'Basilicata: Coast to Coast', Time Out, March 3rd-9th 2011

Following four musicians on their emotionally enlightening journey across the Southern Italian region of Basilicata, this low-budget directorial debut by Italian actor Rocco Papaleo, while aesthetically pleasing, packs little punch. The film is sadly spoilt by classic school boy errors – drama at times verges on the ridiculous (pseudo bandits, incestuous threesomes, a mute that finds his voice), characters are poorly developed and, most irritatingly, the crew can often be seen in the reflection of the actor’s sunglasses. Give this one a wide birth.

'Animal Kingdom' 2010

Winner of the World Cinema Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival, Animal Kingdom always promised to be epic.

Australian director David Michôd’s debut feature is a haunting tragedy exposing a world of base survival and fierce family loyalty. Gritty and disturbing, Animal Kingdom tells the story of an estranged grandchild of the Cody family, Joshua or ‘J’, played by newcomer James Frecheville. J is just your average 17-year-old boy: awkward, alienated and confused. After witnessing his mother silently slip away due to a heroin overdose, he is taken in by his grandmother and it’s from this point on that he gets sucked unwillingly into a world of drugs, violence and uncompromising obligation to do things the ‘Cody’ way.

The loud, sombre, classical music that accompanies some of the film’s darkest moments makes the mood ever more intense and electrifying and the camera work provides us with long, unsettling looks from the films chilling characters. Michôd’s direction shows a real determination to force the audience between the bonds that fragment the family. The movie isn’t recommended for the faint hearted, but for anyone else who is interested in seeing Australian cinema at its best and most gripping, ‘Animal Kingdom’ is a must see.

'Flaming Bodies', Rosemary Branch Theatre

In a time that is hitting young people hard, Roar Theatre – a graduate-led production company – is producing shows that are not only ambitious, but are also executed to a high standard. And true to their name, their latest venture is sure to make a big impact in their bright-looking future.

Snoo Wilson’s Flaming Bodies, written in 1979 and ironically also at a time when young people found themselves particularly hard up, delves into the subconscious of Mercedes Mordecai, a sexually confused and recently fired American woman. In her dreams, she battles demons that she is unable to face in her everyday life, most prominently, the troubled relationship she has with her mother.

While the playwright’s narrative is complicated (and unfortunately sometimes unclear) the acting talent – all alumni of Guildhall’s acting school – showcased throughout is of a high calibre. Most strikingly so is Paloma Oakenfold, the play’s lead. Her intense and powerful monologues keep audiences interested and gripped throughout.

An impressive crew also supports the cast; credit must be given to those behind the lights as the production flowed with energy, clarity and confidence. They’ve certainly set the bar high for their next production.

www.roartheatre.blogspot.com

'The Fighter'

'The Fighter', which opened in the UK this weekend, demonstrates how an exceptional cast can transform what could have been a disappointing 115 minutes.

Mark Wahlberg, Christian Bale and Amy Adams star in the gritty true-story of boxing brothers - Mickey Wark and Dickie Eklund - who come head-to-head with each other when trying to prepare for the former's final attempt at a major boxing title. Issues such as loyalty, the painful process of realising and accepting change, and the power of love make this film's emotional punch so powerful.

The Fighter has already done the rounds in many of the awards ceremonies so far. Bale picked up Best Supporting Actor at the Golden Globes, as did his on-screen over protective mother, actress Melissa Leo, who won the same award but in the actress category. And both of them are deserved of their awards - the honesty and believability each convey throughout are outstanding. Unfortunately, playing the solid and 'rock' character, Wahlberg has been overlooked this awards season, which is a true disappointment. He is what holds the film together; without Wahlberg the film would lack an element of charm that none of the other characters can bring.

That being said, although the acting in The Fighter is none short of a master class, the film is let down in other departments. Direction is inconsistent and fails to find its own style; switching between heavy handed camera work to wide shots of Ward's apartment. Throughout it feels like director, David O. Russell (I Heart Huckerbees, Thee Kings), wants to show every way in which a movie can be shot, which at times sadly distracts the audience from the real selling point - the story. The music falls short also as it misses an opportunity to add drama to many of the most important scenes.

Nonetheless, this film gives us a fantastic insight into family disfunction and the lonely world of chasing glory. It's definitely worth a see if you're a fan of these actors too, as The Fighter showcases them at their best.

The Streets: 'Computers and Blues'

Image: Phil Fisk for the Observer

'Computers and Blues' represents The Streets at their best; each song is nothing like the one before and the sound is completely engaging. When I was first properly exposed to The Streets it was with their second album 'A Grand Don't Come For Free'. The story telling nature of the record and each song giving you a different insight into the mystical mind of Mr Skinner was something that impressed me the most. And his latest, and perhaps last, venture is nothing less. We get the feeling from 'Computers and Blues' that The Streets have come to a natural close, and so consciously play homage to what they know to be their strengths. Honest lyrics, sensitive melodies and an emotional arc are all there. The tracks that stand out to me are 'Blip On The Screen', 'We Can Never Be Friends' and 'Trying To Kill M.E.' as they demonstrate how Mike Skinner is not perhaps the hard edged bad boy that we may understand him as through the media, but actually a reflective yet troubled individual who finds his comfort in his music.

The final song on the record, 'Lock The Locks', ends rather abruptly, as if it has been accidently cut-off before it's finished. Is this purposeful? Is Mike Skinner trying to suggest that in fact he isn't ready to retire just yet? It might be wishful thinking but I really hope so. The Streets offer us a rare, refreshingly original side of British music that is quickly being overlooked with the likes of Cheryl Cole and X-Factor contestants dominating the charts. It has been said that Mike Skinner has recently become a father for the first time, so if the break in music has coincided with his choice to stay at home more and shy away from the public glare, than that must be appreciated. I just hope that 'Computers and Blues' won't be the last we'll hear from the man and The Streets.

You can stream 'Computers and Blues' on The Guardian website here. The album is out on 7th February, 2011.

'Carlos' - i-D online in August www.i-donline.com/i-spy/carlos

Off The Cuff

Upstairs at the Three and Ten, 2010, Brighton

Imagine a small room, six performers, one hour of improvisation and an on stage pirate narrator, and you will begin to understand the bizarre world of Off the Cuff. Audience participation (acting as the script writers) is crucial in this unique ensemble of weird and wacky party games brought to life on stage. Indeed, by the audience demanding what shape the scene will, the sense of excitement is heightened. (A performer was told to tell the story of Robin Hood through the mind-set of 'chick lit', whilst another was asked to rap it.)

Comedic moments are never absent in this production, and the raw cut throat nature of live performance is ever present; some jokes work, some don't. But luckily, the sex comedians were talented, and I found my cheeks and stomach aching by the end. Although all the scenes were innovative, fresh and sharp, a few stood out as really special. One of them, a scene based loosely around wink murder (where one character knows something the others don't) was by far the funniest. The set up was this: the 'murder' was taken off stage (so as he couldn't hear) and the two interrogators were left on stage. The audience then decided who the killer killed, where he killed, and with what he killed. The murderer was then brought back on stage and had to guess what the interrogators knew, what his crime was. In this instance, he was being charged for killing Celine Dion, on the Titanic, with a spade. Explaining it now makes it sound disjointed, random and bizarre, all of which is certainly true of the real experience, but it is also hysterically funny too.

Credit must be given to these comedians, as I did not envy their position of being at the front of the firing line - the audience were honest, there were no unnecessary claps or generous giggles. The improvisation of it all made me giddy with excitement and was a completely refreshing take on the often rehearsed comedy available today.

"Are you Allergic to Me?!"

SUDS production, February 2010, Sussex Campus

Roger Allam and Jodhi May in the 2006 production of Blackbird at the Albery.

Last week, I was invited to watch a twenty-minute snippet of SUDS’ (Sussex University Drama Society) week seven production of Blackbird, followed by a short interview with the cast and director of the play.

As I watched in the cold rehearsal room in Falmer House, I was already impressed by the level of commitment these students were giving – a good sign of quality. The extract I saw was very intense, but not exhausting (I wish I was able to see the whole thing!).

My first question after the performance, and perhaps the most obvious, was why this play? The director, Stefan Adegbola, informs me that he saw this play performed a few years ago and was instantly impressed. “It was my first experience at the theatre with a ‘taboo’ subject being treated so subtly. It wasn’t ironic, there was no jokes, and no happy ending. A fascinating play.”

“So, when the opportunity came to direct again for SUDS, this was the one to do, not just because it was different, but also because it was a good challenge.” Indeed, this is not the first time Stefan has graced SUDS with his undoubtedly strong talent; in 2007, he staged a production of Yerma.
Without giving too much away (the cast and director are very hesitant to even try to describe the whole play’s plot to me), the two hour production follows characters Ray and Una, fifteen years after their ‘relationship’. It’s the first time they’ve seen each other since, and its fair to say it isn’t a joyous reunion.

From the snippet I saw, the ‘issue’, (which I’m reluctant to out myself) the directors and actors stress, is not the focal point of the play. With something so explosive, it easily could have been, but they are keen to emphasise that it is the relationship that takes centre stage.

“The play’s so well written it’s very hard to come to any obvious conclusions. It has no beginning, has no end, its just there.”

My attention is drawn to the two, and only actors in the play, Greg Cranness (who plays Ray) and Rosie Sansom (playing Una). How did they go about researching for their characters?
Rosie explains that because of the difficult situation they are in, and their very individual experiences of their past relationship, there was a lot she was able to draw from the script. “We had solo rehearsals to begin with to help us get to grips with the people we were portraying. No external research was really needed because the characters are so strong in the play.”

Greg agrees with his co-star by adding, “because of the sensitivity of the issue dealt with in the play, it was quite difficult to research” (often for fear of having his computer investigated by the police!). “Because Ray suffers from a psychological disorder, I wanted to know how it would be treated, and how he himself may feel about his problems.”

Their chemistry on stage is unquestionable. There is a constant battle between who the villain and victim is of the two, something I still don’t know myself.

They all agreed that when they started rehearsing for the play (which went into production in week two), they would not judge the characters. “You can’t have any preconceptions of these characters. You must put personal prejudices to one side, as it could be damaging when trying to get to the bottom of Ray and Una, and could give them the wrong focus”, Rosie adds.

Given that the play is so heavily dependant on the emotions of these two people, it certainly has an aspect of rawness to it; there is no messing about with the acting, it’s high-class and mature. And I must remind myself that this was only a rehearsal.

The set is minimal, again encouraging the audience to focus only on the leads. “What makes this play so powerful is its simplicity. It fits the old unity: time, place and action. Everything happens together in one continuous stream, in one place, so the audiences attention is on what is happening directly in front of them”, Stefan comments.

From what I saw, the play is very effective at doing just that, the intensity of it is impossible to ignore. But that’s undoubtedly its purpose, because as Stefan says, “it’s more satisfying for the audience.”

What do they want the audience to come away from the play feeling then, I wonder? The immediate answer is: “come with no expectations, and leave questioning your conclusions.” Stefan insists that it isn’t the job of the director to “push” any ideas on the audience, “mainly because the audience is very unpredictable.” Which is true. With such a contentious issue being toyed with here, there is no way of knowing how each audience member will react.

The name of the author, David Harrower, is ironic. As Stefan puts it, the play is very harrowing. Certainly, leaving their rehearsal, I did feel a little shaken by what I had seen of the play. Not by it’s dealing with a controversial topic though, but because of the high-level of talent that is present in the play.

Strong direction, serious actors, and a supreme script – very refreshing indeed. It’s a must see.

Blood Brothers

Theatre Royal, November 2009, Brighton

Sitting in my seat before the curtain came up, I was feeling a little apprehensive. Musicals were something I enjoyed as a child, but were increasingly beginning to irritate me as the years went by. Having not heard of this famous production before, I was intrigued to see what all the fuss was about.

This story follows the lives of twin brothers raised by different mothers, one biological, and one desperate for a child. Willy Russell avoids narrowly focusing on the theme of separation and guilt, broadening the story’s appeal by looking at class division: Eddy, the rich, well-educated and reserved boy is familiar with things such as a dictionary, whereas Mickey, the cheeky, uneducated brother uses profanities and has bad habits. Despite these obvious caricatures, the boys remain likeable, with credit given to the actors Sean Jones and Simon Willmont.

The lives of the brothers constantly intertwine, though eventually taking strikingly different paths – a comment on the constrains of class structure perhaps. Indeed, the continuing success of this production is perhaps reliant on the prevalence of class consciousness as an issue, something I am sure Russell was aware of.

The back bone of this performance was the outstanding cast, with particular acclaim to the leads – Lyn Paul, Sean Jones, Simon Willmont and Anna Sambrooks – who together made it engaging and energetic. The music was impressive too; the sound vibrant, the voices powerful, and the range of songs managed a good balance between sing-song crowd pleasers and the more serious numbers.

The one criticism of this water-tight performance would be of the on-stage narrator, whose role was to warn characters that their actions may have negative consequences. However, his often High School Musical-esque performance style distracted me. His appearances were comical, not foreboding, turning the play at times into a quasi pantomime, with lines such as “the devils right behind ya!”.

Towards the end, my friend turned to me and said, “I swear this is a Disney song”, which I felt summarised the performance well. On the surface fun and enjoyable, but when you scratched away a little, some interesting issues buried underneath. If you get the chance, it’s definitely worth a see.

Rain Man

Theatre Royal, November 2009, Brighton

Having finished re-watching the film only an hour before the lights came up, I was doubtful any production of Rain Man would match the iconic film made over twenty years ago. However, I forced myself to keep an open mind – and was pleasantly surprised.

Dan Gordon’s adaptation opens by hurling the audience straight into Charlie Babbitt’s chaotic lifestyle of ducking and diving between clients and loan companies, climaxing with the call about his father’s passing. Oliver Chris’ portrayal of Charlie, whilst initially a slavish imitation of Tom Cruise’s performance in the film version of Rain Man, reflected a more individual understanding of the character as the play went on. The last character to enter the stage was an unexpectedly cast Neil Morrissey as Raymond. Bravely, he didn’t try to emulate Dustin Hoffman’s portrayal of the character in the same way as Chris did, instead sensitively depicting a man struggling to live in a society with such an interfering condition.

However, this play is not without its faults. What the production misses is the closeness or ‘connection’ that Charlie develops for Raymond. The film allows for this change to occur over several episodes of frustration, despair and eventual acceptance. On stage this transition happens too hastily. Its saving grace is the good direction; Robin Herford’s scenes were uncluttered, well thought out and sensitive to the story. A strong chemistry between Morrissey and Chris ensured that you believed the struggle that they’ve both endured and could empathise with Charlie’s wish to be permanently reunited with his brother.

For me, the most pervasive issue of the play, perhaps because I had the film so fresh in my mind, was how the play was deliberately more comical – the audience being often encouraged to laugh at Raymond’s unusual behavior – this elicits patronizing sympathy from the audience, something the film seems to consciously avoid. Surely Charlie is the one we should pity, an emotionless git who tries to pawn his brother off to get a fortune he doesn’t deserve? Besides these problems though, this play is a brave and triumphant adaptation of a cult classic, encapsulating the turbulent but rewarding journey that these two brothers go through after the death of their father.