The Clackamas print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1989-2019, November 07, 2001, Page 8, Image 8

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    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