Movie: TIFF 2014

For TIFF 2014, I watched 29 movies in 11 days for an average of 3 movies per day plus two preview movies before the festival officially started.  These 31 movies were a new record for me and I wondered if I had bitten off more than I could chew.  Compared to last season, this year's festival seemed to include many more movies that appealed to my husband and I, which made picking the candidates very easy, but narrowing down and scheduling the final picks quite difficult.  After the first pass of reviewing the movies' synopsis, we had over 50 contenders on our "short"-list that either one or both of us considered watching.

The scheduling exercise involved ensuring that there was no overlaps and sufficient times between movies.  This included not only the movie run-time plus the Question and Answer (Q&A) session if available, but also the wait time in the line-ups to get into the theatres (usually 1 hour or more to get the seats of our choice - 2 seats together, not too close to the screen but close enough to take photos of the movie stars), plus travel time to get between theatres that could be as far as 3.5km apart.  There was also the consideration of which screening to go to for each movie.  Attending the first screening almost guarantees your chance of seeing the director and possibly actors of the movie and receiving a Q&A session.  The chances diminish if you attend the second screening and are practically nil by the third and last screening.  So where possible, we tried schedule first screenings for films with topics that would provide interesting discussions, or had good stars in the cast.  This logistic challenge was greatly aided by my favourite tool, the trusty spreadsheet with its filtering and colour-coding capabilities.

While it would be unrealistic to expect all 31 of my picks to be winners, this year even the relatively "bad" ones were not horrible.  I did not get that "I've just wasted 2 hours of my life that I can never get back" feeling from previous years. And there were many more movies that I thoroughly enjoyed including a good mix of smaller films, foreign language films, documentaries and mainstream Hollywood fare.  The following are some of my favourite movies of 2014.

The movie I was most looking forward to seeing was The Last 5 Years and I was not disappointed.  The Last 5 Years is the movie adaptation of one of my favourite musicals by composer Jason Robert Brown.  Entirely through song, it tells the story of the doomed relationship of struggling actress Cathy and up-and-coming author Jamie.  One of their major issues is poignantly summarized by Jamie in a song where he sings " I will not fail so you can be comfortable, Cathy I will not lose because you can't win."

With alternating solos, Cathy starts at the end of their relationship and moves backwards towards the beginning when they first meet, while Jamie sings chronologically from the beginning until the end.  In the theatre production, Cathy and Jamie are never on stage at the same time, except for when their timelines meet in the middle and they get married, and also at the end when Cathy is glowingly saying goodbye after their first date while Jamie is sadly saying goodbye to their union.

The movie, starring Anna Kendrick (Pitch Perfect) and Jeremy Jordan (Smash), is a brilliant adaptation whose settings and visuals perfectly captured the images that I envisioned while listening to the soundtrack.  Unlike the theatre version, Cathy and Jeremy are in the scenes of each other's solos, interacting and reacting to what is being sung to them.  The time jumps are made obvious not only by the tone and lyrics of the songs, but through clothing, hairstyles, colours and lighting.  The happy scenes representing the beginning of the relationship are brightly lit with the characters wearing rich, vibrant colours.  Towards the end of the relationship, both the lighting and the clothes become dark and somber.

In the final scene that depicts both Jamie at the end and Cathy at the beginning, there is contrasting lighting to represent the two timelines. Jamie sits in a darkly lit room writing a goodbye letter, while through the window, you can see Cathy standing outside the apartment on a bright sunny day.  The point of view switches to Cathy waving goodbye after their first date, but through the darkened window, you see Jamie at the desk writing his letter.

In the Q&A following the world premiere screening, the director commented that he had to stay as faithful as possible to the source material, since theatre aficionados are as fanatic as Comicon geeks and would not stand for tinkering with their beloved musical.  Composer and movie collaborator Jason Robert Brown was also at the Q&A and talked about how he insisted on not having any of his songs changed or cut, especially one called Schmuel that was particularly challenging to film.  Having the perspective of both the director and the original composer made this a very special Q&A session.

The U.K. film Pride is a heart-warming tale based on actual events of the lengthy miners' strike that occurred in 1983 during the Margaret Thatcher regime.  A group of London-based gays and lesbians decided to show solidarity and raise money for the miners, whose plight they empathized with since they had the same experiences of being persecuted and harassed by the police.  The group "Gays and Lesbians Support the Miners" (LGSM) ended up raising more money than any support group and picked one small Welsh community to donate the funds to.  The movie describes how these two groups came together and overcame fears and prejudices in order to develop a mutual understanding and trust of each other, leading to some life-long friendships.  This movie is funny, touching and all the more poignant since it really happened.

Pride's Q&A session was especially insightful because it was attended not only by the director and technical staff, but also by three of the actual people who were portrayed in the movie. They were two members of LGSM, plus one of the wives of the miners, who showed leadership during the strike and eventually became a Labour member of Parliament.  It was interesting hearing them talk about the gay rights movement back then, and to get their perspective on how things have changed since.  They all agreed that while great strides have been made, there still is a ways to go.

The German film Labyrinth of Lies is also based on historic events.  It is a thriller dealing with the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials of the mid 1960s.  While Auschwitz trials were held in Poland just after WWII, none occurred in Germany until decades later.  In fact, it was surprising to learn that just over a decade after the second World War, most Germans did not know any details about what happened in Auschwitz.  The overriding sentiment of the time was that the past should be left buried and that Germany should be allowed to move on and heal.

Watching Labyrinth of Lies quite illuminating, as was the Q&A.  There was as much discussion on the historical and political events and implications as there were about the making of the movie.  Being one generation removed from the events, the interviewees were all well educated about the Holocaust, including being taught the history in school, watching movies about it and visiting the camps.  So they also were shocked to find out that this was not the case right after the war.  The director spoke of their research into the "national narrative" of those times, which was "We need to draw a line on the past.  We lost the war; let's try to look ahead and build the future".  No one spoke of what happened, not the perpetrators, not the victims, not the onlookers.  When asked about how much of the movie was based on fact, we learned that the State Attorney General Fritz Bauer, who championed the cause, and Thomas Gnielka, the reporter who brought forth the initial evidence, were based on real people.  The cases in the lists of victims discussed were real, and the last sentence of the movie were the actual words spoken by the court judge at the start of the trials.  However  the hero of the movie, the handsome, passionate young prosecutor who doggedly pursued evidence of Nazi war crimes, plus his love interest were added for dramatic purposes. 

The Australian comedy The Little Death is a hysterically funny film whose title is based on the French term "la petite mort" which is a euphemism for orgasm.  It cycles between vignettes of five couples, each dealing with an unusual sexual predilection.  Rowena discovers that she is only aroused when her partner Richard is crying, and so she finds different ways to trigger his tears including constantly reminding him about his recently deceased father, hiding his beloved dog, and making him chop onions.  Dan and Evie try to spice up their marriage with sexual role-play, but Dan gets too invested in his roles. When they "play doctor", Dan "diagnoses" Evie with Hepatitis C, basically killing any romantic mood between them.  Monica works at a "Deaf Relay Chat" centre where she uses sign language to converse with deaf clients and then passes the information verbally to non-deaf recipients.  Hilarity ensues when Sam wants her to call a phone-sex worker.  Phil only responds to his wife when she is asleep and takes to spiking her tea with sleeping pills and then wooing her while she is unconscious.  Maeve has a rape fantasy which her boyfriend Paul tries to fulfill by setting up fake rape scenarios.  When he first hears her request, Paul thinks that Maeve wants him to rate her, and declares that she is a solid 10.  He is horrified when she clarifies what she actually wants. There is actually very little nudity in this movie that is all about sex.  The director (who also plays Paul) felt it was unnecessary since simply talking about sex is so much more powerful.

The Canadian psychological thriller Elephant Song is based on a play of the same name by Nicolas Billon.  A doctor in a psychiatric hospital has gone missing and his patient Michael is the last person he saw before his disappearance.  His colleague, Dr. Green, is sent to question Michael, who is highly intelligent, manipulative and claims to know what happened to his doctor.  A verbal cat and mouse mind game ensues as Dr. Green tries to find the truth.  The movie plays out like a tense mystery in a dimly lit setting that is reminiscent of One Flew Over a Cuckoo's Nest.  It is difficult to decide when Michael is lying and whether he is the victim or the perpetrator of some crime, or just plain crazy.  Quebec director and actor Xavier Dolan (J'ai tué ma mère) is excellent in his chilling portrayal of Michael.  He seems to be making a career of playing gay men with "mommy issues".

Force Majeure is a Swedish drama set in a ski resort where a couple with two small children are vacationing.  The start of the film alternates between sweeping, majestic scenery of the French Alps as the family ski together, and mundane, repetitive scenes including brushing of teeth and sleeping in the chalet apartment.  Everything changes when a scary event puts the father's sense of manhood and the expected male role as protector of the family into question.  The rest of the film deals with the aftermath of the father's actions (or inaction) as the family dynamics are shattered.  An interesting scene at the end of the movie compares how the mother reacts in her own moment of fear and crisis, and how different the reactions are to her actions as opposed to the earlier ones of the father.  As the director commented in the Q&A, "The expectations of a man is to stand up for his family when there is a sudden threat, while the expectations of a woman is to take care of the family in the longer term.  If she is drawn away by her emotions, it is OK that she got scared in the moment.  For a man, this is not acceptable."  Force Majeure is a quiet movie with beautiful cinematography and a very interesting theme that comments on social mores and expectations.

While it is always great that the Toronto International Film Festival allows us to see smaller, foreign movies that we may not have the opportunity to watch in the regular cinemas, it is also fun to watch a few Hollywood movies, especially if we get to see and hear from the director and stars in the Q&A.

This year, we saw Ben Kingsley and Patricia Clarkson in Learning to Drive, a sweet movie about a devastated divorcee who learns to take control of her life again as she learns how to drive and befriends the driving instructor.  When the director is asked in the Q&A why she cast Ben Kingsley as a Sikh when he was not one, she replied that Ben Kingsley was a great actor and if she was making a film about a chair, she would have cast Ben Kingsley as the chair as well.

Chris Evans (Captain America) directs and stars with Alice Eve in Before We Go, a delightfully refreshing romantic comedy that does not follow the traditional "boy meets girl-boy loses girl-boy gets girl back" trope.  Nick is a musician who comes to New York for an audition.  He meets a frantic Brooke, who is desperate to get home to Boston before morning, but misses the last train after having her purse stolen.  Together, they wander around Manhattan through the night, trying different schemes to raise enough money to get her home.  Along the way, they develop a friendship, find out each other's back stories and help each other with respective problems.  Chris Evans does a great job as a first time director.  He talked about wanting to capture special little memorable moments throughout the film and he certainly succeeds in doing so.

Simon Pegg stars as the suave, slick, but slightly smarmy and goofy assassin in the Australian action comedy Kill Me Three Times.  The large cast also includes Teresa Palmer and Luke Hemsworth, whose features and deep blue eyes clearly identify him as the lesser known brother to Liam (Hunger Games) and Chris (Thor).  The plot of the assassin hired to kill a cheating wife is told three times, with each iteration revealing more information that clarifies the story and changes previous interpretations. This is a fun movie with twists and turns that keep things interesting.

The Imitation Game has all the makings of an Oscar contender including being a biopic set during World War II and a great performance by Benedict Cumberbatch as mathematical genius Alan Turing, who helped break the Germans' Enigma code. The director has talked about the painstaking attention to authenticity and accuracy in the story, and the period details of the set and costume designs.  He has said in multiple interviews that rather than being "based on a true story", the credits should have said "this was a true story".  They filmed at the actual boy's school that Turing went to, as well as at Bletchley Park where Turing worked for the British government on code-breaking.  The enigma machines shown in the movie were real machines from the war, and Turing's big computer in the movie was a replication of the one Turing actually built at the time.  It was gratifying that for the first time, by picking Imitation Game, we finally watched and help vote for the winner of the coveted People's Choice Award, which is often the harbinger for an Oscar Best Picture win. 

I really enjoyed This is Where I Leave You, which drew big laughs for its premise of a dysfunctional group of non-practicing Jewish siblings reuniting in their family home to "sit shiva" to mourn the death of their father.  In addition to the humorous moments, I found much of the dialogue between the bickering siblings to be quite realistic and often touching.  But this was a big Hollywood movie which ended up playing in the theatres within a week after the festival and our second showing did not have a Q&A session.  So we just paid a hefty premium to watch a movie that we could have seen for half the price at the Cineplex a few days later.  This is why we try to limit the number of these movies that we watch during TIFF, gravitating more towards movies that we otherwise may not get a chance to see.

As for the movies we didn't like that much this year, there seemed to be a trend.  Next year, we intend to be more careful when choosing Asian or French comedies and melodramas.  We realized that we either do not connect with the humour of the comedies, or found the dramas to be overly sappy and weepy.  For example, the Korean movie Confessions was described as a noir thriller but ended up being too much of a melodrama with multiple scenes involving bawling male leads.  On the other hand, the humour of the Chinese buddy road trip comedy Breakup Buddies was lost on us due to bad translations that disappeared before you could finish reading them.  And even when we could read them, we did not find the English text to be funny, despite those who understood the actual Mandarin dialogue roaring with laughter.  So it was either lost in translation or a cultural divide that could not be bridged.  Then there was the mushy French romance Three Hearts about a love triangle between two sisters and the same man.  What bugged me the most was the constant foreboding Jaws-like (da-dum, da-dum) music that played throughout the movie, and yet nothing ever happened to warrant the dramatic tension.  Watching this movie was probably the closest I came this year to wishing for a time machine to go back 2 hours in time and forget what I just sat through.

Overall though, this was a very good festival year and we were pleased with most of our picks.

Movie: Boyhood

I love director Richard Linklater's "Before" series (Before Sunrise, Before Sunset, Before Midnight) which introduces a young couple in their 20s who have a chance meeting on a train, and then revisits their lives and relationships ten years later, and again ten years after that.  Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy were in their 20s when filming Before Sunrise and aged real-time with their characters in each subsequent movie.

Linklater's newly released movie, Boyhood, takes this concept to the next extreme.  With scenes filmed annually over a period of 12 years, Boyhood follows the life of Mason who ages (along with child actor Ellar Coltrane) from 5 through 18.  While films usually portray time lapses through makeup or use of different actors, in this case we watch this boy as he naturally ages and grows into a young man.  At the same time, the supporting cast including Ethan Hawke (obviously a favourite collaborator with Linklater) as the absentee father, Patricia Arquette as the single mother and Linklater's own daughter Lorelei as sister Samantha also appear throughout the movie and age year by year along side of Mason.

The concept would be merely gimmicky if Linklater was not such a strong writer of naturalistic dialogue, as he also proved in the "Before" series, which all featured lengthy conversations between the two protagonists. Boyhood provides glimpses of different stages of Mason's childhood, as you literally watch him grow up on film.  Sometimes the annual aging is so subtle that you only realize there has been a time-jump because Mason has a new hairstyle.

Based on previous family dramas, there were multiple points in the movie where one has been programmed to expect some sensational event such as a car crash, drug overdose, or teen pregnancy to occur.  There is none of that.  Other than a few episodes with drunken step-fathers, nothing overly dramatic happens.  And yet, despite a 2 hour and 45 minute running time, for some reason the movie is riveting and you are totally invested in the lives of this boy and his family.

The unique concept and directorial challenges in making this movie over such a long period of time make Linklater a favourite for Oscar contention, although its July release does seem a bit early for Oscar season.  Hopefully it will not be forgotten in the fall when the other challengers flood the theatres. 

Theatre: Best of Fringe 2014

This year we were away on vacation and missed the entire run of the Fringe Festival.  We did get home in time take part in "Best of Fringe", which features eight shows selected by a jury of producers and theatre critics as their favourites of the festival.  For the two weeks following Fringe, these shows are each given a second run of three performances at the Toronto Centre For The Arts Studio Theatre.  Tickets for the Best of Fringe shows are more expensive than Fringe, at $17.75 as opposed to the $12 during the festival, but at least we had a higher chance of enjoying these specially endorsed shows.  Of the five shows we watched, we really enjoyed three of them.

Our favourite show was "No Chance In Hell", a musical comedy about John Smith who was killed by his crazy girlfriend Chelsea and is now stuck between Heaven and Hell when the "file" on his life is misplaced. While waiting for the judgement on his final destination, he falls in love with Decadence, an envoy of the Devil, and decides to follow her back to Hell.  Once there, John re-encounters Chelsea, who is working for the Devil by creating a computer virus that will cause chaos to the systems in Heaven.  Their interaction provides one of the funniest song and dance numbers of the show, with the petite Chelsea literally flinging herself bodily at the much taller John.  Throw in a supporting cast that includes two angels dressed like gangsters in white suits and shades and a Devil wearing pajamas, a dressing gown and slippers, and hijinks ensue.  The angels try to lure John back to Heaven once they find his file, and John tries to stop the virus and rescue Decadence from Hell.   With an entertaining story, great songs with catchy tunes and good singers, No Chance in Hell is a fun show to watch.
 

52 Pickup, the most popular show of this year's festival with a sold-out run,  lived up to its hype.  It has a very unique gimmick to trace the relationship of a couple from their "meet-cute" beginnings to their eventual breakup and separation.  The story is split into 52 short vignettes, ranging from a few quick lines to several minutes of dialogue.  The gimmick is that for each performance, the story is told in a random order, determined by the labels written on a deck of playing cards that are tossed in the air at the beginning of the show.  The pair of actors arbitrarily pick up one card at a time, read the label and play out that scene.

Despite the jumps in timeline, the story is still very easy to follow because the dialogue is so natural and the situations are so recognizable.  It takes very strong actors to be able to quickly switch emotions as they play out, in random order, the excitement of first meeting, the happiness of being in love, the mundane or annoying moments in a relationship, anger during arguments, sadness over their breakup and regret with a touch of nostalgia when they run into each other a year later.  Accentuating the universality of the story is the choice to have four pairs of actors take turns in different performances. There are two male/female pairings, one pairing with two men and one with two women.  One would presume that the exact dialogue might vary a bit with each pairing, but the overall themes remain the same.  This amount of variation makes for an exciting show that might be fun to watch more than once.  The play is co-written by Fringe Festival veteran T.J.Dawes, who also wrote a play that was adapted into the movie "The F Word" starring Daniel Radcliffe.

Emergency Monologues is another play that uses randomness to generate a different show for each performance.  Morgan Phillip Jones has accumulated many anecdotes over his career as an EMT (Emergency Medical Technician).  He decides which ones to share with the audience by spinning his "Wheel of Misfortune".  Jones is a very skilled storyteller and his narratives range from harrowing to hilarious.  Whether he is describing forgetting the stretcher on one of his first days on the job, or his experiences with one his supervisors who "worked at his own pace", or the incident with the "Penis Guy", his stories have you enthralled and on the edge of your seat.

I'm glad we were able to enjoy a bit of this year's Fringe Festival by watching a few shows at Best of Fringe.  Looking forward to the smaller Next Stage winter Fringe festival in January.

Movie: Hot Docs 2014

It still amazes and thrills me that Toronto is such a great city for cinephiles.  Not only is our city the host of the annual Toronto International Film Festival, but it is home to not one but multiple theatres dedicated to the screening of movies that may not be mainstream or first run.  The TIFF Bell Lightbox shows indie films, foreign films, classic films and has specially curated programming that feature a given director or topic (food in films, books in films, etc.).  The Bloor Hot Docs theatre specializes in screening documentaries and hosts its own Hot Docs Film Festival each spring.

This year, we attended the Hot Docs Film Festival for the first time.  I am usually leery about watching so many documentaries in a row, since I often find the subject matter of documentaries to be too depressing. While fictional movies can be sad, they don't hold a candle to real-life tragedies, made more poignant since they actually happened to real people around the world.  So we tried to pick movies with lighter subject matters.

We hit the jackpot with our first movie which was extremely funny and entertaining –To Be Takei.  The movie focuses on the life and career of George Takei and his decades-long relationship with his husband Brad, whom he married in Los Angeles in 2008, before Proposition 8 temporarily made gay marriage illegal.  George's name is pronounced ta-kay which rhymes with gay, not ta-ki which rhymes with eye, as he corrects several times in the movie as well as the Q&A

Takei's iconic role as Mr. Zulu in the original Star Trek TV series made him a aspiring role model for Asians like John Cho (the current Zulu in the new Star Trek movies) since there were very few minorities on TV at the time.  The role was all the more important since it did not portray Zulu with the typical Asian stereotypes in terms of makeup, dress or speech.

The mutual animosity between Takei and William Shatner is hilariously documented throughout the movie including a dispute about whether or not Shatner was invited to George and Brad's wedding.  Although Shatner originally claimed that he wasn't invited, in the movie he seems to imply that he didn't want to go because he "didn't know Takei that well, to which Takei retorted that after 3 years of TV and multiple movies together, how much more do you need to know someone.  Takei lambasted Shatner at a celebrity roast and later, gleefully revealed that he meant every word.

The movie delved into Takei's childhood, spent in Japanese American internment camps during World War II–an experience which resonated with him and motivates his passion for human rights and social justice.  George is headlining a Broadway-bound musical called Allegiance that is based on this dark period in American history.

In 2005, Takei officially "came out" and proceeded to take an active role as a gay rights activist.  He recently stepped into the Facebook and Twitter scenes and has become a social media darling, posting hilarious images, videos and comments on a regular basis.  In response to Tennessee's attempted "Don't Say Gay" bill which prevented teachers from discussing homosexuality in schools, George offered a solution–"Any time you need to say the word “gay,” you can simply say “Takei.”

In a telling exchange, Walter Koenig (Chekhov in the original Star Trek and George's best man at his wedding) indicated that he thought their celebrity heydays were over.  George responded "Maybe for you, but not for me" and this has certainly been true.  Now in his 77th year, Takei is busier and more ubiquitous than ever, to the chagrin of Brad who thought they would be relaxing and enjoying their golden years by now.

George's deep voice, easy laugh, big personality, eloquent manner of speech and eternal optimism in face of adversity dominate the movie.  But it is Brad, the shy, unassuming, unintentionally funny yet bossy lover, husband, best friend and business manager of George Takei who steals the show.  Brad's look of horror in reaction to Takei's candid revelations to Howard Stern about their sex life and his constant harping on George's missed lines in his Allegiance debut were just a few of the laugh-out-loud moments of this delightful film.

Our second documentary was "I Am Big Bird - The Caroll Spinney Story" which follows the life and career of the man who played Big Bird and Oscar the Grouch on Sesame Street.  It describes how Spinney was discovered by Jim Henson at a puppet show, how he developed the child-like personna of Big Bird and the skill, strength and dexterity required to manipulate the costume.   The film also focuses on his relationship with wife Debra, who he asked out three times before she accepted, but he didn't realize he was asking the same girl each time.  Much of the movie involved archival footage of the Spinney family, since Debra constantly videotaped their lives and adventures.

I Am Big Bird was a pleasant movie but it had very little dramatic arc since there wasn't really any adversity to overcome either in Spinney's personal or professional life.  The most exciting incident revealed was that Big Bird and therefore Spinney was originally scheduled to go up in the Space Shuttle Challenger but the plans were scrubbed because the costume was too big to fit in the shuttle.  There was also a sequence describing how a murdered woman's body was discovered on the Spinney property and it turns out she was killed by one of their handymen.  This seemed like a forced attempt for drama that didn't quite fit into the flow of the movie.

Our final movie was Ai Weiwei: The Fake Case which documents the aftermath of Ai's arrest, or in his words, kidnapping, which saw him secretly detained by the Chinese government.  In the eyes of the outside world, he had "disappeared".  When he was finally released on bail 81 days later, he was formally charged with alleged tax evasion and participating in pornography and was placed under house arrest.

The double entendre of "Fake Case" can be taken literally since the charges of tax evasion were actually against Fake Ltd., the company owned by Ai's wife.  As it happens, he also lives at 258 Fake St.  But "fake case" is also is a clear accusation against the Chinese government for creating trumped-up, baseless charges in an attempt to marginalize and silence Ai's political fight for democracy and human rights.  The pornography charges stem from provocative works of art like the photo called "1 Tiger 8 Breasts" which features Ai and four women all in the nude.  Ai challenges the concept that nudity equates to pornography and it is noted that none of the participants have any physical contact with each other.  Supporters soon started tweeting nude photos of themselves in solidarity and his artist friend created another nude protest photo that featured himself and numerous unclothed women with cutouts of Ai Weiwei covering their private parts.

As always, Ai Weiwei fights back by turning all adversities that he faces into art.  To illustrate what he went through in his 81 day incarceration, he created six life-sized dioramas depicting guards watching him 7/24 as he slept, ate and even showered.  He enclosed each scene with a 5ft x 12ft box with a slit to look inside and shipped the boxes to Italy for the Venice Biennale.


Ai takes pleasure in provoking the police and the secret service agents that follow him. In one scene, he secretly sends cameras to videotape footage of surveillance agents that are watching him and steals the ashtray containing their cigarette butts.  This ashtray was sent to a gallery as another piece of political "art".
 

Ai Weiwei was fined 15 million RMB (2.4million dollars) for tax evasion.  One of the most fascinating scenes in the movie starts off by focusing on the wall surrounding Ai's home, as seen from inside his garden.  Nothing happens for a few seconds, and then you start to see objects flying over the wall from the street.  His supporters are donating money to help pay the tax fine by tossing bills over the wall, or sending them as paper airplanes.  In all, he collected over 9 million RMB and was extremely touched by the gestures of the people who saw this as a way of joining his fight.  Again, turning every event into art, Ai posed for photos that show him covered with these monetary offerings.


Ai Weiwei says that "A life that is silenced is not a life... it is death".  And so he continues to speak out, provoke and agitate in the name of promoting democracy and justice in China, at the risk of his own freedom and safety.

Theatre: Arrabal

Who knew I would like dance?  I have always asserted that I find pure dance performances boring because I prefer shows, especially musicals, that have a strong story, dialogue and preferably singing.  After watching Arrabal, I stand corrected.  While there was no dialogue or singing, Arrabal told a very powerful tale of political injustice, personal loss and the quest for truth.  The plot was conveyed exclusively through the use of expressive dances that ranged from passionate to moving, and clever staging which included lighting effects and video.

Arrabal opens in the context of 1979 Argentina, which was controlled by the vicious military dictatorship that was responsible for up to 30,000 "forced disappearances".  Alleged political dissidents were abducted, tortured and sometimes killed.  Rodolfo, the father to baby Arrabal, is one such protestor who flaunts his allegiance to the former Peron regime by proudly displaying his "PV" (Peron Vuelve, meaning Peron will Return) t-shirt at a political rally.  He is caught, beaten and then executed by the soldiers of the military junta led by General Jorge Rafael Videla, while his best friend El Puma flees, unable to help him.

Eighteen years later, Arrabal dreams of her lost father in a tender ballet that turns into a nightmare as he is torn away from her.  El Puma decides it is time to tell Arrabal about her father and sends his servant to lure her to his tango club.  Along the way, she encounters the streets of downtown Buenos Aires as well as the patrons of the tango club.  She is fascinated by the intense and sensual tango dancing, especially by Juan, with whom she forms an instant connection, much to the chagrin of his girlfriend Nicole.  El Puma approaches Arrabal and dances with her, but loses his nerve and runs off in shame as he relives Rodolfo's torture and his own guilt at not trying to help him.  Juan rescues Arrabal when she is cornered by a group of predatory men, and the two fall in love (yes this is quick, but it is a dance story).  El Puma finally summons up the courage to reveal all to Arrabal after conjuring up happy memories of his and Rodolfo's childhood days.
Arrabal is devastated by what she hears but comforted by the ghost of Rodolfo who gives his blessing for her to be with Juan.

The scene that gives the story its greatest poignancy is rooted in history–The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo were a group of Argentinian mothers of the disappeared, who gathered and marched at the Plaza de Mayo carrying signs with photos of their children around their necks, demanding answers regarding their children's fates.  In the show, Rodolfo's mother joins the march as haunting faces of the missing are shown in the background.  Then in a dream sequence, Rodolfo and other "disappeared sons" drift on stage to have a touching dance with their mothers before fading away again.  As their mothers embrace them, the men spread their arms in a religious "Christ-like" pose.

Black and white video footage of those dark times in Argentina help accentuate the horrors of that period.

The beautiful ballets and fast-paced tangos were thrilling to watch, but it was the moving story that drew me in.  A thorough synopsis provided in the program really helped to highlight the various plot points.  The show also included much audience participation. Prior to the start of Arrabal, members of the audience could go on stage for tango lessons, which were then put into good use when they were led back on stage for a quick dance in the middle of the show.  A few lucky patrons were able to watch the show from cabaret-styled tables located  both on stage and along the front row in front of the stage.  Although that would have been a unique experience, I'm not sure it would have provided the optimum sight-lines to watch the intricate dance patterns.  We were quite happy with our seats further back, where we could see the entire stage.

Library Talk - The Curious World of High-End Contemporary Art

We recently attended a fascinating library talk titled "The Curious World of High-End Contemporary Art" which was presented by economist, professor, and author Don Thompson.  Thompson wrote the book called "The $12-Million Stuffed Shark: The Curious Economics of Contemporary Art" which explores the reasons why some contemporary works of art, by artists who may still be alive, command such high prices at auction.  He theorized that the exorbitant amounts being paid by elite collectors in the art world had less to do with the technical skill of the artist or the esthetic virtues of the art, and more to do with scarcity, branding and back-story.  Scarcity is easy to understand since it plays directly into the iconic supply vs demand model of economics.  Branding and back-story required further explanation, and Thompson spent the rest of the discussion sharing anecdotes that proved his assertions.

Thompson explained that Contemporary art collecting by the ultra-wealthy had much to do with conspicuous consumption, bragging rights and large egos competing at auctions, who need reassurance that their purchases will be appreciated as opposed to mocked by their peers.  This is where branding comes in.  Buying a work of art created by a recognized name (such as Damien Hirst, Jeff Koons, Banksy), handled by a respected dealer, sold at one of the high-end auction houses (Christie's, Sotherbys), or having other well-known collectors owning works by the same artist, ensures credibility and acceptance.  Thompson provided excellent examples of the importance of branding as well as the appeal and resulting value of an interesting back story.

Damien Hirst, one of the wealthiest and most successful contemporary artists of our times, is known for creating the designs for his works, but often uses assistants to actually produce them.  His "Spot" paintings are examples of this practice and he publicly acknowledges that many of the best ones were produced by his assistant Rachel Howard.  When Howard left to pursue her own career, Hirst let her take one of her unsigned spot paintings, which she sold for 90,000 pounds.  Hirst signed his name to another one of these identical spot paintings created by Howard and it sold at auction for 2.25 million pounds. 

AA Gill, a British restaurant reviewer was the long time owner of an unremarkable and valueless portrait of Joseph Stalin.  Nonetheless, he tried to get Christie's to sell the painting and was promptly refused with the reply that Christie's did not deal in works on such tasteless and politically incorrect subjects.  Gill called up his friend Hirst, who came to Gill's office, picked up a red marker, drew a red circle over Stalin's nose and signed the piece.  Not only did Christie accept this "work by Damien Hirst", but it sold for over 100,000 pounds.

The infamous and anonymous graffiti artist Banksy once went to a thrift shop and bought a generic landscape painting for around 50 pounds.  On it, he added the image of a Nazi officer, sitting on a bench, gazing out at the scenery.  He called this work "The Banality of the Banality of Evil".  Although his addition accounted for a miniscule part of the painting, this "Banksy" sold for 615,000 pounds.  Thompson revealed that many in the art world are well aware of Banksy's true identity, but conspire to keep it secret since this back story of his anonymity is a large part of his allure.

The ultimate example of paying mostly for the back story comes from the works of Felix Gonzalez Torres, who made multiple "sculptural" works as a tribute to deceased loved ones including his father, his lover Ross Laycock, and close friend and artist Marcel Brient.  Torres' works, such as his mounds of wrapped candy, are meant to be fluid and changing.  Interaction with the sculpture is encouraged, as viewers are prompted to take candy from the pile and consume it.  As the candy pile diminishes, this symbolizes the lost and letting go of the loved one.  Then as new candy is added back to the pile, this symbolizes rebirth and resurrection (which sounds almost Biblical).  He has a similar sculpture installed in Buffalo's Knox Albright museum where there is a pile of paper each with two joining gold circles on them.  The circles symbolize the eternal love shared by Torres and his lover Laycock who died of AIDS.  You are encouraged to take a sheet of paper with you and as the pile decreases, more are printed.  Each of these sculptures sold for millions of dollars and come with a certificate of authenticity.  But since the original sculpture is meant to be taken away and then restocked or replenished, what is actually being paid for is the concept and the extremely touching back story which moved me to tears when I first read about it in the Knox Albright.

Thompson gave some other examples of the power of branding and back story that were not related to contemporary art.  He described the auction of Elizabeth Taylor's jewelry including her famous La Peregrina pearl which Richard Burton bought for $37,000 and presented to her as a wedding gift.  This pearl was originally owned by King Phillip II of Spain in the 1500s and was painted by Diego Velázquez who also painted Les Meninas. When it was resold at auction in 2011, the auctioneers came up with an estimated price by contacting the original jeweler to find out that you could have a similar piece made today for $2.5 million.  But the powerful association with Taylor and Burton drove the bidding up to $11 million. To put it another way, somebody was willing to pay $8.5 million for the back story! I find it an amusing comment on our celebrity worshiping culture that there seemed to be a much higher premium  put on the Liz and Richard back story, versus that of the King and Queen of Spain plus a renowned Baroque painter.

Thompson told many more intriguing and amusing stories that demonstrated what drove prices in the high-end Contemporary art world.  I look forward to reading his book The $12 million Stuffed Shark as well as his new book coming out at the end of May, called The Supermodel and Brill Box: Back Stories and Particular Economics from the World of Contemporary Art.

Theatre: Marry Me A Litte - Elegies: A Song Cycle

I unequivocally and unabashedly love musicals, whether presented in movie or live theatre formats.  I will give just about any new musical a try, but I've always preferred ones whose lyrics convey the plot and narrative through verse.  For me, Jersey Boys did not fit my definition of the perfect musical–rather, it was a play which included characters singing some tunes by the Four Seasons.

The songs don't have to be originally created for the musical, but they do have to make sense in advancing the plot.  Mamma Mia was one of the most successful recent examples of adapting songs from another source into a musical and cleverly weaving in the story-line to match the words of those songs. I also prefer a musical that actually has a plot that runs from beginning to end, rather than ones where each song is a separate vignette.  Accordingly, I was less than enamoured by two recent musicals which I watched, because they did not meet my personal criteria of an enjoyable musical.

The Tarragon Theatre hosted a new adaptation of Marry Me A Little, a 1980's musical which strings together songs written by Stephen Sondheim for different musicals, most of them cut and never used in those musicals.  Since I think that Sondheim is a bit of a lyrical genius, even his "second-rate" songs are still complex and entertaining.  The problem is that his lyrics are so detailed and specific that they are not easily taken out of context.

Told entirely through song, this adaptation attempts to show the rise and fall of the relationship between two lonely New Yorkers.   Unfortunately the songs don't all work in telling the story or advancing the plot, especially in the middle section, which dragged on a bit.  More is discerned from the actors' glances, expressions and pantomimed gestures than from what they are actually singing.

The best usage of the Sondheim songs comes towards the end of the musical, when the female declares her love by singing the titular song, originally used in the musical Company– "Marry me a little .. I'm ready!!".   The horrified look on the male's face while she was singing this was hilarious.  He replied with lyrics from the misleadingly named song Happily Ever After, which was cut from Company–"Someone to hurt you too deep...  Someone to read you too well .. that's happily ever after - in Hell!".   If the lyrics sound familiar, it is because very similar lyrics were used in the climatic song called Being Alive, that ended up as Company's eleven-o'clock number.  My favourite lines came from the breakup song Rainbow (written for Into the Woods) that highlighted the couple's differences in personality and outlook on  life. He tells her "You're always expecting rainbows" and she replies "You're always expecting rain".

Despite my ambivalence about the musical itself, I was impressed by the talented two-person cast for their singing and acting abilities.  The staging was also very innovative in the way they used the same set and space to represent each person's apartment prior to their meeting.  The two of them weave around the two symbolic, but one physical apartment at the same time, making it feel like a choreographed dance.  It was also interesting to watch the piano player who provided the background music, seen clearly through an "apartment window".  This was juxtapositioned with the male lead, who was a composer and played the piano within the apartment, as part of the scene.   

The second musical that I didn't quite connect with was Elegies: A Song Cycle.  I  actually resisted watching this show the previous times that it was staged, because I knew that there would be no plot, but in the end, I was swayed by the glowing reviews.  As the title clearly intimates, this musical is comprised of a series of relatively disparate songs that each eulogize the death of a family member, friend or even pet of the composer William Finn.

The problem with these vignette songs is that there is very little time to reveal the back-story and establish an emotional connection with the unknown deceased who is being eulogized. The exceptions for me, were the elegies for Mark, the lawyer who used to host the annual "All Men's Thanksgiving Dinner", and Monica, who asked for a special song to be written and performed at her funeral.  By the time their deaths (from AIDS and cancer respectively) were described, I felt an affinity towards them and was touched by their passing.

There were a few light-hearted songs, including one that lamented the early demise of all of the composer's beloved pet dogs, compared to the unjust longevity of the one dog that he despised.  The last few songs were powerful tributes to 9-11 terrorist attacks.  I did not realize this at the time of viewing, so they seemed like just two more generically sad songs that followed an entire afternoon of melancholy.  Now that I understand what these songs were supposed to be about, I appreciate both the lyrics ("Just saying my goodbyes" .. "Boom, Boom, He sees his buildings burn) and the staging (papers were thrown up in the air and allowed to float to the ground, to symbolize the impact of the falling of the twin towers) so much more.

I think I was in the minority in my assessment of Elegies, since the rest of the audience gave the cast a standing ovation.   In fact, the cast was very strong in general, with Thom Allison being the standout both from a singing and acting perspective.  Structurally and plot-wise, or lack of plot-wise, it just wasn't my cup of tea.. but I should have known that and probably not gone to see this.

Theatre: Two Worlds of Charlie F

When preparing myself to watch "The Two Worlds of Charlie F", based the real life experiences of and starring actual soldiers who have been injured on active duty, the words "poignant", "gripping", "inspiring", "powerful" and "illuminating" all sprang to mind.  The play certainly fit all of these adjectives.  What I did not anticipate was how unapologetically irreverent, and even occasionally humorous it would be.

Right from the start, the soldier/actor who played titular Charlie F. defiantly flaunted his amputated leg.  He walked onto the middle of the stage with the help of crutches, the stump of his missing right leg clearly exposed, then hoisted the stump up over the top of his right crutch and stared out at the audience with a cheeky grin, almost daring us to comment.  The action was reminiscent of the old gunslinger movies where the hero would sling his leg over the bar stool at the saloon.

This play was developed as a type of therapy, to give wounded soldiers a voice, and act as a vehicle for them to share their experiences, pain and trauma.  In addition to professional actors, the cast included men and women of the military who have suffered brain damage, are single and double leg amputees, paraplegics, have fractured spines, and other injuries. 

The opening scene is based on Charlie F. portrayer Cassidy Little's real experiences when waking up in the hospital after his injury, suffered in an IED blast.  Disoriented, afraid, and thinking that he had been captured by the Taliban, he thrashed, called for help, fought off and swore at the nurse, doctor and even his own family who tried to calm him.  The scene was shown eerily as a silhouette, as the action took place behind a screen.

We were then presented with the histories of the vets, why each of them joined the military and how they were wounded. The real-life soldiers played characters that were closely based on their own stories.  Maurilla Simpson and her character Lance Corporal Simi Yates shared the same back-story about growing up in Trinidad, wishing to be a soldier and to move to where "the Queen lives".  Charlie F./Cassidy Little joined the Marines as a quick way to win a bet that he could get into shape.  This was followed by scenes depicting the training that the soldiers went through, including learning how to handle their weapons and the importance of their gear. 

In a very powerful scene called "Field Medic Course", an instructor explained what happened to the human body when you stepped on an IED.  He illustrated the point by drawing marks on a stripped-down soldier's body to indicate the areas of destruction.  He described the results of losing too much blood, or if your arms or legs got crushed by a blast.  But the most pressing concern for most was whether their testicles and penis were still intact.

The final scene of the first half symbolically played out the contact with the enemy that resulted in the soldiers' injuries.  As devastating as this scene was, it was just the start of their journey.  What followed in the second act, which dealt with their physical and emotional recovery processes, showed that their experiences will stay with them forever.  Doctors, physio therapy, psychologist visits, flashbacks, nightmares, anxiety, feelings of alienation, are all part of their new reality.

To our surprise, although not quite a musical, The Two Worlds of Charlie F. actually featured songs and even choreographed dances involving the entire cast.  The soldiers chanted spiritedly as they went through their physical training period (.. "Just one way to survive.. you work as a team to make it out alive" ...).  When receiving physical rehabilitation treatments and medications, they sang a song whose lyrics simply named all of their pills, to highlight how many were required ( ... "Codeine, Tramadol, Fentenyl"... )  There was even a beautiful dance between three soldiers in their wheelchairs and their respective loved ones.  As the soldiers spun and moved across the stage in their wheelchairs, the women danced around them, jumped into their laps, and even did flips over them.

It was enlightening to also get the family's perspectives, as wives, girlfriends and mothers described about how difficult it was, not knowing what was happening. During their regular phone calls and letter communications, ".. I talk about .. the weather .. when I really want to ask him if he got shot at today...".  They then had to deal with the post-traumatic stress symptoms when their men returned.

The soldiers sang a haunting "Sleep Song" about how "it's worst at night, scared to close my eyes.. I'm not reliving it, I'm living it".  They woke up thrashing and fighting and occasionally even accidentally punched their wives in their sleep.  The women described how they had nightmares too.  One woman found out about her husband's injuries at 5am, and now she wakes up every morning at 5.  It's in her "body clock forever".

The Two Worlds of Charlie F. avoided becoming too maudlin by tempering the painful moments with ones filled with humour.  There was a scene where the double-amputee Leroy compared stumps with the single-amputee Charlie .. "How come your stump's so f***ing Gucci and mine's like an f***ing arse?".  Leroy then revealed that he had been offered porn work while Charlie had not.  "Must be a double amputee thing..".

This play gives such a unique perspective of the realities of war, as it comes right from the horse's mouth.  We left feeling inspired, grateful and full of admiration for these brave men and women.