#Definition Theatre Company Review

[duelbraids]

Death Rattle Dazzle Plot EXPLAINED (not clickbait)

Other title ideas: So None of the Picwick Triplets Did It?, Theatre Professional Unravels the Plot of In-Universe Musical for No Reason.

This is a list of my thoughts about the plot of the in universe musical Death Rattle Dazzle from Hulu's Only Murders in the Building. This will contain no spoilers for the plot of the show proper, or the mystery, but will spoil all the songs written and theorize about their placement in an actual, two act musical. It'll also reference a few of the gags from the final episode, and this metafiction article by Playbill, which was done in collaboration with OMITB. Maxine's in universe review is bloody funny, and it contains a Playbill, which reveals some plot details about the original play. This practically is fan fiction, I will admit, but its fun, damn it, and I did my research!

Death Rattle Dazzle has the distinction of being the adaption of what is called a "classic play" by Oliver (who, despite his kookiness, is clearly well versed in theatre.) Maxine's review says that "Anyone with more culture than a vanilla yogurt has probably encountered the play in some form—if not by starring in it at the local elementary school, then in the form of a spoof on television, in film, or by Cate Blanchett opening the Tonys in 2012." This is hilarious, basically making the play a straight play version of Little Shop of Horrors. Everyone's done it, especially regional or amateur companies.*

*By amateur, I do not mean bad or unpolished. Many local, amateur companies put on fantastic plays. I simply mean the definition of amateur used in theatre: unpaid.

To me, that means Death Rattle must be old enough to be in the public domain, or was willed to be public domain after the playwright's death, et cetera. We also meet the original director of the play in 3.10, though all we know is that his version was "Weirder." This adaptation element mostly comes up in the aesthetic changes from straight play to musical, because we do not see much of the original play. However it's clear to me that Oliver knows his chops, and knows how to reference original material (keeping 'Creature of the Night' as Act One's opener to replace the opening monologue, for instance.)

Now, I want to write a mock up of the plot, and then justify my decisions. I also had the idea to name random songs to fill out a 12 song tracklist - pretty short for a 2 Act Play, but I'm just doing this part for fun. Maybe they're the songs on the cast album. Made up songs are going to marked in Red.

Players The Detective The Nanny The Constable The Godmother The Father The Boatman The Pickwick Triplets Chorus

Act One

The Detective introduces the audience to the situation at hand - a murder that is driving him to madness. (Creature of the Night) The plot follows the Detective as he and the Constable begin to try and unravel the crime. The Constable admits he has had trouble keeping law and order, thus calling in the Detective. (Private Dick) The Chorus has a song about their own suspicions, including wondering about the parentage of the children (Is It You?) The investigative duo, along with the Chorus, lay out the details of the crime, woman murdered, only her triplets in the room, found tossed from the cliff with a rattle down her throat. (Death Rattle, DAZZLE!) We see more into the mental state of the Detective, who clearly is manic about this case. They go to interview The Godmother, who tells them about her final day with her best friend, casting blame on the "Children's Father," then the Nanny (Last Light / Only Duty) This leads into the Nanny at the top of the lighthouse, closing out the act as she expresses her devotion to the triplets. (Look for the Light)

Act Two

The Chorus brings us back in, summarizing the events of Act One using crab mating as a metaphor (Entr'acte / Nova Scotia Nightfall) The Father is questioned by the Detective, who reveals he knows the children are not his own, because he had been sleeping with the Godmother, not his own wife. However, he could not have killed her, as he was at his post all night, and his wife was inside. (Private Dick Reprise) The Boatman, who had been lurking since the beginning, is finally cornered by the Constable, and reveals that he not only ferried someone over the night of the murder, but couldn't see their face. (Deadest Night) Then, the Boatman tells the Constable that he saw no one enter or leave the lighthouse, which is where the Mother was killed. This leads to the Constable realizing he may have to charge one of the Pickwick Triplets to restore order to his island. He locks himself in the lighthouse, and tries to solve the crime. (Which of the Pickwick Triplets Did It?) As the Detective enters with a copied key, the Constable realizes it must be he who murdered the Mother. The Detective admits this, though doesn't reveal why. (Confrontation, Dear Constable) The Nanny finds the Constable dead against the rocks, and challenges the Detective. He reveals that he is the father of the children, as well as confessing his guilt. The Nanny pushes him to his death, in order to protect herself. (For The Sake of a Child)

Okay, Justification Time.

The original play is described as "Agatha Christie" like, so casting suspicion on every character is basically a must. The actual placement of songs is based on how they were shown in the show, along with my own knowledge of theatre. Creature of the Night is a quintessential opening number: we start with our main character, before introducing every major character as they enter the stage. Look for the Light is a clear reference to Memory. A lullaby-like song to end the first act, the emotional core of the musical. Thus, similar to Cats, I structured the show to be mostly ensemble, framed by the two investigators. Which of the Pickwick Triplets Did It? made me immediately think of plot twist patter songs ( ala Your Fault ) that come in at the 11th hour. And, of course, ending on that spoken For the Sake of a Child is the right level of dramatic.

While some of the plot in between the lines is inferred from the show, a lot of it comes from that metafiction article I mentioned - there's a Playbill with descriptions of the characters, and dear god, did it give me a goldmine of ideas. Seriously, I highly recommend that article. Marketing that's actually fun and engages the viewer in the show? Wow, who could've thunk it.

My original mock up included more people dying, but decided to cut that, since we have no evidence for that aside from the Nanny referring to the Detective "Serial Killing" which could have been about him killing the Constable, since we know he dies. If you want to know, they would've been: The Godmother murdered at the end of Act One, then the Father murdered in Private Dick Reprise, though not revealed until Confrontation, Dear Constable. BTW, that song is basically the only one with any basis in the show's script, as we hear a confrontation between the Detective and the Constable as cross talk near the end of 3.10.

Some scattered thoughts:

Both Private Dick and Only Duty are songs that I expect would have Ironic Echoes later in the show. Private Dick originally introducing the charming Detective in a mostly positive light, and then in the second act, used to insinuate that the Father knows the Detective used his, uh, private dick elsewhere. Only Duty, meanwhile, would be used by the Godmother to say that a Nanny's love is only because it's her paid duty, as opposed to the Mother or Godmother, and of course, later we have A nanny's only duty is to the children.

Finally, I had to include a reference that crab people breeding bit they couldn't drop in the show, lol. In my head it's a dream ballet during the entr'acte, each of the crabs wearing the character's they represent headpiece, and of course, three eggs.

EDIT: I can't believe I didn't mention this, but I believe the motive of the Detective to be a simple matter of custody; he wants the triplets, and got into a fight with the Mother when he tried to take them, leading to him murdering her. Then, he returns to the island when called by the Constable, and plans to either kill everyone in his way of getting the triplets, or to accuse someone other than him, to get out of trouble.

[denimbex1986]

'Even for an actor as skilled as Andrew Scott, playing a character as infamous as Tom Ripley poses a serious creative challenge. Since the release of Patricia Highsmith’s now canonical 1955 novel The Talented Mr. Ripley, the elusive, murderous grifter has become a fixture in the cultural imagination. He’s headlined multiple novels and movie adaptations — meaning that almost everyone is acquainted with at least one incarnation of Tom Ripley.

Even so, in writer-director Steven Zaillian’s eight-episode miniseries Ripley, the Irish actor manages to deliver the definitive portrayal of the literary schemer — a sociopath who is an expert at self-preservation, a man seemingly driven by overwhelming desire, envy, and greed. As Scott developed his approach to the tight-lipped character, he says it was vital to forget about Tom’s formidable reputation and focus instead on how such a man might realistically move through the world.

“I think what’s gripping about the show is that we see the logic of what he has to do to survive, and each episode leads us in a very particular way,” Scott says. “We spend time with the character when he’s doing these things and [see] how much of an expert he isn’t. Sometimes what he’s really talented at is being able to think really, really quickly.”

Scott clearly knows a thing or two about talent: His was obvious from the moment he began his career on the Irish stage, though global audiences only learned of his gifts when he made his showstopping — and BAFTA Award-winning — television turn as Sherlock Holmes’s brilliant nemesis Moriarty in the BBC hit Sherlock. The actor’s subsequent portrayal of the sensitive (and yes, sexy) priest in the second season of acclaimed series Fleabag then launched him into a new stratosphere of stardom, earning him a Critics Choice Award and two Screen Actors Guild Award nominations. “Particularly in L.A., people just shout, ‘hot priest!’ at you all the time when you’re crossing the street,” Scott says. “It’s extraordinary.”

The Olivier Award-winning actor has further burnished his credentials with singular, riveting work on both stage and screen. Last year alone, he starred in Vanya, an impressive solo adaptation of Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya at London’s venerable Old Vic Theatre, and earned rapturous reviews for his role as a lonely screenwriter in the sensitive and stirring drama All of Us Strangers. Now, Scott’s unforgettable turn in Ripley has critics again raving over the actor, who gives his Tom an eerily placid demeanor that surely conceals an inner raging tumult.

That facade proves indispensable to the character when, in the series, he’s hired to travel to Italy to convince the errant Dickie Greenleaf (Johnny Flynn) to return to New York to helm his father’s company — under the mistaken pretense that Tom is Dickie’s close college friend. Upon arriving in Europe, however, the amoral Tom is staggered by the scion’s privileged, romantic way of life, and disguises his true aims to live for as long as possible in his new host’s shadow.

“One of the reasons that I love the character: He’s got this huge appreciation for art and Italy and food and culture and nature,” Scott says. “I think that’s something that the other characters take for granted. I was just seeing his appreciation for life and the arts. He’s never been exposed to that kind of beauty before.”

Krista Smith: Ripley is so gorgeous — it just washes over you. It’s my favorite kind of viewing experience, where I’m rooting for the sociopath at the same time I’m terrified of him.

Andrew Scott: Steven Zaillian has done a great job of replicating what Patricia Highsmith herself did, which is to make you root for somebody who’s doing these terrible things. The big challenge for me was to make the audience feel what it’s like to be Tom Ripley rather than to be a victim of Tom Ripley. That’s quite an unusual thing to surf because I’m required to love him, protect him in the way you do with all your characters. But it’s difficult with Tom because, even in beginning to talk about the character, I have to protect his secrets a little bit. You don’t want to overexplain him too much.

That’s especially difficult when the camera is trained on your face for eight full episodes, I would imagine.

AS: Yeah, that was challenging. I don’t feel like there could be a bigger part on television than Tom Ripley because he’s just there the whole time. He’s a loner character [so the question is]: How are you able to convey what he’s feeling without a lot of talking and not a lot of deep relationships? It’s quite rare for a limited series like this to focus so much on one character. And as an actor, it’s quite an unusual thing to do.

It was challenging to be with somebody who’s quite opaque as a character, to spend so much time with him. There was an awful lot of internal work, but it’s such a great privilege to get to play this character.

It’s fascinating to watch how Tom is viewed by both Dickie and his girlfriend Marge, played so marvelously by Dakota Fanning. So much tension and jealousy and suspicion develops among them. What was it like to work through all of that with Johnny Flynn and with Dakota?

AS: Johnny is an absolutely gorgeous, warm person and with Dickie [and Tom], there’s a sort of love between those two characters that we were reluctant to define too much — whether it’s romantic love or whether Tom wants to just occupy his space. To me, their [scenes together are] love scenes in a way because if you don’t have love at the heart of it, we don’t fully understand why Tom does what he does and why he’s so enamored by Dickie. Marge, she’s suspicious of Tom. We had really good chemistry, Dakota and I, and we enjoyed the scenes because we have to do so much without saying anything. We have to sort of say, “I cannot bear you,” but do it with a smile.

You shot in some of the most amazing locations. Italy itself is really a character here. How did physically being in those breathtaking environments fuel your performance?

AS: We shot in Venice during the pandemic — when I think about it, it lent a real feeling to me and to the character because I did feel isolated. I [remember] walking to the set through Piazza San Marco [in Venice at] six-thirty or seven in the morning. It was so extraordinary because this would usually be one of the [busiest] tourist spots in the world, and it was completely empty. It was unique, and sometimes quite sad in some ways. But you find your joy. We went to so many different places — Capri, Palermo, the Amalfi Coast. And we shot in a place called Atrani, which is the tiniest village. The experience of being in Italy, particularly on the coast, it’s sort of transfixing. You’re walking up these incredibly steep stairs . . . I love the [scenes with Tom climbing the stairs]. He’s experiencing life for the first time in a completely different way, and his confidence grows really, really quickly.

So, I want to take you back to the early days of your career. You were one of those kids who was shy and maybe did a drama class to see if that might work for you?

AS: Yes, exactly. I used to act a little bit as a kid, not much, just in commercials and little theater things. There’s a myth with actors, that they’re extroverted. I was a really shy boy, and the acting really helped me to sort of overcome that.

Then you go to college and immediately drop out. Why?

AS: When I was about 18, I went to the Abbey Theater in Dublin, which was an incredible learning ground. That’s why I dropped out of college, to go and actually do the thing rather than study the thing. I spent a few years at the National Theatre in Dublin as a really young person — it was extraordinary when I think about it, playing these amazing parts in the Abbey. I moved to London when I was 22, and I was auditioning a lot. It’s a big, big journey. My inspiration has always been good writing. I don’t believe you can make a great film or TV series or play if you don’t have a great script, so that’s where I’ve always gone. That means doing things that maybe don’t hike up your profile; I’m always happy to play supporting parts if the writing is good. So, it’s never been about trying to play leading roles necessarily, but in the past few years, that’s what’s happened.

Can you recall a film or a play that maybe informed who you are now, the kind of actor you became?

AS: When I was 17, I made my first film, which was a tiny Irish film called Korea, and there was an actor in it who was, to use that beautiful expression, a journeyman actor, called Donal Donnelly. He had a huge amount of theater credits and film and television credits but was not a particularly famous actor. What he was was a very kind actor. By looking at him, seeing what way he talks to the crew and what way he talks to the other actors, I learned how to behave on a set. That’s something that I’m always so grateful for.

I love hearing that. So, coming off of this very challenging, very intense production, what’s next? What are you excited to tackle?

AS: I want to do something funny, and I want to be in a musical. I’d love to be in a really well-written rom-com. I’m putting that out there and sort of hoping that manifests in some way. I had to sing onstage for the first time in Vanya, in a very small way, but I really loved it. It’s extraordinary to sing, isn’t it? It’s about confidence and it’s about really listening.'

[destinyc1020]

All the other Jamie plays have had more promo and press interviews. The difference is that R+J is sold out so they don't need to. I'm glad British Vogue did an an interview with Francesca because she definitely deserves it after all the horrible hate she has experienced simply for being cast opposite a very popular young white actor

Thank you Anon for your input.

Yea, R&J didn't really need press due to being sold out so quickly. 😅

Thanks also for mentioning Fran's interview... it was a beautiful interview, very heartwarming, and I'm so glad she's staying AWAY from reviews and social media. I'm sure the entire cast is probably taking Jamie's rules to heart on this. ❤️

[maddiethecanadianassassin]

Jokes! Jokes! Jokes!

A Jacob Frye Drabble - dedicated to @ramshackledtrickster and inspired by their animation!

Tags: Implied relationship, features OC, dancing, party, at a pub, drinking.

Warnings: PG - no major earnings except for decapitating a stuffed dummy

//////

The pub was lively that late afternoon as Jacob Frye and his merry band of Rooks threw a little get together. The company was lovely, the food and drink refreshing, and the entertainment was a laugh. Literally.

One of the Rooks, a natural pianist was going at it on the instrument, his fingers seemed to dance on the keys. His buddies clapped and cheered him on as they each toasted their mugs, drinking and singing along to his tune.

Speaking of performance...

Madeline Shrike sat with the Rooks, a drink in hand as she glanced over to see Jacob practically waltz over to an open area of the pub floor. His Rooks applauded his arrival, hooting, hollering, even some banging their fists on the tables. Madeline reached for her glass, saving it so it wouldn't topple over from all the excitement.

It had been a few months now since Madeline had first joined Jacob Frye and his band of Rooks after first moving to London for a fresh start, a new life outside of the comforts of her family home in Scotland. She had never been on more fulfilling adventures in her life before setting foot in this city, and her heart swelled with pride over the good she had helped take part in to protect the city from the Blighters, especially protecting the young, innocent and unfortunately poor orphaned children forced into horrendous child labor.

She looked at Jacob, seeing his smile, the playful gleam in his eyes. After his last few missions the past couple of weeks, he needed tonight. A well deserved rest and respite. Well. . . maybe minus the rest for now. Definite respite.

Madeline glanced over to see Jacob dragging along a bean bag dummy. He effortlessly lifted it up, its arms flailing in the air as he made it bow in greeting and the Rooks laughed, followed by a cheer. Where Jacob found it, either in a trunk somewhere at her Theatre or buried somewhere in his train hideout, Madeline didn't know.

But if there was a stage prop missing when she'd go into work the next morning, she'd know who to speak to.

Madeline pressed her elbow onto the table, holding her head up with her hand as she rolled her eyes in a teasing manner at the gang leader. Jacob caught the glimmer in her eye, his own eyes dazzling to match his mischievous grin.

He cleared his throat, getting into position.

"The curtain rose, the scene was set They danced a murderous duet~"

His voice projected across the bar as he stepped up onto his stage, twirling around with the dummy before leading it into what looked like a waltz.

"And much deserving blood was let Up to!"

He dipped the dummy down as if he were seducing a woman with his moves before shooting back up right, his eyes going wide as he made a motion with his finger, slicing across his throat.

He tossed the dummy up before grabbing it by the back of its neck, showing it off to his audience.

"The scene wherein they disagreed On who should live and who should bleed?"

Jacob poked at the dummy with an accusing glare before pointing himself before tossing the dummy again, grabbing it by its shoulder and held it in front of his body to shield himself. His fingers wiggled in anticipation before activating his hidden blade, with a flick of his wrist, he sliced the head of the dummy clean off, stuffing falling everywhere on the floor.

That dashingly mischievous grin returned.

"And Maxwell Roth he then received A very bad review~"

The Rooks cheered at the performance, whistling and hollering. Madeline couldn't help it herself as she clapped along with them. Jacob glanced over towards her, taking his top hat in his hand and offering her a performative bow at the waist as the Rooks continued seeing the chorus. Madeline offered him a glimmering smile as she bowed her head in kind.

Jacob approached Madeline's table where Jacob's drink lay waiting for him. He gave her a smile as he reached for his mug and downed another gulp of his drinks. How he was able to drink this stuff like guzzling water, Madeline hadn't had the foggiest.

"You seem quiet," Jacob spoke up, leaning forward slightly to make sure his voice could be heard over the crowd.

"Just tired after a long day is all," Madeline shook her head before giving Jacob a reassuring expression. "I'm alright, Jacob, I'm content sitting on the sidelines and watching you and the Rooks celebrate. You've all earned it. Especially you,"

"Kind words, Miss Shrike," Jacob smiled as he crossed his arms over the table. "I'll admit I was a little nervous. Here I was thinking you'd be a more stern judge of my performance,"

My eyes glanced over to the now decapitated dummy, seeing a group of Rooks playing around with it. They looked like they were playing hot potato with it.

"You played your part flawlessly, Sir Frye," I grinned back at him.

Jacob rolled his eyes at the young woman, though there wasn't any sign of actual hurt in his eyes. "How many times have I asked you not to call me that?"

"It's a title! Why not use it?" She asked him honestly.

If I had been given the title of Dame by the Queen herself, I'd be absolutely beside myself. Madeline thought to herself.

"As my sweat sister has once said, there is a time and place for everything. I'm simply waiting for the right moment," Jacob chuckled softly before taking another sip of his drink.

"And what moment would that be?" Madeline asked curiously.

Jacob looked towards Madeline with an equally curious gaze, his lips twitching into a playful smirk as he pushed himself off from the table. "How about this?"

He walked around to her side, offering her another bow, more. . . posed actually, even for Jacob, "Madeline Shrike," He straightened, offering the Magician his hand. "How would you like to dance with a Sir tonight?"

Madeline's cheeks flushed a light shade of pink at Jacob's playful delivery. She smiled up at him as her petite hands glazed over his black gloved hand. "I'm not much of a dancer, but. . . just this once, Jacob Frye,"

"Just this once," Jacob repeated, nodding his head in agreement.

Jacob gently brought Madeline along to the open floor of the pub, his other arm around her waist. As the Rooks cheered and continued to sing the song, the pair started their dance.

"Jokes, Jokes, Jokes! Make ‘em laugh until they choke~"

Madeline followed Jacob's steps, his movements lively with the music as they danced and laughed together. Madeline couldn't remember laughing this much. She yelped suddenly when Jacob twirled out of his hold before spinning her back into his embrace, sidestepping as part of his chest pressed into Madeline's back.

He had a big grin on his face as he started singing along with the Rooks.

"Fairly slay ‘em in the aisles Maidens fair and Princes charming~"

Her cheeks darkened as Madeline gawked at the man, his mere teasing. Madeline rolled her eyes as Jacob gently spun her back around to face him, his arm finding its way back looping around her waist as they continued their merry dance.

Jacob had always been a tease. A mischievous, playful, devilish tease. But he was also brave, cunning. A man that Madeline was proud to work with and fight alongside to protect London from the Blighters. A great leader, and a good friend.

Although if she was being honest with herself. . .

"Thrills, Thrills, Thrills! Dashing feats and bloody spills And I guarantee You’ll never see The ending coming!"

Madeline miss-stepped and found herself falling back. She shut her eyes, anticipating hitting the harsh floor below. The music stopped, there was chatter among the Rooks, cooling down from the song as she opened her eyes slowly and found Jacob staring back, his face ever so close to her own. He had caught her before Madeline could hit the floor.

Perhaps. . . there was something more?

Jacob slowly pulled her back up right, his free hand moving away from cradling the back of her head. His other arm stayed at her waist as he spoke, "Shall I escort you home, Miss Shrike?"

[jennathearcher]

Let's Talk About: Disney's Wish

(DISCLAIMER: It is my understanding that BDS has asked for a more targeted boycott when it comes to companies that are involved with the conflict in Gaza, and for Disney to be subject to public pressure instead. It is entirely up to individual discretion whether they want to include Disney in their personal boycott or not.)

So now that I've had a few days to let this movie kind of settle in my brain, I've been moved to write up my own comprehensive (albeit spoiler-free) review because I'm already tired of seeing Bad Faith Takes, and I have MANY THOUGHTS.

Things you should know about me prior to me launching into this review -- I am a Disney girl, I have been a Disney kid my whole life, and I've gotten really good at separating my love for Disney movies and Disney magic from my criticism of the Disney company. I've been REALLY excited for this movie pretty much since I saw the first official image of Asha and instantly fell in love with her design, and the hype only grew with the release of trailers and other promotional material. I also avoided listening to any of the songs prior to seeing the movie in theatres.

With all that being said, let's dive in.

Okay, so, first impressions -- I LOVE this movie. I am absolutely the target audience for Disney magic and nostalgia for Disney movies, and I love the idea of this movie being a kind of love letter to the now 100 year long legacy of Disney movies. A lot of the little nods, references, and Easter eggs in this movie worked for me. All in all, seeing this movie in a theatre absolutely felt like a warm hug, and I can already see it becoming a sort of comfort movie for me personally.

I can tell that a lot of love went into the creation of this movie -- if the animation style or the music isn't your thing, that's completely understandable, but it rubs me the wrong way to see people acting as if they're objectively bad, when that's definitely NOT the case. In fact, they're quite GOOD; I would go so far as to say that the music and animation of this film are its two greatest strengths.

I've seen some criticism of the fact that the songwriters who worked on this movie are pop songwriters and not musical songwriters -- but I personally feel that this unique stylistic choice really WORKED for this movie, and made it stand out from other Disney movies. This movie has some of my personal favorite songs that Disney has ever produced.

As for the animation, the blending of 2D and 3D animation is en vogue at the moment, and I love seeing how different movies use the style in different ways (i.e. the comic book style of the Spider-Verse films, the cartoony style of The Bad Guys, the moving painting effect of Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, and the grimy, graffiti style of TMNT: Mutant Mayhem). For Wish, this movie is literally a LIVING STORYBOOK, and the animation is absolutely indicative of that. This is a GORGEOUS movie.

(It's also hardly the first time that pop songwriters have written for Disney movies, or even for musicals in general, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.)

With all that being said, I definitely have my criticisms of this movie -- all of which go back to issues with the STUDIO that effected the finished product. Wish has a rich, lush world with hints of deeper lore, but I feel that this movie really suffered from being "the Disney 100 legacy movie." Like I said, I love Disney nostalgia, but this movie takes it to a level where it can be distracting, and I ultimately feel that it wasn't given enough room to really be its own, individual thing. This is, at the end of the day, meant to be an original fairy tale -- and there are absolutely loose threads and hints at storylines and character arcs that were just….left incomplete.

I really think that the writer's strike ended up effecting the final product of this movie negatively, and resulted in an unfortunate waste of potential. In an ironic way, I kind of wish they HAD delayed the release date so that they could work on it more, but again, it was the "Disney 100th anniversary movie" so the release date was a part of that as well.

This movie feels like it should be so much BIGGER than it is, and that the story should have paid off in ways that it just DIDN'T -- because of a lot of aspects of the film being shoved into the prototypical, and frankly lazy Disney boxes.

I feel so strongly that Wish really was on the verge of being something revolutionary, and through unfortunate circumstances and poor choices made on the part of the studio, it wasn't able to fulfill that full potential, and that's such a shame. I personally am really hoping for sequels -- or at least, fanfiction tends to fix everything.

Comparing this movie to other Disney movies, such as Moana, Raya and the Last Dragon, and Encanto, all of those movies tell a fully fleshed out, cohesive story, with character arcs that feel natural, and really strong themes that challenge our expectations. The sad fact is that Wish doesn't have this -- it TRIES, and there's very much elements of that present, but it's only HALF of a story, really. It feels unfinished, or like it wasn't allowed to push the envelope in the ways that the creators likely wanted to (at least that's my impression).

At the end of the day, it is REALLY impressive that Wish is as good of a movie as it is, with all of this in mind. Every other aspect of the film is VERY strong, and there are some important, powerful messages that shine through (strong messages about the power of self esteem and self love, and the power of community coming together). But the story is ultimately what unfortunately suffered here, due to what is more than likely yet another case of there being too many cooks in the Disney kitchen.

So, yes -- I LOVE this movie, but more than that, I am in love with everything that this movie COULD and SHOULD have been.

That being said, I will continue to aggressively love this movie. Out of spite :P

(I will also likely go into more spoiler-y, specific depth on this movie once it's out internationally after the holidays, and once more people have had a chance to see it -- idk if you guys can tell just from reading this but I am suffering alone in hyperfixation HELL right now :P)

[siena-sevenwits]

My June/July Reading Review

Not as excited to share this time, because I don't have as many books - or as much variety - despite being a double month. Life has been extremely busy, and I had to put my reading mostly on hold for a bit. This led to a reading slump even when things got more manageable, so I have been concentrating on getting out of the slump. I permitted myself to read lots of short, fun things in order to get back into the reading habit, as that has worked in the past and I know I'll be intentional about reading slightly more difficult works once the habit is re-established. But it does make me feel silly typing this up. On, then.

"Nicholas Nickleby" adapted by Tim Kelly (Play, literary adaptation) - FOUR STARS - As some may know, Dickens' novel is extremely close to my heart and figured into several important passages of my life. I was extremely keen to propose a Dickens adaptation for next years' school play, and was very impressed with this one. (Of course no adaptation will ever compare to the Royal Shakespeare Company's eight hour stage adaptation, which is possibly one of the best adaptations of anything ever, but if we're doing Nickleby in two hours, with students, Tim Kelly has done a pretty great job.) Alas, for financial reasons we need to go with a free script rather than one that requires licensing, so we're falling back on good old Shakespeare, but I am glad I got the chance to order this one in and read it.

Beren and Luthien by JRR Tolkien, edited by Christopher Tolkien (epic poetry, fantasy, mythology, Tolkien legendarium,) - FOUR AND A HALF STARS - My appreciation of the tale truly benefited from reading this anthology. It's remarkable to see how Tolkien's imagination reinvented itself over time. The first version of Beren and Luthien feels like an Edwardian children's short story, with Luthien the fairy hiding behind a flower from the gnome Beren, and singing a song of long things like ladders and vines and the lives of cats to magically give herself Rapunzel hair! And of course the absolute delight of the Sauron character instead being "Tevildo, Prince of Cats" who loves napping in the sun! The later versions have cool variation too - the poetry really emphasizes different aspects than the prose tellings. I also love the dignity and equality of both Beren and Luthien, and how they are equally heroic. Luthien especially is wonderful to me.

The Whispering Skull; The Hollow Boy; The Creeping Shadow (Books 2-4 in the Lockwood & Co series) by Jonathan Stroud (MG, mystery, adventure, thriller, supernatural) For sheer enjoyment, I'd give the second book 2 1/2 stars, and the third and fourth books 5 stars. They are for the most part intelligently written, and just such a blast. (The fun is enhanced by the fact that my brother frequently asks me to narrate the story to him (as opposed to reading it,) and so I get to unleash my love of storytelling. Book 2 is okay, but has middle book syndrome in a way the others don't. Books three and four have better plots and characterization on the whole. I read the scene at the Rotwell Institute at 2 AM during a terrific storm, and though it did not creep me out, I did get a nice suspenseful shiver! (These books don't spook me at all - suspense is really the operative word here.)

"The Mousetrap" by Agatha Christie (play, mystery) - THREE STARS (and that might be rounding up) - My sister had read the entire Agatha Christie canon save this one, as they were kind of her thing in her teens. I have not read as many, but I've definitely read at least twenty-five of her books, plus a large number of short stories and plays. But for many years we had a pact that we would neither of us read this play, because we had an ambition to travel to London and see it on its original run (now more than seventy years running!) at St. Martin's Theatre. Now we're both adults and very much have our own lives, and I am about to embark to England without her, so we decided it was time to mutually break the pact. We had meant to see a community theatre production February, but that fell through, so we made tea and had a spot of reader's theatre. We had tremendous fun, even though the play itself was only so-so - certainly by Agatha Christie's standards. Maybe we just know her too well as an author. That being said, the reader's theatre session was a hoot. We watched this trailer first:

and predicted what all the characters' personalities and backstories were just from the trailer, as well as the murderer's identity. We were correct on almost everything. It also added to the fun because we based all our character voices on the appearances of this cast. My sister stole the show, as far as I was concerned, with her comedic performance as Christopher Wren (the guy in the sleeveless pullover.) I think we actually had more fun doing reader's theatre than we would've seeing it in person.

The Frugal Wizard's Guide to Surviving Medieval England by Brandon Sanderson (science fiction, historical fantasy, dimension-hopping) 3 STARS. Fun, but really not Sanderson's best. As always with Sanderson, read it aloud to my brother, and the connection with him is always a good thing.

Ongoing:

Five Children on the Western Front (I can't wait to do my writeup of this one - it's really good!)

An enormous collection of Medieval and Renaissance Italian short stories. For some months I've been reading through the first volume of a multivolume anthology series of the world's great stories, organized by time and country. The first half of this volume was all ancient tales (and, with the exception of Cupid and Psyche, all stories not included in your standard mythologies and such.) Now I am in the second half, and reading all the stories Shakespeare used as inspiration for his stories. The original ending to Romeo and Juliet is... something.

Epistle to the Romans - I continue my slow deep dive, working my way through it with copious notes, two commentaries, sundry articles, etc.

Iphigeneia in Tauris by Euripides - I do mean to keep liveblogging this.

The Empty Grave by Stroud (last Lockwood of them all)

Beowulf (reread)

Fellowship (reread)

[steelcityreviews]

FRINGE REVIEW: roller rinks and sugary drinks

If you are a young person of a certain age, the conflict between hanging out with your friends and chasing the opposite sex because of raging hormones feels incredibly real. The audience follows Kamari and Zara in this coming-of-age exploration of feeling beautiful and worthy as brown women and the trials and triumphs of existing in this world which demands maturity rather than taking another turn around the roller rink we call growing up. 

There’s a great deal of relatability in this production and it is refreshing to see a coming-of-age story presented in this way. The set lends itself to being simple but multi-purposeful aiding in the quick transitions to keep the story moving forward. At times, the frequency of the transitions feels tedious and the script lingers on moments a bit too long, which also cause unexpected blocking issues on the large stage. The Fringe companies don’t always get their choice for venue and this production may have had an even easier time staging in a smaller black box venue, increasing the intimacy of the story and our connection to its characters. 

There’s also plenty of recognizable rites of passage and societal issues that so many young people face such as weight/size/appearance, coming out moments, discussions of pregnancy, rape and abortion. There are also moments of the characters struggling to celebrate their “brownness” while being bombarded by white culture. One of these topics that I personally appreciated was how microaggressions play such a huge factor between friends/acquaintances whether that be about race or being judgmental over someone’s choices. Seeing these characters openly discuss, fight and work toward improving themselves as people and come together in solidarity over traumatic shared experience was truly powerful. 

roller rinks and sugary drinks is a nostalgic look back on the moments that shape our lives and how we use those moments to break us or raise us up. Definitely worth seeing. 

The cast of roller rinks and sugary drinks 

Photo by: Steel City Girl Reviews

Director: Kayla Ado

Playwright: Kayla Ado

Performers: Amariah Faulkner, Ayesha Maria Khan, Reem Rizk, Isabella Rose

Additional Artists: Dramaturgs: Sarah Miller, Annie Buckton. Stage Manager/Sound Designer: Priscila Gonzalez

Event Details

Price: $12

Venue: Player’s Guild of Hamilton, Queen St in Hamilton 

Genre: Theatre—Comedy, Theatre—Drama

Duration: 60 mins

Warnings: Sexual Content, Coarse Language. This play contains the recounting of rape from the victim's perspective.

Age Suitability: Parental Guidance (ages 13+)

For tickets, please visit: https://hftco.ca/events/roller-rinks-and-sugary-drinks-past-lives-production-company/

[cometomecosette]

Video Revew: Les Misérables, 3rd National Tour, 2000, Act I (long)

In honor of Barricade Day, I’ve decided to re-share the review I wrote some time ago of an outstanding complete Les Mis performance from yesteryear. The multi-part upload I originally reviewed has been taken down, but the whole performance can still be seen on YouTube in a single video here.

This performance by the US 3rd National Tour (a.k.a. the Marius Company) was filmed at the Ahmanson Theatre in Los Angeles, February 7, 2000.

Main Cast

Jean Valjean: Ivan Rutherford

Javert: Stephen Bishop

Fantine: Joan Almedilla

Thénardier: J.P. Dougherty

Mme. Thénardier: Aymee Garcia

Marius: Tim Howar

Enjolras: Kevin Earley

Éponine: Sutton Foster

Cosette: Regan Thiel

Grantaire/Bamatabois: Trent Blanton

Young Cosette: Stephanie Mieko Cohen

Gavroche: Christopher Carlson

“Work Song,” “On Parole,” “Valjean Arrested, Valjean Forgiven,” “Valjean’s Soliloquy”

Ivan Rutherford’s Valjean lives up to all my positive memories of the three times I saw him onstage. His voice is excellent for the role: bright, rich and mellow, yet with a hint of grit that suits the convict, and effortlessly capable of both sweetness and power. Acting-wise, he’s subtler than some other convict-Valjeans, but still portrays a fully realized, nuanced and engaging character. Other actors are more aggressive to Javert and more visibly ecstatic on “Freedom is mine…” but Ivan’s portrayal seems a bit truer to Hugo’s Valjean, who was always a quiet, self-contained man and whose hardening from his years in prison makes him even less inclined to show emotion. Yet his anger becomes clear with his increasingly fearsome responses when others reject him. The growing darkness in him is evident when he shouts at the innkeeper’s wife, especially with how delicate, polite and frightened she’s portrayed as being. Then at the Bishop’s house we see him disturbingly become “a thief in the night,” as he plots the theft of the silver in a sneering, calculating tone, and then bows his head before the Bishop in feigned abject gratitude, only to steal the silver with a sneaky, quietly growled “…flight!” rather than a wild shout. The theft definitely feels like a premeditated, malevolent act rather than an impulsive, desperate one. Yet he still conveys sympathy-earning vulnerability too, with the abject, beaten dog-like fear he shows when the Bishop first approaches him and when he thinks he’s about to be sent back to the galleys. And at the end, he gives us a truly impassioned Soliloquy, full of rage, anguish, confusion, and ultimate determination to change.

Stephen Bishop was my first Javert and his performance here is exactly the way I remember him. Tall and imposing, with a rich, robust baritone voice, and just the right attitude of dignified condescension. Well I remember his snide, disdainful “No” in response to Valjean’s ‘Yes, it means I’m free!” I remember that Arlene C. Harris, the author of the Les Misérables sequel series Pont-au-Change, wrote in her review of this cast that his Javert was too smug, too much like ‘Gaston (from Beauty and the Beast) in a police uniform,” and I’ll admit I can see a little of that here. But at the same time, he’s very professional and avoids needless aggression. He’s the only Javert I’ve seen so far who doesn’t intimidate Valjean with his nightstick on “Do not forget me, 20601!” and despite his disdain, he hands Valjean his yellow passport in a civil way, not playing the games with it (e.g. smacking it against his chest, pulling it out of his reach at first, or dropping it for him to pick up) that other actors do.

The Bishop has a very nice voice and gentle, serene bearing, though he doesn’t make as strong an impression as some others.

The 3rd National Tour was always known for its outstanding ensemble and they do indeed seem excellent so far. One thing that stands out for me, though, is their subtlety. They don’t do too much shouting when Valjean turns aggressive, nor treat him with too much physical brutality. Compared to some other productions in more recent years, the crowd scenes are definitely understated here. But it works: sometimes less is more. That said, the warders in Toulon have a more brutal edge than in some other productions, noticing every time a convict stops working and either kicking him or shoving him with a gun butt. Even later performances in this same tour toned that business down.

If I’m not mistaken, the short and stocky yet gorgeous-voiced convict who sings “The sun is strong…” is Randal Keith, who at the time would have been understudying Valjean, but later became the final Valjean of both this tour and the original Broadway production, as well as the first Valjean I ever saw in 2001.

“At the End of the Day,” “I Dreamed a Dream,” “Lovely Ladies”

Joan Almedilla was my first Fantine, and while she’ll never be my favorite in the role, I do like her. In its lower and middle registers, her voice is warm, sweet, and excellently suited to the role. Unfortunately, when she belts in the upper register, her tone becomes nasal and strident, and this annoying quality becomes more pronounced as Fantine falls into poverty and disgrace. Still, her Fantine is solidly sung and effectively acted. After a soft-spoken, frightened factory scene, she vividly depicts Fantine’s tragic transformation, infusing “I Dreamed a Dream” with raw anguish and desperation, and then endures her slow degradation through “Lovely Ladies” until it culminates in her pitifully gagging from the strong drink the ladies give her and desperately stumbling into her laughing client’s arms, the re-emerging to sing a truly fierce, bitter final verse, her former ladylike manner gone. My only quibble about her acting is that, apart from holding her chest/stomach as if in pain (although that’s something, at least), she doesn’t do much to convey her declining health.

I like the way she kisses her locket after “He filled my days with endless wonder.” It shows that the locket was a gift from Tholomyes and makes the fact that she still wears it symbolize her dream that someday he’ll come back to her, which she renounces once and for all when she sells it.

Ivan’s Valjean has excellent new dignity in his brief appearance as Monsieur Madeleine.

The ensemble work is once again outstanding. The Foreman is just as imposing and nasty as he should be, while the Factory Girl is excellent in her initial feigned friendliness as she first peers at Fantine’s letter and in her true venom as she reveals her secret. The poor sick whore in “Lovely Ladies” seems genuinely agonized and the Pimp is a nasty piece of work, grabbing her by the hair to force her to keep selling.

You’ll notice a certain tall, thin young woman whom the camera subtly yet repeatedly focuses on, particularly during “Old men, young men, take ‘em as they come…” where she’s the fierce-looking whore in yellow striking an animalistic pose on the ground. That’s a pre-stardom Sutton Foster, whom we’ll see later in this performance as Éponine.

“Fantine’s Arrest,” “The Runaway Cart,” “Who Am ?” Joan’s Fantine is still compelling, even though her voice still tends to sound nasal. Her fear of Bamatabois and her screams of pain as he abuses her are heartrending, as are her pleas to Javert and her anguish over Cosette, but she also shows spirit and ferocity when she fights Bamatabois off and in her furious “M’sieur, don’t mock me now, I pray!” Yet again, though, she doesn’t make any real attempt to seem sick until she faints as the constables pick her up. Although I notice that just before that happens, she reaches out her hand – possibly implying that she’s already slipped into delirium and seeing Cosette. Trent’s Bamatabois is excellently nasty. The way he erotically strokes Fantine’s arm but then roughly yanks her to him makes it clear why she wants to escape, and his subsequent throwing her around and grabbing her by the hair is brutal.Stephen’s Javert still sings with a handsome, imposing baritone voice and cuts an appropriately stern, stolid figure. Ivan’s Valjean is dignified and generally reserved at this point, but still believable. It’s interesting that on “…that I am not your man?” he holds out his hands for Javert to handcuff then and there if he sees fit. His “Who Am I?” is excellently sung and conveys his inner turmoil subtly yet convincingly. By the way, is it just me, or does he look a little bit like Ernest Hemingway? Of course this is irrelevant to his portrayal of Valjean, but I just happened to notice it.

“Fantine’s Death,” “Confrontation,” “Castle on a Cloud”

Joan’s Fantine is poignant to the end. I like that she doesn’t lie still at the beginning, but turns feebly yet restlessly from side to side: it enhances our sense of her pain and delirium. Her deathbed desperation to ensure Cosette’s future is vivid and moving.

Ivan and Stephen’s “Confrontation” is very effective, with both initially remaining calm and dignified, but the tension on both sides gradually growing until it literally bursts when Valjean smashes the chair. They both sing outstandingly too. I also like the way Valjean’s threatening Javert with the chair leg is handled – instead of being intimidated, Javert just points his nightstick right back at Valjean, and for a moment they stand frozen in “Who will strike first?” tension. But then Valjean lowers the chair leg as if he suddenly feels ashamed of himself and is now choosing to be the bigger man and avoid needless violence. Unfortunately, though, Javert won’t let him avoid necessary violence.

The video skips ahead to “Castle on a Cloud” just as Valjean and Javert start to fight, so we don’t see Valjean knock Javert out and escape, or the scene change where our last sight of Fantine’s body is juxtaposed with out first sight of Young Cosette. I’m not sure if this is a technological error or if the filmmaker did it on purpose to make the scene change more cinematic. It looks more like the latter, though.

Stephanie Mieko Cohen’s Young Cosette is an appropriately sweet, delicate waif with an adorable little voice.

Aymee Garcia is a physically and vocally imposing Mme. Thénardier whose bullying of Cosette and cooing over Young Éponine are spot-on. I’m glad she was my first. (This is a recurring theme in this performance – by the time I first saw the show in 2001, the tour had a new Valjean, Marius, Éponine, Cosette and Enjolras, but Javert, Fantine and both Thénardiers were the same.)

“Master of the House,” “Well Scene” and “The Bargain/Waltz of Treachery”

Now we reach the Thénardiers’ Act I comedy showcase scenes with the first Thénardiers I ever saw.

By this performance, J.P. Dougherty had been playing Thénardier in this tour for over ten years and he would stay another two years before finally leaving. I remember from the reviews I read as a new fan that many tour followers were thoroughly sick of his performance by the end of his run. Fortunately, I only saw him in the role once, so I can still appreciate what he does with the role. I’ll admit that compared to other Thénardiers he’s a bit lacking in energy (maybe back in 1989 and ‘90 he would have had more), but he still manages to be funny and colorful without overacting – at least apart from his goofy high-pitched wail after “Like our own, M’sieur!”

As for another complaint that reviewers sometimes aimed at his Thénardier, that he was too comic and lacking in evil vibes, I don’t think that’s a problem so far. While of course Thénardier needs to become more sinister in the later Paris scenes, I think a genuinely amiable facade is entirely fitting at first. To a lesser extent the same is true for his wife. We should believe that Fantine could have trusted this couple to take care of her precious daughter, even if we can see how slimy they really are.

Aymee’s Mme. Thénardier is excellent. Brash, crude and funny, with a big, rich, attention-grabbing voice.

Ivan’s Valjean continues to make a great impression. He knows full well that the Thénardiers are conning him and offers excellent annoyed expressions and deadpan line delivery, as well as a flash of his temper when he slams the money onto the table after Mme. T.’s verse. Yet he’s so tender and sings so sweetly with little Cosette, and his big, hearty laugh and beaming smile as he spins her around at the end is infectious. He’s truly ecstatic to become her father.

It’s nice to hear the complete preamble to “Master of the House,” especially the subsequently-cut lines about Thénardier at Waterloo.

“Look Down,” “The Robbery,” “Stars,” “Éponine’s Errand”

Comparing this video to a video I shared in the past of the same year’s London cast performing “Look Down” and “The Robbery,” I can definitely see the ways in which the London production was subtly darker and more intense than the US tour. The beggars here don’t seem as harsh or as quick to turn on each other, the pimp doesn’t abuse the prostitute when he breaks up her fight with the old beggar woman, Éponine’s entrance has her cheerfully palling around with Gavroche instead of fighting off Montparnasse’s advances (although she and Montparnasse do have such a moment off to the side later), and Marius only jostles Cosette when he bumps into her, whereas in London he knocked her down. Not that this production feels tame in any way; it doesn’t. But there’s still a clear difference.

Christopher Carlson’s Gavroche is fine, but he doesn’t have quite as much character in his voice as I’d like to hear. He sings strongly and acts well enough, but he’s just a little bit nondescript.

Kevin Earley’s Enjolras commands instant attention with his rich, powerful baritone voice. His tone is slightly reminiscent of Michael Maguire, but decidedly less trumpeting and more elegant. Between his singing, his dignified ardor, and (on a shallower note) his good looks and Hugo-accurate curly blond hair, he definitely makes a strong first impression.

I like the touch of his giving a coin to a beggar woman on the bridge. It shows that Enjolras is no poseur or detached idealist, but striving to help the poor here and now as well as fighting for a better future for them.

Eighteen years before his controversial Phantom of the Opera, Tim Howar makes a likeable first impression as Marius, with his darkly shaded, gentle yet rich voice, and his warm interactions with Éponine and newfound passion for Cosette. The fact that he’s a fairly short man alongside a 5′9″ Éponine lets them add some fresh humor to their exchange in “The Robbery,” with her holding his book high above her head, out of his reach, until he makes her let it go by tickling her stomach, and to “Éponine’s Errand,” when he kneels before her to beg her to find Cosette, only for her to effortlessly and unsentimentally yank him to his feet. Of course Hugo’s class-conscious Marius and Éponine would never be so physically forward with each other, but in the musical it’s endearing.

This brings us to the person who, for many viewers, is undoubtedly this video’s raison d’etre: Sutton Foster as Éponine. Right away it’s no surprise that of all the cast members here, she’s become the biggest star. First of all, there’s her gorgeous voice. Then there’s her fully believable acting. Her Éponine is a true street urchin: tough, scrappy, intelligent, cheeky and playful, yet with brooding moments when she’s alone, and with (thus far) subtle hints of pathos yet not a trace of syrup. I like that she seems to deliver “Little he knows, little he sees” with a bittersweet smile: she wishes he returned her love, but is still happy just to know him and be his friend. The real angst will only come when he falls in love with someone else.

J.P. and Aymee still do a good job as the Thénardiers, although some of the others in other videos I’ve shared of this scene have been more distinctive.

Even though it doesn’t get a closeup, I notice one detail that I remember reading about in reviews of this cast. Regan Thiel’s Cosette doesn’t passively let Marius shield her from Montparnasse during the robbery, but struggles to break free from his protective arms and run back to her imperiled father. At one point she has both her feet kicking in the air!

Last but far from least, Stephen’s Javert is still as stern, imposing, driven and rich-voiced as ever. The dark lighting in “Stars” unfortunately makes him hard to see on camera during his own solo, but we can hear him perfectly well, and his sumptuous, impassioned baritone gives us a magnificent rendition of the song.

“The ABC Café/Red and Black,” “Do You Hear the People Sing?” “In My Life”

Whenever Kevin’s Enjolras and Ben Davis’s Feuilly are in the same shot, I can’t help but think “Look, twins!” If I hadn’t already known that Ben was Kevin’s understudy, I would have probably guessed it from their similar curly blond hair. Since the actor playing Joly also looks similar to Tim’s Marius, whom he would have understudied, I assume whoever chose this cast had firm ideas of what they wanted both Enjolras and Marius to look like.

Kevin is a natual-born Enjolras. Idealistic, dignified yet passionate, stern yet devoted to his friends, handsome and Antinous-like in appearance, and with a gorgeous baritone voice. His sound combines some of the earthy power of Michael Maguire’s with some of the elegance of Anthony Warlow’s, so if you’ve always thought your ideal Enjolras would combine the traits of both, look no further. I also notice that as he goes around the café and sings, he touches his friends more than any other Enjolras I can remember. So many shoulder pats! It’s a small detail, but it does enhance the sense of intimacy between Enjolras and his friends, making him more than just an aloof idealist without detracting from his dignity.

Trent Blanton’s Grantaire is deliciously wild. The audience gives him a good laugh, and rightfully so, when he opts to perch on the back of Marius’s chair and drape his whole body over Marius on “I am agog, I am aghast…” Then we get the infamous “Don Juan” business, first with the rolled-up paper, then with the wine bottle, both of which are snatched away in turn by an embarrassed, indignant Marius while all his friends applaud.

Tim’s Marius is endearingly earnest and serious about his new passion in “Red and Black,” and then overwhelmed with joy when Cosette is finally within his sight. A bit too much so, as when Éponine is taking a moment to look at her former foster-sister through the gate, he inconsiderately grabs her and pulls her out of the way so he can gaze at Cosette himself. As Hugo said, love makes a man forget both to be evil and to be good. At least he means well, as a moment later he pours out his gratitude to Éponine and gleefully spins her around.

As far as I know, Regan was the first blonde Cosette in a replica production. I can only assume that a brown wig wouldn’t have suited her complexion. It’s a little bit strange to see her after both Fantine and Young Cosette were not only both brunette, but both Asian. Still, she does a fine job in the role. Her voice is a sweet, pretty soprano, although her vibrato is slightly heavy and her high notes are ever-so-slightly strident, and she fully inhabits the character, portraying her with a gentle, earnest demeanor, yet with spirit too, brimming with yearning and excitement for her new love, and convincingly angry and frustrated on “In my life, I’m no longer a child…” yet without being bratty.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again: I don’t care much for the way Ivan angrily grabs Cosette’s shoulders on “You will learn!” His Valjean always did this no matter when or where he performed the role. Still, it is clear how deeply he cares for her, and the warm, earnest way he grasps her hand on “There are words that are better unheard…” shows that he doesn’t want just to shut her down, but to make her understand that his secrets are for her own good. The shoulder-grab is just a burst of desperation when she persists.

Sutton’s Éponine is beautifully poignant in her few lines, and the ensemble work is excellent, as always.

“A Heart Full of Love,” “Attack on Rue Plumet,” “One Day More”

I remember from the reviews I read as a middle schooler that Tim and Regan’s Marius and Cosette were a much-beloved pairing. Not least because they were dating in real life, although it didn’t last long after they left the show. (Tim’s eventual first wife was another beloved Les Mis alumna – Ruthie Henshall.) At any rate, they offer a lovely rendition of their romantic duet: gentle, earnest, full of sweet disbelief and subtle rapture, and beautifully sung.

Sutton’s Éponine is touching in her quiet heartache,then beautifully fierce and powerful as she defends the Rue Plumet house from her father and the gang. I love the way she leaps onto Thénardier’s back to stop him from reaching the gate, and her raw, screechy scream is an epic moment.

It’s nice to see Éponine’s subsequently-cut exchange with Montparnasse. It’s certainly a good character moment for this Montparnasse (Matt Clemens, I think), who seemingly considers it perfectly normal to grope Éponine with his knife to her throat while talking about a completely different subject.

J.P. does an excellent job of shedding the amiable facade of his earlier scenes and showing us Thénardier’s ruthlessness. At first he plays the affectionate father he always has on “Éponine, get on home…” but when Éponine rebels, he shows his true colors as he yanks her away from the gate by her belt and snarls “Don’t interfere!” and then in the horrifying moment when he slaps her to the ground.

Kudos to Ivan for how panicked he sounds on “My God, Cosette! I heard a cry in the dark!” That’s the true voice of a father who thinks his child is in danger!

Unless I’m mistaken, Brujon is Randal Keith – my first Valjean a year after this performance. I think he’s also the unnamed student who carries Gavroche on his shoulder in “One Day More” (let’s say it’s Bahorel, though he wouldn’t have been credited as such).

“One Day More” is exhilarating, just as it should be.

[watching-pictures-move]

Movie Review | On Wings of Eagles (McLaglen, 1986)

I picked up a copy of the book this is based a few weeks ago as the church down the street from the Lightbox was holding a book sale during the first few days of TIFF, and basically went through it while waiting for screenings. I'm a notoriously slow reader so the fact that I finished it as quickly as I did is an endorsement. For those not in the know, it's about the rescue mission organized by Ross Perot to rescue two employees of his company EDS who were jailed in Iran right before the Iranian Revolution. I would have been a year old when Perot ran for President, so I admit I have no strong feelings about him beyond vague cultural reference. (His "giant sucking sound" phrase came up in an economics class.) 

The portrait it presents of Perot is pretty fawning, although I suppose if the book presents an accurate portrait of the events, he probably did come off pretty well in this situation. For example, he was supportive of the attempt to rescue his employees, while another notable public figure of similar wealth in more recent years accused the head of the Thai cave rescue mission of being a pedophile. It's worth noting that Perot was a mere multimillionaire at the time of these events rather than a billionaire, so perhaps the corrupting influence of that extra digit hadn't tipped him over to total asshole. Anyway, the book is a breezy read and full of interesting detail, so it's worth a read even beyond the genuinely exciting events it depicts.

This is directed by Andrew V. McLagen, director of The Wild Geese, and I was hoping for some of the schlocky but extremely tasty flavour of that one, but his direction seems especially clumsy within this one's TV movie / miniseries confines. Information that the book conveys through prose is awkwardly turned into dialogue, and the movie tries to spice things up with really stupid and lame action not present in the book. Exhibit A: Kabir Bedi, playing a character not in the book, reveals his allegiance to the Ayatollah and fires an Uzi at a picture of the Shah in the middle of an office with no warning. This also excises the stretch set in Germany, meaning that it loses one of the funniest bits. That part has the characters learning that Germany has something of an extradition treaty with Iran, so they lay low during their layover at a German airport by visiting the movie theatre (apparently that's a thing in Germany), where at least one screen was playing a porno movie. Imagine, if you were flying through Europe and had time to kill between flights, you could slip into a darkened theatre and for a few hours, watch, I dunno, Karin Schubert getting railed. What a country!

Probably the best thing this has going for it is the cast. Perot is played by Richard Crenna, which is like casting William Shatner to play Slim Pickens. It is not a credit to McLaglen's direction that a scene between Perot and his son, played by Crenna's real son, is as awkward as it is. Most fun are Burt Lancaster as Arthur D. "Bull" Simons, the war hero colonel who spends many of his scenes chomping on a cigar, and Esai Morales as the impulsive, quick thinking Rashid, the Iranian EDS employee who frequently saves the day, followed by Paul Le Mat playing EDS executive Jay Coburn like he has mancrushes on his boss and colleagues.

This probably deserves some points for casting actors of Iranian decent, even if the portrayals are not positive and a lot more broad than the book, which definitely took a Western perspective but seemed interested in the nuances of Americans living in Iran and their relationship to the locals. You get Parviz Sayyad as the villainous Dadgar and Mary Apick as his assistant/translator Mrs. Nourbash. Dadgar is the primary villain in the book and hangs over the proceedings thanks to his command of bureaucracy in a fraught political situation, a dynamic the movie can't evoke so instead it has him chasing them in a helicopter. Apick has a bit of a Saundra Santiago thing going on. You don't need to remember any of these names by the way, I'm just rattling them off because I recently finished the book.

Anyway, this is not good, but I like the actors and the TV-grade hamminess keeps this watchable.

[alexawesomeblog]

Luxury Home Buying Tips You Need to Know

What defines a luxury home? Well, many things, but in simple terms it is a high priced, large sized home that contains luxurious and expensive amenities and equipment such as a swimming pool, jacuzzi, home theatre, custom home gym etc. Its location will also affect its standing. For example, waterfront lands and villas for sale in Sri Lanka are generally considered as luxury properties.

Some common aspects of a luxury home include:

An architect designed and well-built home.

One that is built using high quality materials.

Has better finishes.

Is aesthetically pleasing.

Is located in a good neighbourhood, with other similar houses.

Is located within a prestigious community.

Luxury homes can come in many different types, including:

Estates.

Townhouses.

Single-family homes.

Apartments.

Villas

If you are interested in a home of this type, it is best to partner with reputed real estate companies in Sri Lanka that can get you the best options. It will also be far easier and less time-consuming dealing with an experienced company, than trying to find one yourself.

Why to people buy luxury homes?

If these types of homes are so expensive, then why are more and more people trying to own them? Here are a few reasons for this trend:

Lifestyle changes: As people move on in life, their aspirations and goals change. For some people, as they go higher up in their careers, they may want to have things in their life that portray that opulence. For others, it may be a total change of scenery when it comes to living styles.

Location: These types of properties are located in prime locations, within high end communities. They may want to get away from the chaos of certain locations and move to the serene environment that is offered by a high-end property.

Better security: These types of houses are equipped with the very latest and best security systems and measures, which may be appealing to some people.

Modern amenities: These types of properties have all modern amenities and equipment, which make life much easier for those living there. From smart devices to high tech equipment, large swimming pools to personal gyms, the life of the opulent are to be awed.

High quality: These houses are designed and constructed to the highest possible quality, using only the best materials.

Greater privacy: They offer far better privacy than living within an apartment building or housing community.

Tips on buying a luxury home

Choose a good realtor: As we mentioned before it is essential that you find yourself a good real estate company that can find the ideal house for you. Check with family and friends for a recommendation, or check online reviews. You will be able to find a good company in no time at all.

Define what you consider as luxury: It is important that you properly define what you mean when you think of a luxury home. There is no one definition of this because everyone will have their own perceptions and ideas of what they would like to have in their house. Hence it is essential to note down your exact requirements prior to searching for available properties.

Stick to your budget: It is important to allocate your budget for your purchase, and stick to it no matter what. You may be buying a luxury property, but that does not mean you need to go overboard on the spending.

Have an idea regarding the location: If you have a rough idea regarding the location you want to live in, it will be much easier for you to search for your new home.

Personally visit the prospective property: If you are interested in any specific property, it is best to go there personally and have a look at it, don’t just go with the photos. Getting a home inspection done by a professional is also important because you will be able to detect any issues with the house and get them rectified prior to buying it.

Check zooming documents: It is always good to have a look at government zoning plans for specific locations, since there could be highways or other structures planned for the future which may run through the property you are interested in.

Check on property taxes: Property taxes for luxury residences can be quite high, hence it is always better to check these details prior to making a decision.

Negotiate: You should never say ok to the first price you get from a seller, no matter how much you love the property you see. Always negotiate. If you are working with a real estate company, let them know that you would prefer a better price on the property.

Have patience: Finding the ideal home or property is not an easy one, and may take some time. Hence it is important that you have a bit of patience when searching for real estate, and not go about it in a hurry. Rushed decisions could be bad ones, so take your time.

Elevating yourself to a luxurious living standard is the dream of many people, and they achieve this dream by moving into a luxurious property in a prime location, that is consistent with their lifestyle changes. One thing to remember when searching for real estate like this is to do your research well. Sometimes sellers may be putting their properties for sale because of certain problems or issues, which, with this type of real estate, could turn out to be quite expensive to resolve. After all, you are paying good money to purchase a good piece of real estate for you and your family.

[speakeysie]

Review: OMG You Guys! City Springs's LEGALLY BLONDE is Literally Amazing

by Jody Tuso-Key, Managing Editor The Byers Theater in Sandy Springs has been a sea of pink as patrons are donning various shades to usher in the opening of City Springs Theatre Company’s LEGALLY BLONDE THE MUSICAL which runs from May 3rd to 19th. This is a Speakeysie highly recommended show and a definite cure for FOMO as long as you get your tickets! LEGALLY BLONDE THE MUSICAL premiered in…

[ethicsgirls]

Legal English Lecturer and Co-Founder of M2 Legal Services, Monica Migliarotti Teaches New Ways to Learn, Be Curious, Participate and Create

Monica is a legal English lecturer and has worked at various universities around the world. She has been a lawyer for over twenty years. She is currently working on a new book about her unique approach to teaching Legal English and is also the co-founder of M2 Legal Services, a new concept law firm that also offers linguistic and legal technical training services.

She has a background teaching human rights cases both in the UK and Spain and prioritises teaching cases with strong political and historical contexts to encourage her students to look beyond their national borders, see themselves as world citizens and see the bigger picture in everything they learn. We catch up with her and ask her about her legal background, her unique approach to teaching legal English, international law, the future of humanity and human rights and her exciting new book project.

1) Have you always wanted to be a lawyer?

In truth, my desire was to become a performer. Before enrolling in Law School, I was studying dance professionally and my initial intention was to continue along that path. My other choice was to choose languages, another one of my interests. My father is a lawyer, so eventually he persuaded me that Law school was the best choice. After graduating, I then decided to pursue a career as a lawyer. So summing up, no I haven’t always wanted to be a lawyer. Let’s say I found a compromise between my creative/artistic side and the more “serious” one: I managed to nurture my passion for the arts while practicing as a lawyer since I studied acting in parallel and joined a theatre company in the end. So, I was practicing as a lawyer during the day and performing on stage at night. After, since I had been practicing yoga for many years I studied to become a yoga instructor. Therefore, I replaced the theatre with yoga classes and maintained my double life. I still teach yoga now, but at the moment I have taken up singing and I am really glad I did.

2) How important is it do you think to have a legal background to teach legal English?

I think it is in fact a plus. In my experience, I have come across several teachers, and to my surprise, none of them were legal practitioners. Let me put it this way: most of the materials and cases I use in my classes are real cases I have worked on in my twenty years as a lawyer. That has proved to be much more effective than using some random article or some remote case from old Law Reviews. Of course, landmark cases and statutes are regularly used in the classes. Now, my perplexity has always been the fact that, to explain these concepts (whether about somebody’s practice or not), somebody without a legal background would certainly have to struggle. Is it then necessary to be a lawyer to teach Legal English? Maybe not, but it would most definitely be preferable. In any case, it is essential to have a solid legal background and I would add: a solid background in both civil and common legal systems.

3) What is the ordinary way to teach Legal English and what is the approach to teaching it in Europe compared to the US? 

Most of the Legal English books used by teachers are written by English or American authors or in any case somebody coming from an English-speaking country where the legal system is based on Common Law. Those types of works then, refer to concepts and terms typical of that system. There are indeed references to corresponding Civil Law concepts when available, which tend to be, as said brief and concise. Now, one of the main problems I have encountered in my own experience is precisely teaching Legal English to civil lawyers (including myself in the learning process) and explaining Civil law concepts to Common Law practitioners using Legal English. Some would say that this is quite an insuperable problem since Legal English is based on common law. But is it? I noticed that most of the time civil lawyers are mainly interested in explaining to their common counterparts what the Civil law system is really about and what they should be aware of when, for example, having clients planning to invest in their country. Can they do that after taking a Legal English course of the ones available now? Not so much in my opinion. In my experience, there isn’t a text where various areas of the law are analysed and compared from both perspectives fulfilling what the needs of the civil lawyers are. After all, common lawyers don’t need to do that since they already study Legal English when they study at U. K, U.S or Australian Universities for example.

4) What ethical issues do you include in your teaching and how do you teach ethical aspects of controversial issues to your students?

Ethics are a very important part of the things I teach.

“I like to awaken young and older students’ consciences and make them face ethical issues.”

(photographer: Alexander Grey)

I believe that an important part of studying law is to learn what rights we all have and how to protect them in every field. I don’t think that learning law provisions by heart or seeing this profession as a way to become wealthy and powerful is more valuable than becoming passionate about protecting and advocating people’s rights. Therefore, if one, as a lawyer, does not have it in his/herself this lack of passion will eventually show. The law can be very dry and quite dull, to be honest. It’s mainly in the aspect of protecting people’s rights that it becomes challenging and interesting.

“It is sadly true though, that areas like Criminal law, Human Rights, Public International law, etc, are less remunerative than Company law, Contracts, M&A, Banking and Finance but that is the way the world goes. It makes me think about the Arts too. How badly remunerated are they? Very. In particular when you compare them to other professions. It is indeed funny how the most interesting things are the most neglected ones.”

Going back to my teaching, I usually choose topics related to historical happenings but not only. I’ll give you an example of the topics I dealt with in my last course. As for Masters students I had them deal with ethical issues concerning the treatment of IRA prisoners during “The Troubles”. For the bachelors their first exam was a presentation chosen amongst: 1) Looted art by the Nazis during World War II, 2) Human rights violations related to waiting time for convicted felons on death row, 3) The theory of the innocent bystander. Witnessing bullying, abuse and violence without doing anything. We are indeed bystanders in that case, but are we innocent?

So, as you can see there is a lot of ethics involved.

5) What do you think about the lack of international law present in this humanitarian issue in Gaza right now? Isn’t international law the solution to achieving peace on all sides? Doesn’t the conflict in the Middle East prove yet again that people’s rights correspond to their power and wealth? What is the future for humanity and human rights?

(photographer: Lübna Abdullah)

This is a very interesting yet painful topic. The Israeli-Palestinian situation is an old thorn in the side. At this time, the problem of violation of Human rights has gone beyond all expectations. You would think that all or most countries would get involved to solve this problem but just like the Russian-Ukrainian conflict where diplomacy and action by most States in the world have lacked, we are witnessing a very tepid international reaction to what is happening.

“Power and wealth indeed correspond to people’s rights and people who have less in that respect, are considered to have fewer rights even if not openly. We are now witnessing a situation where human rights violations happen daily in many areas of the world.”

(photographer - Mati Mango)

However, the current pressure and hardship of everyday life have made us turn a blind eye to most of them. The only possible future is to awaken consciences to what is really important, to stimulate people to know, to get interested and passionate, to open their minds. Most minds are too closed on the world right now and open only to volatile and superficial values (if we can even call them that). I am an optimist by nature although I cannot help but be realistic and honestly, the situation does not look good at all.

“However, I think that we can still believe, we can still change but we need to take action even in our small sphere, and we need to step up and do something otherwise we will be the makers of our own destruction.”

6) Congratulations on your new book publishing contract with Cambridge Scholars Publishing. What inspired you to write this book about your different approach to teaching Legal English?

Well, I have been doing this for a long time now and I have seen that in this field there is very little innovation. The methods are very standardized and have been so, for as long as I can think. The approach to this topic has always been very schematic and based on the same texts all along. As I mentioned before, everything connected to the study and teaching of legal subjects is by definition very hard and quite dry (not to mention extreme dullness at times). I have experimented with a new way to learn legal subjects throughout most of my studies in the past and I have decided to put it into practice. We have now a lot of different resources to learn Legal subjects: half of the series on the market deal with legal situations, lawyers, courts, etc, there is a lot in the literature that we can use for these topics and an incredible amount of movies whose plot deals with legal concepts and believe it or not songs’ lyrics (fewer materials there but still there are quite a few examples). That’s what my book is going to be based on. It’s still Legal English but with another approach to legal concepts and terminology.

7) How do you inspire your students and bring to life legal concepts and legal terms in your teaching methods?

I always encourage my students to reflect and reason on legal concepts. There is no point in knowing legal definitions and legal terms if we don’t know what they mean in practice. I prefer to explain with situations and examples. And again, I use the resources above. I show them videos, film clips, literature excerpts, etc. I encourage them to put everything into practice.

8) How important are creativity and innovation in teaching at the moment?

They are both essential.

“The old method is still valid to some extent but without creativity and innovation the new generations in particular are less inclined to learn.”

Again, these resources and encouraging participation, group and individual activities in the classroom is a much more effective and productive method. Seeing is believing. I have used the old method with students who asked me to use it, books, exercises, listening practice, etc, especially lawyers and consultants and I can assure you that that has turned out to be less effective than the innovative and creative method.

Creativity and innovation are, in Monica’s opinion, a very good choice and what we need at the moment.  It is indeed important to have firm beliefs and methods, but at the same time change is necessary in every field and creativity brings that change even in the most traditional and "stiff" areas. 

In celebration of the launch of Monica’s new book ‘The Ultimate Legal English Manual: A Different Approach,’ she will be running a pre-book launch webinar to give a sneak peek into the book. Anyone interested will have to register and they’ll be a recording of the live version. Watch this space.

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/monica-migliarotti-461b721a/

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/m2englishlaw/ 

Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@M2englishlaw

Website: https://www.M2legalservices.com

[thewombatsopinion]

Lord of the Flies Review

Review of Lord of the Flies watched at the Belgrade Theatre, Coventry on the 29th April 2023. A Leeds Playhouse Production directed by Amy Leach, designed by Max Johns and adapted by Nigel Williams.

The production started off promisingly. The opening audio recording giving brief context to the state of the world the play inhabits, coupled with a simple yet effective movement piece depicting young adults being evacuated onto a plane gave me hope for the coming show. Sadly this hope quickly ebbed away with the plane crash being depicted in a slightly ''youth theatre'' style (the company shaking their way around stage.) More stylistic movements would have been welcomed, a thread I wish had carried itself throughout the performance. Once on the island and with the initial character meetings out the way the action descended into chaos following the classic William Golding novel. It's my opinion that the breakdown of the groups' sanity happened too quickly and would have benefited from a more lengthy/nuanced approach.

Max John's design: depicting a central island surrounded by palm trees, in a stark white and black contrasting palette was sadly not to my taste. The central rostra/platform was meant to depict multiple areas across the island, but the constant location hopping became confusing. There was never quite enough space between the warring groups to add effective tension. A personal pet peeve of mine is having props and scenery painted black in an attempt to make them unfamiliar to the audience, something that sadly Lord of the Flies did, not a fan I must say!

Although the show is steeped in violence, fight scenes felt laboured and clunky. Slow-motion fight scenes are very hard to pull off and sadly they dragged on a little too long. Piggy's death (spoiler alert) was regrettably insignificant with him being rolled off the top of the central platform onto a mat hidden from view. The overall lack of aggression/conviction in the fight scenes meant we, as an audience, are left wanting more.

There were a few stand out performances though. Angela Jones as Ralph, Patrick Dineen as Jack and Jason Connor as Piggy were all riveting to watch. I've no doubt that they will become very confident performers in the years to come, they certainly know how to command a space and make their presence known. The rest of the company were good, but at times they did feel underused and the stage was at risk of overcrowding.

Overall the performance felt somewhat disjointed. Tension needed a bit more time to fully develop and a more stylistic movement theme would have been welcome. The push for greater accessibility of the audience and increased diversity onstage was definitely a a meritable point. Something all productions should strive towards in 2023!

In the end Lord of the Flies gets a wombat rating of:

3 Wombats 'It was alright'

Thanks for reading, The Wombat's Opinion

[steelcityreviews]

FRINGE REVIEW: Death By Shakespeare

Director: Tyler Brent & Leonard A. Cain

Playwright: Tyler Brent & Leonard A. Cain

Performers: Vicktoria Adam, Everton Campbell, Andrew Easterling, Tyler Brent, Leonard A. Cain

Additional Artists: Michelle LaHaise (Producer)

Urban Eclipse Theatre Company brings The Immortal Bard’s words back to life... only to slaughter them again in this brilliantly staged comedic romp through Shakespeare’s legacy of tragic deaths. 

The Zoetic is the perfect venue for this type of production. The stage alone lends itself to the extremely physical nature of the show and the creative vision of directors Brent and Cain is brilliantly executed with thematic lighting effects, “Bardcore” music selections and a troupe of players (with one special sacrifice, I mean, audience participant) who excel at stage combat while spouting off classic lines from Shakespeare’s most popular works. 

All the classic deaths are brought back from Romeo and Juliet to Titus Andronicus and reimagined with plenty of throwbacks to how the death would have been shown to a Renaissance audience and then twisted for a more modern interpretation. When you make your players wear protective “splatter gear” you know you’re in for a bloody good time. 

The show is well-paced with momentum dragging ever so slightly near the end as the players act out an almost exhaustive list of death scenes. Each actor demonstrates a real sense of respect for the work as well as having the best time on that stage. This is especially true with the unexpected melding of two of Shakespeare’s best in his self-professed long desired sequel (because modern people want sequels, damnit!) featuring the Weird Wayward Sisters (Macbeth) and Prospero (The Tempest). The audience joined in several times, hissing at any mention of The Scottish Play, allowing our thespian knowledge of theatre superstitions to unite us in the dark as we watched the magic unfold. 

This show is what Fringe is all about: trying a new concept, reimagining classic material and having the time of your life while doing so. There is so much to enjoy here, even if you think Shakespeare is dated, tired and overdone. Let this company prove you wrong. Shows like Death By Shakespeare are the embodiment of what makes Fringe a powerhouse festival. This one is definitely going to be a contender for Best of Fringe. Don’t miss it.

Pre-show antics featuring Everton Campbell and Andrew Easterling. Photo by Steel City Girl Reviews

Event Details

Price: $12

$5 Kids Tickets Available

Kids Under 2: FREE!

Venue: The Zoetic Theatre, Concession St in Hamilton, ON

Genre: Theatre—Comedy, Theatre—Drama

Duration: 60 mins

Warnings: Coarse Language, Strobe Lights, Fog, Violence

For tickets, please visit: https://hftco.ca/events/death-by-shakespeare/

[familyevents]

Wedding Planner

Decoration:   

         Something That Is Added To Something Else To Make It More Attractive. A Medal Or Award That Is Given To Someone For Doing Something Brave Or Honorable (Such As Fighting Bravely In A War) Decoration.

Bride Groom Special Entry:     

       However, At The Wedding Reception, Most Bride-And-Groom Couples Employ A Formal Announcement As They Make Their Grand Entrance Into The Reception Space

Entertainment:       

    Entertainment Is A Form Of Activity That Holds The Attention And Interest Of An Audience Or Gives Pleasure And Delight

Venue Booking:         

  Venue Booking System Is A Web Application In Which Service Providers Or A Venue Owner Can Registered Their Venues And Customers Can Book Venues For Events As Per Their Location, Availability And Interest

Catering:       

     Catering Is The Process Or Business Of Preparing Food And Providing Food Services For Clients At Remote Locations, Such As Hotels, Restaurants, Offices, Concerts, And Events. Companies That Offer Food, Drinks, And Other Services To Various Customers, Typically For Special Occasions, Make Up The Catering Sector.

Invitations:         

    An Invitation Is A Request In The Form Of Verbal Or Written Communication Inviting An Individual Or Group Of People To Do Something Or To Attend An Event. It Is A Way Of Informing People Of The Details Of An Event, Which Include The What, When, Where, Why, And In Some Instances

Photographers:         

   When Trying To Quantify What Is Photography, It’s Important To First Start With A Photography Definition. In Layman’s Terms, Photography Is Quite Simply The Process Of Capturing Light With A Camera To Create An Image.

Makeup Artist:       

    A Make-Up Artist, Also Called A Makeup Artist, And Often Shortened To MUA, Is An Artist Whose Medium Is The Human Body, Applying Makeup And Prosthetics On Others For Theatre, Television, Film, Fashion, Magazines And Other Similar Productions Including All Aspects Of The Modeling Industry.

Hospitality Guest Management:       

     Hospitality Management Is The Supervision And Coordination Of A Hotel Or Restaurant’s Functions So That The Entire Guest Experience Is Comfortable, Positive, And Review-Worthy. These Functions Include Reception, Housekeeping, And Food Service.