Image provided by: Clackamas Community College; Oregon City, OR
About The Clackamas print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1989-2019 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 7, 2001)
8_________ WedNEsdAy, NoveiwbER 7, 2001 A&E ThE CI ac I camas P rìnt T ’Flesh and Blood’ innovative, thought provoking romp ELIS A BETH MEYER Staff Writer Portland Center Stage’s lat est offering, “Flesh and Blood,’’ is a pleasing, entertain ing romp through a family’s century-long journey towards reconciliation. Although the play is full of tough issues, in cluding gay relationships, AIDS, suicide, drug use and infidelity, it was easily acces sible and enjoyable. The family tree and the story stem with Constantine (Peter Gregory), a Greek immigrant whose desire to nurture and build flops when dealing with his family. He and his bride, Mary (Caren Browning), desire to escape their heritages—poverty—and assimilate into suburbia. But none of the family members quite fits the mold; Mary turns klepto when playing house with pals, eldest daughter Su san (Tara Falk) becomes trans parent; Billy (Peter Gaitens) re treats into himself, secluded and angry; Zoe (Holly Spencer) turns to drugs and prostitution to escape Long Island. The complicated web of new family members provides virtu ally all of the play’s humor; Zoe’s drag queen mentor, Cassandra (Jack Clay), has al most a complete monopoly on the laughs. Her “enchanting” son Jamal (Jim Garcia) finishes a distant second. Beyond the entertainment value, though, the grown children’s interac tions with those they feel com fortable with provide the basis of our understanding of their personalities. I loved the intimacy of the Newmark Theater, but I was glad to be in the balcony; fur niture was efficiently trans ported in via cables, but remov ing the furniture proved much more difficult. The result, ac cording to a front-row viewer, was that furniture left in the front portion of the raked stage blocked some action behind. The single most outstanding feature of the play for me was the use of character voices off stage. In a typical scene, Billy, now known as Will, contacts his mother for the first time in years to request she meet the man he wants to spend his life with. She hears echoes of hurt ful things he’d said: “Maybe I don’t want to go to Harvard,” the voices taunt. “I have a life you know nothing about.” The play comes together when the now-isolated siblings begin to reach out to each other and start to forgive. As much as I was entertained by “Flesh and Blood,” it seemed like something I’d seen many times before. The mes sage of acceptance is a sermon to the faithful; I suspect it more affirms the general political correctness of the audience than it qims to change any negative perception of the characters. I adored the characters; I was enchanted by the echo technique. However, I was not completely en thralled. The subjects this play ad- Constatine (Peter Gregory). Bottom left to right: Zoe (Holly Spencer), Mary (Caren Browning), Billy (Peter Gaitens). dresses are as complex as a square meal, but the treatment of the is sues is more along the lines of throwing all the ingredients in a blender and ladling the result out. If political corectness doesn’t bore you, go! Join the rest of the beautiful people and drink you culture in. |- Dreamy plot, surreal format make ’Waking Life’ Brilliant r LUKE MAHAN Staff Writer What do you do when you’re stuck in a perpetual dream, unable to discern between reality and subconscious imagination? How can you tell if you are awake or dreaming? Flip a light switch. In writer and director Richaid Linklater’s latest film, the experimental “Waking Life,” changing light levels is one of the only ways the main char acter can know if he is still asleep. Originally live-action footage, the film frames were then animated using a computer program developed by one of Linklater’s colleagues. This hybrid method creates a totally surreal, yet stunningly life-like effect, leaving the audience in a quandary similar to that of the main character: Is it real or fake? The plot takes the main character, an unnamed youth around the age of 17 to 22, to many situations in which someone is talking, not with, but to him, lecturing him if you will. Subjects being talked about range from existen tialism and evolution to God and, yes, dreams. Most of the philosophical and intellectual “discussions” apply to personal interaction and expression and come from a different person for each subject. My favorite of these lectures is from a girl who the main character acciden tally bumps into while walking down some stairs. The normal, casual “Ex cuse me” and “Sorry,” are exchanged, and the two go their separate ways. The girl immediately turns around and says, “Can we do that again?” She goes on to express her dislike of the prompt dismissal of human interaction at the prospect of discomfort She com pares the human race to ants, continu ally walking around with their feelers out, looking for something or some one, but ignoring it once they find it The two retire to a residence of some sort and “discuss” other issues at length. I suppose my attachment to this segment is attributed directly to my own desire that an attractive young woman would someday do the same tome. Further emphasis is put on each “discussion” by the animation style used for each speaker. The styles an sometimes amazingly realistic ant detailed, sometimes minimal ant very cartoonish. The lines at time! j squiggle and morph, while at other! stay put. These differences illustratt the sharp contrasts among tht speakers. Linklater, director of such movies a “Slacker” and the cult classic “Daza ' and Confused,” has unveiled a new totally original medium of modem film which can add unthinkable dimensioi to otherwise bland screenplays. Hat this movie been left unanimated, ont would be in constant anticipation o: something more: action, rising action anything to keep one’s attention. No even a true resolution is offered to ap pease the typical moviegoer. As it is the format adds volumes of artistic ant intellectual implications. I found it dif ficult to tear my gaze from the screei to jot down illegible notes. As I was watching “Waking Life,” wasn’t too sure how I felt about tht movie. Made up entirely of talkin' (with the exception of a few strangt incidents floating around and somt subtle humor), it didn’t seem to havt any sort of meaning. But as soon as L left the theater, I was sure I had seen i very unique film, which was full o: heavy issues and critical thinking. Bril liant in format and content, “Wakin! ® Life’ ’ is an excellent movie, which deli nitely merits several viewings. B
