Monet and Lichtenstein Cathedrals at LACMA

           World renowned impressionist painter Claude Monet (1840-1926) and some of his finest work is being featured right now at Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) alongside the pop art of Roy Lichtenstein (1923-1997). Both feature their interpretation and vision of the Rouen Cathedral in Northern France which are quite different in style and feel. It is truly an astounding exhibit containing just ten paintings on three walls, but the Monet/ Lichtenstein presentation is a wonderful comparison of two separate art forms at an unparalleled skill level.

           Monet is regarded as the French father of Impressionism. His paintings have been significant for the style of art they show, as well as their value even in the current day. As one of the most recognized names in the art world, Monets have been regarded as masterpieces for the last century. Lichtenstein was also a prominent figure in the art world, especially when it comes to Pop art as well as the entire 21^st century. His works have been referenced in movies and in regards to the World Trade Center. Both have been exalted as some of the greatest artists in history and so a comparison of their series’ on the Rouen Cathedral is an interesting study and made for a wonderful art show.

One of Thirty Rouen Cathedral painted by Claude Monet. Courtesy of LA Times.

           Monet created a series of 30 paintings of the Rouen Cathedral between 1982 and 1983 and five of them were collected for this exhibit. They come from major impressionism collections—two from The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, which co-organized the show with LACMA, and three from Paris' Musée d'Orsay. Monet uses the same subject for every painting but different lighting and position for each one to display his various impressions on it on any given day. He implements his whole arsenal of colors in this series, capturing the different times of day, weather, and feel of the Cathedral. It is absolutely breath taking to Monet stack up layers of paint to perfect every color, every stroke, every texture. It is interesting to see how something can look a little bit messy up close can be such a phenomenally planned work of art when you take a step back.

Rouen Cathedral series on display at LACMA painted by Roy Lichtenstein. Photo provided by the LA Times.

           This is what Roy Lichtenstein counts on when he did his series on the Rouen Cathedral. Lichtenstein’s form of art mirrors that of comic books with his use of Ben-day dots. His method was that he would paint a canvas one color and then project a picture of the Rouen Cathedral onto the canvas. Then he would have his assistant paint circles with a stencil by hand while he directed them where he wanted them to go. He could see the bigger picture, even though close up it was merely a collage of dots. The viewer must look at it the same way to be able to see it. Once you take a step back, the Cathedrals jump out at you with vivid colors and flavor. Some are hard to see though, as he washes them out with his usage of white on yellow and black on blue to portray high noon and the dead of night. The five paintings Lichtenstein created are owned by LACMA patrons, Eli and Edythe Broad and are all placed close together on one wall to show the series. It adds to the already comic book feel that Lichtenstein tends to possess. Even though it is a little bit hard to see the big picture without squinting, the array of colors brightened up the very serious feel that the Monets have in the exhibit.

The Monet/ Lichtenstein exhibit is quite fascinating, seeing impressionism at its finest and pop art as its opposite, working together to portray the same subject. Walking into this widely popularized art show, it was slightly disappointing to see so few painting and to see such works of art as Monet and Lichtenstein pieces contained in so small of a space, but is it definitely still worth it. The Monet/ Lichtenstein paintings are truly works of art because of their depth and no matter how small the show may seem, it is worth your money to be in the presence of greatness.

It will be open to the public at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art until January 1, 2012.

"A Nice Family Gathering" is Refreshing

Even the turkey is imperfect in Whittier Community Theater's ad for "A Nice Family Gathering"

           Especially around the time of Thanksgiving, everyone experiences a little family dysfunction along with the comradery that the holidays bring. None so more than the Lundeens who gather to celebrate their first Thanksgiving after death of their father. “A Nice Family Gathering” focuses around not only his absence from the family, but his presence. Dad (Jerry Marble) comes as a ghost and haunts his son, Carl (Justin Murphy), in attempts to try and relay the idea that though he never told them, he loved his family. The script by Phil Olson contains an accurate depiction of family life and director, Karen Jacobson, led the actors through supporting that vision through their portrayals.

            Olson got to the heart of the issues that a lot of families face and that is the reason this play has been growing in popularity across the country. The main issue was that the children felt their parents played favorites. The play explored the idea of “the golden child” and the pressure and tension that causes each member of the family. What makes the play so enjoyable is that everyone can see aspects of their family in the characters and family dynamics of the Lundeens. The feelings of each character are relatable and cause empathy. Most people struggle with their parents’ love and approval and Olson capitalizes on that subject matter to bring the play to life.

The set picturing the Lundeen family's home

            The cast was full of personality that splashed throughout the series subject matter. They were able to bring humor to an array of difficult topics, just as Olson had intended. Mom (Andrea Townsend) tried to handle the death of her husband of 35 years with strength, but lost her mind missing him. Her Alzheimer’s-like forgetfulness laced with humor gives the play its most unrealistic aspect, yet necessary comic relief. Laura McDowell played the role of Jill, the perfect daughter-in-law who struggled with barrenness amidst the pressure to bear grandchildren. Her raging hormones from fertility drugs were over the top and the only annoying, displeasing part of the production. Besides Townsend and MacDowell, the rest of the cast was very real and down to earth. John Warner, who played “the chosen son,” Michael, and Megan Duran who played the forgotten daughter, Stacy, rounded out the cast rather nicely with their seriousness as they were the true examples of favoritism among siblings and the pain and separation that follows.

            Jacobson pulled the show together with not only that near perfect casting but with a phenomenal set and blocking, and manipulation of the audience’s emotions as well. The set was cozy and automatically made the audience feel right at home. It was perfectly detailed to look like the living room of a house, from the family portrait, to the stockings hung by the chimney,down to the trophy case in the hall.  Her blocking established the family dynamic, like in the way she always had Stacy sitting at a separate chair or banished to the coffee table for dinner until the very end where the family came full circle with Stacy joining them on the couch. In ways such as this, Jacobson was able to keep the audience engaged and their emotions high.

Through her interpretation and execution of Olson’s script, the angle changes every couple of minutes and you find yourself rooting for different characters. One second the father is the bad guy who never showed the affection his kids and wife deserved and the next he is the father that was too busy providing, even though that meant giving up his passions. At first glance Carl, the main character, is looked down on by his family, and the next we see that he has been the pride of his parents the entire time. The changes in point of view are drastic and keep the audience on their toes, so Jacobson put Olson’s script into action well.

            The cast and crew did a great job taking Phil Olson script to the stage. “A Nice Family Gathering” is not perfect, but what family gathering is? You can see all that love for yourself at the Whittier Community Theater for its last two performances on Nov. 18 and 19 at 8 p.m.

Time is Money and "In Time" is Worth Both

            In a world where time is money and people work so that they can keep their clocks ticking, writer and director Andrew Niccol has produced a truly thought provoking sci-fi film. It has all the components of a fan favorite—innovative ideas and morals, action, adventure, romance, and Justin Timberlake. “In Time” takes place in the future where everyone is born with a biological clock with one year etched into their arms, and when they hit the age of 25, that clock starts ticking and also becomes their means of currency. This allows the film to have a cast of beautiful people who have the luxury of looking 25 forever. More than that though, “In Time” brings up a lot of ideas about time, living, and the status of America’s socio-economics. 

Timberlake has 25 seconds to spare to take the picture for this movie poster.

 

Courtesy of 20th Century Fox.

                 Timberlake plays Will Salas, a poor man who sees dead people “timed out” in the streets while higher zones, or classes, have people gambling thousands of years of their life away with no consequence. While Niccol is setting up the story, it is truly heartbreaking to see how heartless some are, and it forces you to invest feeling into this movie. Salas has had to work hard for every minute of his life, so it shocks the entire economic construct when a rich man with a death with gives him over a century of time and the message, “Don’t waste my time,” before plunging off a bridge. Too bad it was not punctual enough to save his mother (Olivia Wilde) from timing out. From there Salas tries to live it up in the richest zone by gambling his years and multiplying them tenfold while being on the run from a timekeeper (Cillian Murphy), or a cop who tries to keep balance among the zones. During his insane gambles, Salas meets the richest of the rich (Vincent Kartheiser) and finds unspoken chemistry with his red-headed daughter (Amanda Seyfried). Turns out, the rich’s burden of living forever makes a girl restless. The movie ends up taking a hug e Robin Hood meets Bonnie and Clyde twist when she realizes how drastic the difference in lifestyle is between those who rush everywhere because every second they have is precious, and those who take their sweet time because they have a billion to spare.

Timberlake and Seyfried on the run. Courtesy of 20th Century Fox.

            This film is a huge social commentary by Niccol in a time we probably need to hear it. It is a radical idea about the state of our economy in the midst of a banking crisis. He also throws out rich philosophical ideas like the difference between living and merely existing and the morality of what precious time we have. It gives something for the audience to wrestle with inside and out of the theater. Sure, it may not be attracting the audience that a huge blockbuster film would, but that is not the point, rather it is to struggle with the idea that we take everything for granted while some people are fighting to live for just another minute. People do not want to see the extremes in the difference of socio-economic statuses because that would mean a calling to do something about it, when there is not much one can really do to change the constructs.

            All these philosophical ideas are wrapped up in a hot people package. Timberlake takes on the more serious role of the vigilante from the wrong side of the tracks pretty well considering the transition from his last movie, “Friends with Benefits.” Seyfried is mediocre as the restless spirit, tough girl trapped in a safe and luxurious world. Her sweet persona is pretty hard to believe in this role, but she gets the job done. Murphy was most notable in this cast though as he got down to motives of the timekeeper and is astounding as one of the outside forces against the power couple.

            “In Time” gets down to the heart of multiple issues while throwing in some exciting car chases, crime, and romance to keep your attention. This may not be an edge of your seat kind of thriller, but it is definitely exciting long after the credits role. Now playing in theaters everywhere.

“To Kill a Mockingbird” Sure Murdered More Than Just Mockingbirds

Biola's Theater 21 advertisement for "To Kill a Mockingbird", which runs October 27-November 12.

       

          “To Kill a Mockingbird” is a classic novel by Harper Lee that is commonly a reading requirement in high school these days. With its beautiful symbolisms for racism and innocence, the book really made a statement at a time in America’s history when the color of your skin defined who you were. Biola’s Theater 21 production of “To Kill a Mockingbird” was unable to translate all those impactful ideas and pressing symbolism to the stage. Director Forrest Robinson led a cast of young adults trying to play small children with bad accents and more time and attention was spent on that than on the depth of meaning behind the story Harper Lee constructed 51 years ago. Despite its faults though, the play did exhibit some redeeming qualities, including the set, the directing, and some of the supporting roles.

            Theater 21, which is the small black box theater located on the outer edge of Biola’s campus is where the play was presented and because of the size, not much quality was expected. However I was pleasantly surprised with how Robinson and his team utilized what little space they had to create the quaint little town of Maycomb, Alabama. The houses’ facades, the balcony, and even the creative touch of the tire swing were elaborate and well done. Along with that, Robinson’s blocking and the way he utilized such a small stage was masterful.

            My favorite part of the entire play was Atticus Shires, the personality behind the role of Dill Harris. His mannerisms and speech were wildly funny as they rode the fine line between childish and a lisp. Shires portrayed the shy, yet adventurous, tall tale telling, naïve six year old with accuracy as well as with his unique personality. Though a minor character in this play, he provided the comic relief that really stole the show.

Director Forrest Robinson also acted in the role of Bob Ewell (pictured left). Forrest Robinson and Jeremy Pfaff (Boo Radley) prepare for their performance of "To Kill a Mockingbird." Photo Courtesy of Tyler Otte of The Chimes.

            The rest of the casting was one of the most distracting things of the entire play. Julie Ploehn played Scout Finch and while she did a fair job acting child-like, it was so far cast against type that it was completely unbelievable and it really brought me out of what was going on in the story. It was just bizarre watching a large 18 year old trying to play a tiny six year old well. On top of all that, another thing that took me out of the fantasy of the play was the way the actors slipped in and out of accents. It was most noticeable in Cris Cockrell who played Jem Finch, but could be seen also in the narrator, Miss Maudie (Sydney Grafft), in Mayella Ewell (Emily Leigh) and many other characters throughout the play.

“To Kill a Mockingbird” is just such a phenomenal novel and the play version did not quite live up to that. The script really missed out on the subtext of the story, like in cases with the symbolism of the mockingbird. The idea that killing a mockingbird was a sin because they are pleasant and never harm anyone was raised in the very beginning of the play by Grafft, but she did not project well and from the back row I did not understand what she was trying to say. After the first two minutes of the play, the idea was never brought up again. It happened like that for many other ideas as well, and so the audience really only got the surface level story in the play’s interpretation.

            So I would not say the play was bad, but it had as many strengths as it did weaknesses, leaving you with an “eh” feeling when you walk out of the theater. Sure it has some shining moments in the acting and directing, as well as an impressive set, but that may have been lost in the inconsistent accents, bizarre casting, and shallow story. See for yourself at Biola’s Theater 21 for $10 pre-sale or $11.50 at the door. The play will run at 8pm until November 12.