Archive | Current Affairs

Pulling the Heartstrings: WMU puts on Eurydice

Pulling the Heartstrings: WMU puts on Eurydice

It is amazingly difficult to be more tragic than Greek tragedy. The myth of Orpheus is the perfect example of quintessential Ancient Greek pessimism. Say what you will about the ancient Greeks, they knew how to pull at the heartstrings. Losing the love of your life once is bad, but twice is just devastating. Based on the tragic myth of Orpheus and Eurydice is the play by Sarah Ruhl, Eurydice. Helped along by an amazing cast and a spectacular set design, the Western Michigan University performance at York Arena Theater is both infinitely funnier and devastatingly more tragic than the original myth.

George Frederick Watts's Orpheus and Eurydice

The humor comes in two forms; the new spin on the classic Greek chorus and the unfettered interpretation of the Lord of the Underworld. The energetic Chorus of Stones is a permanent fixture in the underworld and serves as translator while helping transition the less-than-living to their new home. The three stones, identified as Loud Stone (Katy Copeland), Little Stone (Shannon Hill) and Big Stone (Ben Maters), are all dressed head-to-toe in grubby, soot-stained mining gear, which helps to remind us of the setting on the bare stage, including the Stones’ headlamps, which are perfectly suited to their use in the lighting design. The chorus pulls the show together, injecting the play with a powerful energetic feel and acts as a distorted emotional mirror: cheering at the failure and misery of the protagonists and jeering their successes.

The most thrilling performance of the play comes from Zack Apman, who portrays the Nasty Interesting Man and the Lord of the Underworld. Between his outrageous dance moves, perfectly disturbing evil cackle and daring journey on a tricycle, he brings much needed character to the play. He provides an unlikely mix of power-hungry, devastatingly lonely and slightly malicious, the synergy of which becomes ridiculously hilarious.  Foreshadowed in the opening, however, it is the interplay between the protagonists, and not The Lord of the Underworld, that causes their truly tragic downfall.  Orpheus (Michael Lopetrone), ever the musician in his gilded burnt-amber headphones, thinks of nothing but music while Eurydice (Rachel Napoleon) is fixated on him and disheartened that the artist does not reciprocate her devotion. The cute and pantomime-filled romance between Orpheus and Eurydice culminates in their short-lived marriage. The Nasty Interesting Man lures Eurydice away from her wedding party and towards her wake. After Eurydice’s untimely death, the real action of the play starts.

The Chorus of Stones, Eurydice, her loving, supportive and dead father (Joel Hoard), and a spectacular lighting array populate the underworld half of the stage. In contrast, the other half is barren and shows the continued suffering of a heart-broken Orpheus. The two halves of the stage alternate, switching the action of the play from the underworld to Orpheus. The underworld scene depicts a touching reunion between father and daughter and a growing familial bond; the other scene shows Orpheus slowly losing touch with reality. Michael’s portrayal of Orpheus’ growing detachment and the intense pain of his loss comes across amazingly as he shouts at the stage floor, begging his dead wife to hear his cries of undying love. As this pathos-inducing display is playing out, the father and daughter are sharing memories of life and family, displaying sweet sentimentality and a compellingly-performed father-daughter connection.

The relationships that have built up over the play’s course are used heart-wrenchingly well to heap tragedy upon tragedy at the end of the play. Overall, the acting is compelling, the twist on the old myth breathes new life and depth into the story and the lighting and sound design is more than effective, adding an element of spectacle to an otherwise bare stage.

The show continues to play in WMU’s York Arena Theater; February 4th-6th at 8 p.m. with a Sunday matinee on the 7th at 2 p.m. Tickets are $20, $15 for senior citizens and only $5 for all students.

Posted in Kalamazoo, Movies/TV0 Comments

Kosmo Oscar Predictions!

Kosmo Oscar Predictions!

Awards season is by far the best time of year for a movie fan. Not only is it an opportunity to see stars and directors in their finest, it’s an opportunity to experience the best (popular) movies of 2009.

My first experience with Oscar was in 2005. Being an overly overt fan of Finding Neverland, I would slam front runner Million Dollar Baby amongst friends and family. Of course after seeing Million Dollar Baby, I admit my narrow mindedness as it is a far superior film.

This morning, The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences released the nominations for the 82nd Annual Academy Awards. I will try to pilot the major categories as best as I can to give an idea of what to expect on March 7th, 2010.

Best Picture

It is hard to gauge where voters will steer this ship. In an unexpected move, the Academy moved the nominee number to 10 this year. This pegs for a wide variety of material and target audience. Avatar and Inglorious Basterds should get pre-hype as they have captured other organization awards. Avatar took home the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture Drama while Basterds received the Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture award from the Screen Actors Guild. In order to round out the top five, I would bet on The Hurt LockerUp in the Air, and The Blind Side being favorites.

On to who will win. As Hollywood loves money, Avatar would be the best pick. But as history shows, Hollywood doesn’t always love the hype (a la Brokeback Mountain). Avatar isn’t a great movie (it isn’t really even good) therefore I believe the field is open. A quirky comedy like Up in the Air could finally bring home an Oscar for Jason Reitman (missed on Juno and snubbed on Thank You For Smoking). The Hurt Lockercould potentially be this years Crash, an indie drama about bomb technicians in Iraq. The Blind Side has be known to be a motivating, tear jerking drama that showed the acting chops of notoriously bad Sandra Bullock. Even the animated (lovely) favorite from Pixar, Up, could potentially garner enough voters.

Who will win: I believe Hollywood rewards Avatar as it is the most popular choice

Who should win: Up in the Air or Inglorious Basterds were phenom films of 2009.

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Subcategories are much easier to predict as the field is generally narrowed to four or five. Jeremy Renner was wonderful to watch in The Hurt Locker, a gung-ho American bomb technician in Iraq (although I couldn’t help draw comparisons to his military portrayal in 28 Weeks Later). Morgan Freeman was bland in Ivictus and for further explanation, my review of the movie can be found on this blog. I haven’t seen A Single Man (Colin Firth) and George Clooney (Up in the Air) is always the Oscar darling (received nominations in 2006 and 2007). With the Golden Globes and Screen Actors Guild Awards (SAG) as guidance, I believe it is safe to put money on Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart. Yes, I believe The Dude, Bridges character in The Big Lebowski, will win come March 7th.

Who Will Win: Jeff Bridges

Who Should Win: George Clooney. I haven’t seen Crazy Heart but Clooney was enjoyable in Up in the Air.

Best Actress in a Leading Role

It is a rarity to find an award that Meryl Streep is nominated for and not expected to win. Sandra Bullock’s sweep of the Golden Globe and SAG categories should propel her to Oscar stardom. I don’t believe Carey Mulligan will capture enough voters for her An Education performance and while Gabourey Sidibe (Precious) might be too fresh (first motion picture role) for the award. While Helen Mirren was rewarded for her role in The Queen, Bullock will prevail.

Who Will Win: Unfortunately, Keanu’s sidekick (Speed) will win this year.

Who Should Win: Probably Sandra Bullock. I haven’t seen The Blind Side and I will refrain from knocking it too hard, but it’s Sandra Bullock.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role

The Lovely Bones failed to capture the hype it had a year ago. Peter Jackson’s followup to King Kong won’t bring him the record love LOTR: Return of the King did. I predict then that Stanley Tucci (The Lovely Bones) will rest at the bottom with Woody Harrelson (The Messenger) and Christopher Plummer (The Last Station). While Matt Damon was inspiring in Invictus, it’s still Invictus. All signals point to Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds. Speaking four languages while taking on the controversial role of a rewarded Nazi SS was magnificent.

Who Will Win: Christoph Waltz

Who Should Win: No one other than Christoph Waltz

Best Actress in a Supporting Role

This category is a bit more muddled than Best Actress. The leading ladies of Up in the Air (Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick) will probably cancel each other out. Maggie Gyllenhaal’s nod was greeted as a surprise and that leaves Penelope Cruz (Nine) and Mo’nique (Precious) as the frontrunners. The Academy does like musicals which could propel Ms. Cruz above Mo’nique but, I expect that Mo’nique ultimately wins as she took home both Golden Globe and SAG awards.

Who Will Win: Mo’nique

Who Should Win: After staring in Phat Girlz and Flavor of Love Girls: Charm School, this is an unexpected turnaround.

Best Animated Feature Film

I enjoyed Fantastic Mr. Fox and the return to 2D animation by Disney was welcomed with The Princess and the Frog, an Up upset would be shocking.

Who Will Win: Up

Who Should Win: Up…again

Best Original Screenplay

This category should be decided between The Hurt Locker (Mark Boal) and Inglorious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino). Up deserves the recognition and any Coen Bros. work (A Serious Man) is sure to not disappoint. Rounding out the category is Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman for The Messenger. All in all, this one could go anywhere.

Who Will Win: I will go out on a limb and say Up. Moving and popular, this touched all ages.

Who Should Win: I enjoyed Hurt Locker but much of the movie was placed on acting and I believe the vulgarity of Inglorious Basterds might drive a few voters away.

Best Adapted Screenplay

Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner will almost surely win this category for their work in Up in the Air. Although An Education and Precious could prove to be dark horses, I suspect District 9 and In the Loop to provide little competion

Who Will Win: Up in the Air

Who Should WIn: Up in the Air

Kathryn Bigelow and James Cameron

Best Director

Interestingly enough James Cameron (Avatar) and Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker) were former lovebirds. I believe Jason Reitman (Up in the Air) will be rewarded for screenplay instead of directing and Tarantino (Basterds) and Lee Daniels (Precious) should be on the outside looking in.

Who Will Win: James Cameron if voters want to see another “I’m the king of the world” proclamation (see Cameron’s Oscar acceptance speech for Titanic) or Bigelow if voters want to pick someone deserving of the award.

Who Should Win: Kathryn Bigelow

Odds and Ends

Since I have hit all of the major categories, I will offer some minor predictions for the smaller awards. I suspect Avatar to sweep Best Film Editing, Best Cinematography, and Best Visual Effects. Sound mixing will likely be between Avatar and The Hurt LockerUp and Avatar will compete for Best Original Score and I suspect Best Sound Mixing will be another dog fight between The Hurt Locker and Avatar.

Posted in Current Affairs, Entertainment, Movies/TV, Technology and Games, The Campus Dispatch0 Comments

I’m Applying for Teach for America: A Personal Experience, Part I

I’m Applying for Teach for America: A Personal Experience, Part I

Amidst seemingly international pressure to have Plans for After College, I am applying to Teach for America.  “At the very least, it’s a paycheck and full hours,” one friend points out.  I encounter two camps regarding TFA.  The first are academic types that say “TFA is a great opportunity,” pointing to the acquired professional and graduate study qualifications the program allows, not to mention the “real world” experience.  I counter that if I currently am not gaining real world experience, to please unplug the back of my neck from the motherboard and pull the hose out of my throat. The other camp comes more from my colleagues: “I heard TFA is really fucking hard.  I knew someone whose friend dropped out.

Sitting in the office of a professor whose opinion I highly value, I popped the question: “So, what do you think of Teach for America?”  “I love it,” he responded, referencing a former student of his who completed the program while gaining an expensive accreditation from a local university, made affordable by TFA. “It’s really fucking hard though,” he added.  “No easy stuff.”

Upon closer examination, it is difficult to pinpoint what is “so fucking hard” about TFA, when, in fact, what you do is quite simple: you teach, and nobody who teaches does so because it is easy.  As a four-year Woodward School for Technology and Research veteran, having co-run the program in 2007-2008, and currently involved in nuturing personal long-term relationships with specific students and their families, I can vouch that the rewards for such time-alotment are often retrospective, best reflected upon after a good meal and a nap.  Hearsay, however, can be gold when it comes to “life transition programs” such as TFA, and one thing that I hear is that corps members quit, or become discouraged because they feel impotent to fight the greater forces at work in their respective classrooms.

The K student liaison to TFA came into my Shakespeare class Fall Quarter to plug the upcoming application deadline.  She recounted a story of two public high schools in the same Chicago school district.  One was well funded and in a wealthy area, and a majority of the students performed well on national tests, and the expected number went on to higher education.  The other high school was more urban, poorly funded, and [I believe] serviced a predominantly ‘minority’ community. An astoundingly low percentage of the students there åperformed well on national tests, and very few went on to higher education, let alone graduated or passed an equivalency exam.  And this was why we were supposed to join Teach for America.  I sat in the back of the room and screamed “DOESN’T ANYBODY REALIZE THAT THERE ARE LARGER AND SYSTEMIC ISSUES AT PLAY HERE?  THEY’RE IN THE SAME FUCKING SCHOOL DISTRICT.  THERE SHOULDN’T BE A SINGLE FUCKING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO SCHOOLS AND THEIR STAFF!”

I brought up my “plugging the cracks in the dam” theory with my trusted professor.  He nodded and said “Oh, yes.  I see now.  Yes.” and then he nodded again.

In May 2009, U.S. Secretary of Education Secretary Arne Duncan called Detroit “ground zero” for education, though he added that he felt “‘a sense of real hope … [that] people here understand’ the importance of education and the need for reform.” That following December, Detroit Public Schools learned that their students set the nation record for inferiority on the National Assessment for Educational Progress.  69% of the fourth graders and 77% of the eighth graders participating in the hour long exam scored “below basic” on math.  The Freep mused,

“The results are perhaps the most damning indictment to date of a district already pummeled by reports of poor graduation rates, labor disputes, financial collapse, and even gunfire in the hallways.”

The buck stopped at the school district administration, and then Lansing-appointed “emergency financial manager” Robert Bibb took the Washington and deposited it into the district’s waning coffers.  “Just one of three of DPS fourth-graders, the test suggests, can correctly subtract 75 from 301, given a choice of three answers,” the Freep observed.

In the print edition of the Free Press I picked up that evening, one column opined that this was the district’s fault, while one blamed the teachers.  Another vaguely asserted a connection between parental involvement and educational success, and all parties agreed that this, above all else, was not the student’s fault.  There was even a nice graphic to illustrate how two-thirds of Detroit’s publicly-educated fourth- and eighth-graders were stumped by 301-75 = ___.  (My iPhone calculator says ’226′).

And I’m thinking: this isn’t one person’s fault.  This isn’t just bureaucratic vacuousness, or teacher inanity or family fatuousness or a student’s lack of respect for him or herself: this is everyone’s fault.  Every person who has ever meaningfully encountered these kids is to blame for this pathetic academic showing–including the students themselves (though we are all so much a product of our environments).

In an age where Washington plans to spend $663.7 billion on the DOD (not including $42.7 billion allotted to the Department of Homeland Security) compared to $46.7 billion on education–and $164 billion to cover the interest on our national debt–Teach for America employs around 7,300 college grads to help fill and ameliorate the nation’s classrooms, none of which are located at the academic “ground zero” of Detroit.

The final application deadline for 2010 is February 19.

The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of The Kosmopolitan Online.  They reflect the personal opinions of the author.

Posted in Current Affairs, Kalamazoo, Voices/The Times4 Comments

Page 10 of 83« First...89101112203040...Last »
Advert

The Kosmopolitan Online is:

Published with support from The Center for American Progress/Campus Progress

Archives