All (Most) of the Important Movies to Know Before the Academy Awardsby Randi / February 7, 2020If you still take your iPhone into the bathroom with you, then this is the show for you! Man alive you won’t be doing that shit anymore. The Haystack is the fantastic new play that all modern theatre wants to be. It’s fascinating, provocative, gripping, and best of all completely original. Nearly every minute of this show felt warranted and every plot twist had me simultaneously gasping (quietly) in surprise and smiling at how well done it was. I have been waiting for a new play (or a revival, I mean see my last theatre review) that was this close to being flawless.
The Haystack is not, as I originally guessed just when I heard the title, a farm show that’s sort of like Oklahoma! but without music. Instead, it’s a thrilling look at modern society and how our government watches all of us, for ‘good reason’, so they say. Told in flashback after what seems like it’s going to be for sure a tragedy, the story centers on the work of Neil (Oliver Johnstone, I mean, so good) and Zef (Enyi Okoronkwo, airtight performance) at the GCHQ, which is like the UK version of the NSA. It’s the government agency where they spy on you, pretty much, with technology that is mind-boggling. Neil and Zef are best friends, video game aficionados, and incredible spygame wizards (hackers? Are they hackers? I mean probably also?). When the two get assigned a particularly important case that falls under the terrorism unit’s purview, everything changes, and not in the fun ‘last song of Waitress’ kind of way. The subject of their surveillance, a young journalist named Cora (excellent Rona Morison), captures Neil’s attention, and then he starts to Adam-Sandler-in-Uncut-Gems it up real hard (i.e. make bad decisions).
The play depicts a huge issue – government’s alarming incursions into civilians’ privacy – while telling an interpersonal story about how the larger actions of the government agencies controlling our society play out on the small scale. As someone who remembers when the USA passed the Patriot Act (super typical America to call something so insidious such a delightful name), I appreciated how they used this fictional tale to remind us that we should be horrified at what rights to privacy we have given up without a fight, in a way that worked without being overbearing.
What’s great about this show is that, with Neil’s central performance, you know he’s doing bad things but you understand why, and I can’t really fault his reasoning for first going down this path (for continuing it, sure, lots of bad moves, but the initial part, I probably would have done the same). By establishing that empathy with him, you feel the anguish of his conflict, and his stress, my god the stress. Johnstone’s Neil is a guy we all know and like and root for, and he handles the weight of this role wonderfully, as does Morison’s Cora, fully fleshed out like an actual real person, with flaws and heart and vulnerability. The rest of the small cast is equally strong and believable.
I was impressed with how thrilling the first act was that I even said “even if the second half of this is the second act of Oslo it’ll still be overall a good evening.” But that second act, and its two twists in particular (I seriously would never have guessed), is brilliant and harrowingly formed. That line about how if we turned off our devices, the agencies tracking us would be blind made me want to go build a cabin in the middle of nowhere and just live off the land, which if you know me is a huge feat (and probably a mistake). This show will stick with me for a while. Also, it’s all well researched. My date has a masters in computer security and worked at similar agencies I shall not name, AND knows all the gaming references they make in the show, to things like godcodes and other things that I don’t know about because I went outside as a teen. Aside from a few things that he found out were simply UK vs. USA differences, the content was pretty much unassailable.
The look of this show holds its own with this text. With impeccable direction by Roxana Silbert (female directors do exist, hallelujer!) and captivating movement from Wayne Parsons (the shrewd blocking was one of my favorite aspects), the show visually impresses despite a minimal set. The projections, of all the various tracking and video captures, are also well done, and Ivo could learn a few things in When Projections are a Good Idea.
The only thing that makes me mad (besides government corruption and control) is that the playwright, Al Blyth, is making his professional full-length debut with this. His first full play and it’s this good. What an asshole.
Okay now that you’re finished reading it, let’s all go destroy our smartphones (you first).
INFORMATION
With about a 19:33 start, the first act finished at 20:47 (I was so captivated I didn’t even notice I went past my bladder time limit so that’s really quite something). After a 20 minute interval, Act II finished at 22:19.
THE HAMPSTEAD THEATRE BAR SELLS VEGAN SAUSAGE ROLLS AND THEY ARE REALLY GOOD! They also have vegan focaccia. WIN.
My seat J1 was absolutely perfect – you want to be house left/stage right to be nearest Door 1 which is right next to the bathrooms, and rows around G-K are closest to the door. Also this particular seat doesn’t have one behind it so you don’t get anyone kicking your chair.
This audience was faaaairly okay. Someone only set their phone to vibrate and they didn’t hear when it rang but we did, of course. VIBRATE IS NOT SUFFICIENT.
Related Posts
Nine Night at Trafalgar Studios: A Promising New Playwright’s Debut
It’s Theatre Thursday! Today’s show is Nine Night, playing at London’s Trafalgar Studios until February 23.
For most shows, I’ll boldly say ‘take my advice’ and leave it at that. Who else do you need to listen to? For Nine Night, however, the debut play from Natasha Gordon, I’m going to say sure, heed my advice, but maybe listen to a few other voices as well. This play, while promising and entertaining, has a few core problems that keep it from being great (which we will discuss). But, one of the biggest problems with my experience is that I am hella white, like so white it’s pronounced ‘ha wite’ (which is funny because both my halves are groups that white supremacists consider or have considered non-white!). I’m not saying that people of any background aren’t able to enjoy a play about any other kind of person; that’s literally the point of theatre. But my hwiteness kept me from actually understanding the heavy Jamaican-British hybrid accents of some of the characters. I know, it’s embarrassing. If I were willing to ever break my cardinal rule of theatergoing (which is “everyone shut the fork up!”) I would have been like those old people in movies going ‘what did he say?…what did she say?’ I mainly missed what lines were so funny that the audience would crack up, which is a shame because the one-liners seem to be everyone else’s favorite part of the play. Without the jokes, the central issues with the plot and the characters became more obvious to me, making Nine Night, while enjoyable, feel less than fully formed.
The play is centered around the Nine Night celebration one London-based family of Jamaican descent has after their matriarch, Gloria, passes away. Nine Night is a funeral tradition in Jamaica and surrounding locales in the Caribbean. It’s like a wake that lasts for, you guessed it, nine nights, with relatives, friends, neighbors, really anyone coming to your house all night, every night. It’s like the Jewish tradition of sitting shiva, but more rum, less bagels and lox. But during Nine Night, you celebrate the dead instead of mourning them, with the tradition having become more and more like a party in the modern day for many families. The family in the center of this play has embraced the party version of the festivities, and we watch them on all the nights as their house is filled with raucous drunks eating their food and generally just Being Loud. As you know, that’s my nightmare (loud? drunk? up late?? nooo) so it was hard not to sympathize with their neighbors, but in another example of how I was not on the right side of the drama, we were supposed to laugh at their complaining neighbors for being losers. Nine straight nights of all-night partying with super loud music is a lot to ask in a tightly packed city though!
It’s an interesting premise for a play, to have this family dealing with their loss as well as all their issues, plus bringing in relatives they haven’t seen for ages and having to deal with all their issues, and rehashing old fights and bringing up long-buried hostilities. The problem is, that’s all the show is. There’s no real driving force to the plot, although a seemingly shoe-horned aspect of financial problems tries to fill that gap. Various threads of action are scattered about, but none that is picked up and taken forward. Where was the conflict? Is it that Gloria’s son was going to sell his mother’s house without his sister’s approval? That kind of peters out. Is it that the relatives from Jamaica were going to stir things up? They do, but it doesn’t drive the plot. Is it that the brother’s wife is white, or that she’s pregnant? Because all of the potential to mine their relationship is wasted. Is it that they were going to run out of alcohol for all these drunk random guests in their house before the last night?
The conflict was, of course, the histories between the characters, and that’s the second problem: the character development was lackluster. While Gloria’s daughter, Lorraine, is a strong presence and character, no other character on the stage feels fully fleshed out. Since Lorraine is believable, it’s clear the playwright has the potential to create stunning characters. But with, for example, Gloria’s son Robert (the estate agent, barf), he has so much stage time and so many words, SO many words, mostly about how important money is to him. And yet all these lines and all this time don’t work to actually flesh out his character. He was like a stick figure drawing, and instead of effectively coloring in his character, his many lines and all his time just kept drawing over the same straight lines.
Everyone’s favorite character, Aunt Maggie, is touted as the heart of the show and the funniest thing onstage. However, she grated on me, because she was all one-liners and no actual heart (and all her one-liners were the lines that were lost on me (except the one about cremation, when she says ‘we don’t cook our people!’ which the audience roared at and I was like, ‘but cremation is so much better for the planet than burial…’ which was not the right take I guess)). The night of our performance, Aunt Maggie was played by the understudy, so I can’t help but wonder what my experience would have been if I saw the role as played by the actress everyone and every critic raves about. But even with a more developed performance, the character leaves much to be desired. In several parts, Maggie surprises you by secretly griping about Gloria, hiding her photo, spitting at her name, and you’re like WHAT, wow, what happened between them? And you never find out. Certain aspects of their history are hinted at, but it’s way too vague to have any impact, so the instances of Maggie’s rage peppered throughout feel kind of clumsy, instead of coming together at the end to explain something. Usually I really appreciate writers leaving certain events to the audience’s imagination, but there was just way too little to even bring you up to the point where you can start to fill in the blanks yourself.
But there is a lot to enjoy. I really enjoyed the actors playing Anita and Uncle Vince, who seemed to bring a much needed naturalism and gravitas to their roles, underused as they were. I wish we got to see more of how Anita, the youngest, was able to create a new kind of life for herself as the member of the family who may be more English than Jamaican. That’s the compelling sort of character background that would have lifted this story up. I also enjoyed Trudy, the half sister coming from Jamaica. She was all histrionics and over-the-top humor, which was fun, until she applied the same extreme level of emotion to anger and sadness. None of the screaming felt earned since nothing bridged to that extreme emotion, like the problem I had with Falsettos. Even though the upset is regarding some of the worst imaginable things, it didn’t feel like we earned the emotional response yet given what we had seen. You can’t just barge in yelling/crying/whatever extreme emotion and expect the audience to be right there with you.
However, Trudy’s humor was responsible for my favorite scene – when she shows the family the gifts she brought from Jamaica. The pattern of “sweet potato, green banana, tamarind, RUM….x, y, z, RUM” was hilarious and the audience loved it. Of course, the man near us caught on to the joke and starting shouting RUM every time Trudy reached into her bag, which kind of ruined it but, ya know, people love to ruin things.
So there’s a lot that was interesting and enjoyable about Nine Night, and a lot that’s promising but needs further fleshing out. But for a debut play, it’s pretty impressive, with so much potential, and I can’t wait to see what Gordon does next.
INFORMATION
Nine Night is at Trafalgar Studios until February 23. Trafalgar studios is like one big stalls section but with balcony-style rake. It is the STEEPEST theatre I’ve ever seen. You could be in the 10th row ‘orchestra’ like I think we were but you’d be at a 2nd balcony elevation.
The show is 1 hour 45 minutes with no interval.
It’s an interesting premise for a play, to have this family dealing with their loss as well as all their issues, plus bringing in relatives they haven’t seen for ages and having to deal with all their issues, and rehashing old fights and bringing up long-buried hostilities. The problem is, that’s all the show is. There’s no real driving force to the plot, although a seemingly shoe-horned aspect of financial problems tries to fill that gap. Various threads of action are scattered about, but none that is picked up and taken forward. Where was the conflict? Is it that Gloria’s son was going to sell his mother’s house without his sister’s approval? That kind of peters out. Is it that the relatives from Jamaica were going to stir things up? They do, but it doesn’t drive the plot. Is it that the brother’s wife is white, or that she’s pregnant? Because all of the potential to mine their relationship is wasted. Is it that they were going to run out of alcohol for all these drunk random guests in their house before the last night?
The conflict was, of course, the histories between the characters, and that’s the second problem: the character development was lackluster. While Gloria’s daughter, Lorraine, is a strong presence and character, no other character on the stage feels fully fleshed out. Since Lorraine is believable, it’s clear the playwright has the potential to create stunning characters. But with, for example, Gloria’s son Robert (the estate agent, barf), he has so much stage time and so many words, SO many words, mostly about how important money is to him. And yet all these lines and all this time don’t work to actually flesh out his character. He was like a stick figure drawing, and instead of effectively coloring in his character, his many lines and all his time just kept drawing over the same straight lines.
Everyone’s favorite character, Aunt Maggie, is touted as the heart of the show and the funniest thing onstage. However, she grated on me, because she was all one-liners and no actual heart (and all her one-liners were the lines that were lost on me (except the one about cremation, when she says ‘we don’t cook our people!’ which the audience roared at and I was like, ‘but cremation is so much better for the planet than burial…’ which was not the right take I guess)). The night of our performance, Aunt Maggie was played by the understudy, so I can’t help but wonder what my experience would have been if I saw the role as played by the actress everyone and every critic raves about. But even with a more developed performance, the character leaves much to be desired. In several parts, Maggie surprises you by secretly griping about Gloria, hiding her photo, spitting at her name, and you’re like WHAT, wow, what happened between them? And you never find out. Certain aspects of their history are hinted at, but it’s way too vague to have any impact, so the instances of Maggie’s rage peppered throughout feel kind of clumsy, instead of coming together at the end to explain something. Usually I really appreciate writers leaving certain events to the audience’s imagination, but there was just way too little to even bring you up to the point where you can start to fill in the blanks yourself.
But there is a lot to enjoy. I really enjoyed the actors playing Anita and Uncle Vince, who seemed to bring a much needed naturalism and gravitas to their roles, underused as they were. I wish we got to see more of how Anita, the youngest, was able to create a new kind of life for herself as the member of the family who may be more English than Jamaican. That’s the compelling sort of character background that would have lifted this story up. I also enjoyed Trudy, the half sister coming from Jamaica. She was all histrionics and over-the-top humor, which was fun, until she applied the same extreme level of emotion to anger and sadness. None of the screaming felt earned since nothing bridged to that extreme emotion, like the problem I had with Falsettos. Even though the upset is regarding some of the worst imaginable things, it didn’t feel like we earned the emotional response yet given what we had seen. You can’t just barge in yelling/crying/whatever extreme emotion and expect the audience to be right there with you.
However, Trudy’s humor was responsible for my favorite scene – when she shows the family the gifts she brought from Jamaica. The pattern of “sweet potato, green banana, tamarind, RUM….x, y, z, RUM” was hilarious and the audience loved it. Of course, the man near us caught on to the joke and starting shouting RUM every time Trudy reached into her bag, which kind of ruined it but, ya know, people love to ruin things.
So there’s a lot that was interesting and enjoyable about Nine Night, and a lot that’s promising but needs further fleshing out. But for a debut play, it’s pretty impressive, with so much potential, and I can’t wait to see what Gordon does next.
INFORMATION
Nine Night is at Trafalgar Studios until February 23. Trafalgar studios is like one big stalls section but with balcony-style rake. It is the STEEPEST theatre I’ve ever seen. You could be in the 10th row ‘orchestra’ like I think we were but you’d be at a 2nd balcony elevation.
The show is 1 hour 45 minutes with no interval.
65th Primetime Emmy Award Predictions!
Are you going to win again, Alec?
Tomorrow night, the 65th Primetime Emmy Awards will air and no doubt fill me with rage, incredulity, and of course awe (when watching host Neil Patrick Harris).
It’s no secret that I believe the Emmys to be the most ludicrously political and meaningless of the major awards. More than the Oscars, the Tonys, the Globes, and the SAGs, the Primetime Emmy award nominations are notoriously nonsensical. They usually correlate more to popular audience opinion (e.g., The Big Bang Theory over Community) and not critical thought. You might be one of the many who believe that popular opinion should drive such awards, but I’m an entertainment snob and I want the critical darlings to win (at least the ones that I like).
Despite the rage, I can’t not watch, I can’t not have opinions and keep fueling my anger about the nominations and, soon, the winners. Here are my thoughts about what should happen tomorrow, and what should have happened months ago.
It’s no secret that I believe the Emmys to be the most ludicrously political and meaningless of the major awards. More than the Oscars, the Tonys, the Globes, and the SAGs, the Primetime Emmy award nominations are notoriously nonsensical. They usually correlate more to popular audience opinion (e.g., The Big Bang Theory over Community) and not critical thought. You might be one of the many who believe that popular opinion should drive such awards, but I’m an entertainment snob and I want the critical darlings to win (at least the ones that I like).
Despite the rage, I can’t not watch, I can’t not have opinions and keep fueling my anger about the nominations and, soon, the winners. Here are my thoughts about what should happen tomorrow, and what should have happened months ago.
|
Outstanding Lead Actor In A Drama Series
Bryan Cranston, Breaking Bad Hugh Bonneville, Downton Abbey Damian Lewis, Homeland Kevin Spacey, House of Cards Jon Hamm, Mad Men Jeff Daniels, Newsroom |
FIRST OF ALL, there should be 5 nominees in each category. These expanded acting categories are not doing anyone any favors. It should mean something to be nominated.
I’m usually not a fan of someone winning multiple times; I’m very socialist in my awards desires. But Bryan Cranston is deserving, in this last season of ‘Breaking Bad’. He has made Walter one of the most important characters in dramatic television, and should be rewarded. Possible spoiler: Spacey, because he’s Spacey, and this Netflix revolution in quality programming is something special that they may honor in some way here. |
|
Outstanding Lead Actress In A Drama Series
Vera Farmiga, Bates Motel Michelle Dockery, Downton Abbey Claire Danes, Homeland Robin Wright, House of Cards Elisabeth Moss, Mad Men Connie Britton, Nashville Kerry Washington, Scandal |
First, note that there are SEVEN nominees. As stated above, when categories are expanded like this, it means less and less. A nomination should not be a consolation for great work – every employed actor should be doing great work. These slots should reflect more than that, pure excellence. Instead, it’s just a way to get in everyone who is good at their job. Or in the case of Connie Britton, someone who isn’t great in her current role, but whom the voters liked in her last role, and in real life. Obviously, I do not think she belongs here. Same for Michelle Dockery, who, while serviceable, is not deserving of a nod.
My vote is for Kerry Washington, in the most exciting show I’ve seen lately. There’s no season premiere I’m looking forward to more than ‘Scandal’. She carries a strong ensemble and I’m completely on board with her no matter how cray cray it gets. I mean, Olivia motherf-ing Pope, amiright. Spoiler definitely Danes, who is the least spoily spoiler ever and is probably most people’s first choice. Actual spoiler could be Moss, who is always deserving for a show that has never won an acting Emmy. |
|
Outstanding Lead Actor In A Comedy Series
Jason Bateman, Arrested Development Jim Parsons, The Big Bang Theory Matt LeBlanc, Episodes Don Cheadle, House of Lies Louis C.K., Louie Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock |
Really, as long as Jim Parsons doesn’t win, I’ll be happy. When he won the first time, it was magical. It was deserved. When he won the second time, over Steve Carell in his last season of ‘The Office’, it was pretty terrible. If he wins a third time?? Nope. Not ok. He is very funny as Sheldon, but not 3 Emmys funny. I would be happy for Alec to win again for the ‘30 Rock’ last season, but Louie will probably win, deservedly, because once the Emmy voters think they are doing something hip, they stick with it. (See, e.g., Parsons.) I’d be happy with Cheadler or Bateman as well.
|
|
Outstanding Lead Actress In A Comedy Series
Laura Dern, Enlightened Lena Dunham, Girls Edie Falco, Nurse Jackie Amy Poehler, Parks & Recreation Tina Fey, 30 Rock Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Veep |
She’s not going to win, but she should. Poehler’s Leslie Knope is one of the most lovable characters in television, leading an excellent ensemble and ensuring that each episode is funny, ridiculous, and heartwarming all at once. I’d be voting for her. Since the first three nominees should be in drama categories, watch for yet another win for Fey or Julia L-D, for their great work. |
|
Outstanding Comedy Series
The Big Bang Theory Girls Louie Modern Family 30 Rock Veep |
Veep’s second season was even stronger than its first, and out of these nominees it should be honored. I would have loved for 30 Rock to win in its final season, but the past year was badly tarnished by the awful character of Hazel. It really ruined things. Modern Family and BBT are funny but stale and unexciting, and Girls is a drama.
|
|
Outstanding Drama Series
Breaking Bad Downton Abbey Game Of Thrones Homeland House Of Cards Mad Men |
Homeland is sick levels of awesome. It really is, and should be honored. But it’s Breaking Bad’s final season, and it’s also a sickly awesome show that will probably get the win. Aside from Downton, which is getting increasingly boring, and Mad Men, which had a very weak season, all of the other nominees would be quality winners.
|
|
Outstanding Supporting Actor In A Drama Series
Bobby Cannavale, Boardwalk Empire Jonathan Banks, Breaking Bad Aaron Paul, Breaking Bad Jim Carter, Downton Abbey Peter Dinklage, Game Of Thrones Mandy Patinkin, Homeland |
Ohhh how I want Mandy to win! His Saul is fantastic, as is everything he does. But Paul will win again for his final season, not undeservedly. I love that my boy Bobby Cannavale is nominated, too. Dinklage won before and his accent is getting worse. Oh I want Mandy to win!
 Win, Mandy! |
|
Outstanding Supporting Actress In A Drama Series
Anna Gunn, Breaking Bad Maggie Smith, Downton Abbey Emilia Clarke, Game Of Thrones Christine Baranski, The Good Wife Morena Baccarin, Homeland Christina Hendricks, Mad Men |
How random is this category? Jessica Brody? Daenarys? The most hated character in cable TV, Anna Gunn? If I were voting, I’d actually vote for Emilia, but only because I feel bad that her Broadway debut was an utter failure and I want to make her happier. I think Anna Gunn would be the most deserving winner. If Maggie Smith wins, it would be the epitome of the Emmys – voting for someone they like with absolutely no thought given to the actual role. She has one line per episode! Yes, it’s usually the best part, but c’mon. C’MON!
|
|
Outstanding Supporting Actor In A Comedy Series
Adam Driver, Girls Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Modern Family Ed O’Neill, Modern Family Ty Burrell, Modern Family Bill Hader, SNL Tony Hale, Veep |
Honestly, I’d be happy with anyone but the Modern Family guys. I’m so sick of this being the Modern Family category. I’m hoping they will cancel each other out and let the wildly deserving Hader sneak in. He won’t, I’m not saying that will happen, but I’d love it. I’d actually love if Hale or Driver won as well. Aside from the Modern Family monotony, this is actually a really fun bunch of nominations.
|
|
Outstanding Supporting Actress In A Comedy Series
Jane Krakowski, 30 Rock Mayim Bialik, The Big Bang Theory Jane Lynch, Glee Anna Chlumsky, Veep Merritt Wever, Nurse Jackie Sofia Vergara, Modern Family Julie Bowen, Modern Family |
Actually, if I could make one award happen tomorrow, it would be for Jane to win. As Jenna Maroney, she has concocted one of the most insane, amazing characters ever. It’s a crime that she has not won already. I’d be happy with Chlumsky, because she is the best (she’s ‘My Girl’!) and is great on Veep. But Jane must win!!
If Bowen, Lynch, or Vergara win, I mean…no, please. |
Lastly, I must say that it is a crime that Shaiman & Wittman didn’t win at the Creatives for their work writing the music on ‘Smash’. ‘Smash’ was vilified as a show, but the music was superb. SUPERB. It could have won a Tony for Best Score in any season, and it should have won here. Ironic that it lost to the opening number from the Tonys, which was funny but nowhere near as fantastic as the ‘Smash’ songs. The loss might have been guaranteed when the two songs nominated, ‘Hang the Moon’ and ‘I Heard Your Voice In A Dream’, were announced, because they weren’t the strongest. But still, I’m pissed that Shaiman & Wittman didn’t add an Emmy to their award collection. They are too good for the Emmys.
Who do you guys want to win?
Who do you guys want to win?
