Page Eight

The relatively new Masterpiece movie, the British "Page Eight," has everything going for it that we have come to love and expect from so many British films, starting with great acting (that famous British tradition still extant - these actors all must come from the world of live theater rather than, as do U.S. actors, from the world of fashion runways), starting with Bill Nighy and Rachel Weisz (though either she's too young and pretty for the part or, in any case, hard to accept that she would have any romantic interest in the much older Nighy), crisp directing and really smart writing scene by scene, thanks to David Hare, and of course the fine production values - not as evident in a contemporary piece, but still, the film does capture the essence and look of a variety of contemporary London settings. All that said, Page Eight ends up fading from the mind and memory very quickly - like eating a piece of candy that just doesn't satisfy a real appetite - in that at the end it's like about a thousand other British films and shows about British spies, moles, sources, interagency conflicts, duplicitous prime ministers, overbearing subordinates, and so forth. Very briefly, story revolves around a source who claims that the PM knows and has known about secret American prisons and torture interrogations - Nighy tries to ferret out the truth, and ends up in conflict with one of his co-workers. There are some odd twists - is Weisz spying on him or not? - but ultimately I didn't find anything that distinguished this film from the masses. Though there's a nod to technology and social media - some joshing toward Nighy about his being very old fashioned, but he triumphs by using a camera that uploads automatically to "a computer" as he so quaintly puts it - the spy and counterspy techniques in Page Eight would have fit right in with a Le Carre novel: would be interesting to see a British spy film or show that really pitted the old techniques, good sources, occasional lock-picking and break-ins, against contemporary techniques, cold and analytic and dependent on technology rather than on people skills and social savvy.

God said to Abraham: Kill me a son. Homeland and the Bible.

Spoiler again here but just a quick note on Season 1 of "Homeland": in previous post I speculated on some plot developments that I can foresee, one of which, I suspect, will be a revelation that the terrorists arranged the bombing that killed Abu Nazir's son, Isa - a death that was blamed on the U.S. and that supposedly leads Sgt Brody to "turn" away from the U.S. and toward Al Qaeda. I noted that this may be an enactment of the sacrifice of Isaac - which, if I'm not mistaken, Muslims unlike Jews believe actually was carried out. Let me point something out - have others noticed the very names of these characters? The father, Abu (Abraham?) Nazir, and his son, Isa (Isaac)?

Trying to figure out where Homeland is heading in Season 1

Spoilers here: but about 8 episodes into the excellent Showtime series "Homeland" (Season 1) I'm completely convinced that my surmise in previous post is on the money: Estes, the CIA boss, is clearly the mole within the CIA, giving away information to Abu Nazir and the terrorists: he has the means and the motive; they made it really clear that he's in a terrible divorce situation and he needs the money. If you closely watch the interrogation scene, he had the opportunity to slip the terrorist subject a razor blade. He was completely uncooperative on the lie-detector test, and they didn't call him on it because of his rank. He's tried to hinder Kerrie (the excellent Claire Danes) except when he can use her, and he knew of all the intelligence info and had time to convey it. OK, so maybe I figured that much out; but what about Brody himself, the returned POW whom Kerrie suspects has turned? We do know that he has been working with the terrorist Nazir - but is he some kind of double-agent or triple-agent? In these latest episodes they dramatize how and why he supposedly "turned" - anger about the American drone bombing, and then the cover-up, that killed Nazir's son, whom Brody was tutoring in English. I wonder, though, if the bombing could have been done or staged by the terrorists: we know they faked the death of an Marine in order to get Brody to believe his was guilty of murder. My first thought was of the Muslim interpretation of the Abraham-Isaac story: Abraham would have and did kill his son, in service to the cause. But I'm actually thinking that maybe Nazir never had a son, that the whole tutoring arrangement was plotted out to ensnare Brody: the kid may have been just a street urchin. Very hard to figure out Brody's motives and objectives. Also hard to figure out how his fellow POW survived or why he's turned into terrorist himself.