Saturday, February 10, 2007

Whos Afraid of Virginia Woolf - my review

Greetings blogger community. As is my custom now, whenever I see a movie or other production, I post a review on my blog. Since my wife and I went to see "Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolf" last night, guess what...

Last night was one of those perfect nights out that you look forward to and remember long after it's over. We picked up my brother at the Metrolink station in Covina, and drove to the Music Center in L.A. Considering that it was Friday night, we made awesome time. We paid our $8 for parking, and by 5:45, we were enjoying the night air as we took in the sites of the Ahmanson, Mark Taper Forum, Dorthy Chandler Pavillion, and the Dinsey Concert Hall. As we waited for my brother's girlfriend to get off work and meet us there, my bro showed is his "secret" places around the Music Center, and we surprised him by showing him some of our own. He didn't know that Angie and I had been there a few times ourselves. If you've never been there - find a reason to go. An added bonus was that as he was showing us where his girlfriend works, one Ms. Kathleen Turner popped out of a small limo right under where we were standing. She's the headlining star of the production. After blowing off a few autograph seekers, she disappeared into the stage door. Most people my age would recognise her as Michael Douglas's lady in "Romancing the Stone" and the sequel that sucked.

Our tickets couldn't have been better. We were in Row AA right up next to the stage. In case you're wondering, if there had been an orchestra last night (there wasn't), we would have been sitting on the oboe player's head.

As the production opened, Ms. Turner, and her costar, Bill Irwin, entered from stage left to roaring applause. Ms. Turner has a lot of fans. They exchange some words, and it immediately becomes apparent that their characters, Martha and George, have a love-hate type of marriage. Their dynamic is tragic while at the same time filled with some of the funniest exchanges I have ever seen on stage. For example, when Martha tells George, "you make me puke," (audience laughs), George responds with "that's not a very nice thing to say, Martha." I know it comes off sort of dry, but in the dialog that leads up to it, it's as funny as two guys kissing over a Snicker's. The setting is the living room of George and Martha's in a small home near a New England university of which George is "in" the history department, and of whom Martha's red-eyed, white moused father is the president. The couple has just arrived home after a welcoming party for the new professor on campus. It's 2:00 in the morning.

As the evening wears on, they are joined by the new professor, Nick, and his wife, whom we know as Honey. The four drink and exchange insults, verbal and physical abuse, and relentlessly peel away each others layers until we learn the deepest, darkest, most intimate things about each of them. Overall, the play was outstanding, and while I do enjoy musicals, I really enjoy the dramatic productions with minimal characters and deep, meaningful dialog.

With that in mind, I have to give props to Bill Irwin, because I believe he is what made this production. Kathleen Turner, while outstanding in her own right, did an excellent job, but her character did not require any real stretch. I'm not saying I could do it, and given Ms. Turner's remarkable career and even more remarkable battle with various ailments, I don't know that she couldn't be replaced with any other actress in her post 40's and have the quality of the production reduced at all. But I do need to point out that it is Ms. Turner who deserves full credit for the revival of this production (it was originally performed in 1966), and for that, I am grateful.

The other two characters barely deserve any mention. Again, I'm not saying that I could do it, but I don't know that the roles really required any special talent, nor do I think Kathleen Early or David Furr brought anything special to the stage. However, David Furr did crack me up during the first act, when he and Irwin nearly broke character when discussing Honey's "false alarm" pregnancy when she "went up, then went down."

All in all, the performances of all four performers was deserving of the standing ovation they received at the end, and if you get the chance to see this while it is in town, please do. One last highlight for us was during the second act when George breaks a bottle on stage. The bottle breaking wasn't the highlight, but the little piece of glass I found for Angie was.

Take Care.

Monday, February 05, 2007

Bring Back the Frogs!

Yesterday was superbowl Sunday. As we usually do, we went over to some friends' to watch the game and eat junk food. While I don't follow football during the season, I do watch the superbowl every year (except last year, when we went to Disneyland with the Armstrongs).

While the game is usually okay, I get a bigger kick out of watching my friends make their commentaries about the action. I also like the commercials - or at least I used to. It seems that in the last few years, the commercials have gone from world class to mediocre, to just plain boring. In fact, the advertising agencies have become so incompetent, that they have resorted to what I will call "reality advertising," where viewers make their own commercials and send them in. This year, the best commercial, in my opinion, was a viewer piece for Doritos in which a guy driving a car, while eating Doritos, sees a hot girl, also eating Doritos, crashes, and then looks out the windows as the hot girl trips off the curb. There were a few others that made me smile, but no trend setters like the Budweiser frogs, or Michael Jackson setting his hair on fire. In the past 10 years, I only remember one commercial as really standing out. Maybe you remember the Wilson commercial that was a re-enactment of David and Goliath, shot like a Hollywood epic movie, and after David lobs the fateful stone into Goliaths cranium, a close-up of the stone reveals the Wilson "W" logo. That's a commercial worth spending $2.6 million on.

The one thing that I found particularly disturbing this year was that it seemed most of the commercials during the first quarter had a certain "queer eye" overtone. One commercial had two guys accidentally kissing over a Snickers. Another had a male sales executive passing on the opportunity to give a hot girl a ride in his new car, only to offer a ride to another dude in his office. What the crap? I don't want to see this. I don't ever want to watch dudes kissing, especially during a football game. I think I'm boycotting Snickers. The people on the other side of the fence can have them.