Every Christmas Story Ever Told, Dec. 21 at MAT-Great Falls

Last night I saw the MAT-Great Falls production of "Every Christmas Story Ever Told," and overall wasn't that impressed.
I will add a few qualifiers before getting to that, though. The story has some potential. There were a few moments that made me laugh and I wouldn't say it was completely worthless. It wasn't.

I also should add that I left at intermission. Out of respect to Dana, Josh and Aisha, I offer my sincerest apologies for leaving early. I experienced a circumstance beyond my control that made me unable to return.

But, I will, however, offer my thoughts on what I saw.

The good
I enjoyed watching Aisha's enthusiasm for her role. Connie, too, had lots of enthusiasm and almost childlike wonder. This was her first experience acting, and it showed, but she was indeed full of energy and life. I also liked the light show as the first half was ending and seeing the three actors, the previously mentioned Aisha and Connie along with Josh Wendt, dancing silly-like on stage to the music while the Christmas lights flickered in sequence.
Finally, the scenes where they asked someone from the audience to get up and help with the scene worked wonderfully. The person asked to get on stage often added something quantitative to the show that garnered some of the biggest laughs.

The bad
Firstly, I understand why Josh had a script in his hand as they had an actress drop out at the last minute forcing him to fill-in. I understand that.
However, when I saw the show it was Josh's third weekend performing it. Granted he did not glance at the script much at all, probably the least he had of all the weeks, but the fact remains he was up there with a script.
It might not be fair to compare local actors, but I think this comparison has merit.
When Krystine Wendt, Josh's niece, was asked to step in at the last minute in I Hate Hamlet, and in Steel Magnolias, she did so without a script.
Maybe that shows how well Krystine is at memorizing her lines more than anything against Josh, but well, there's just no way this aspect of the show can be construed as anything but a distraction, however small or big depending on your preference.
Like I said, I didn't notice Josh looking at the script hardly at all, but he did still have it and did still look at it so it's always going to be something I'll mention.

Secondly,
I think what made the end of the first act work for me, like I said earlier, was the decorations. The rest of the time the set was plain black. Perhaps some garland or some colored lights, even a Christmas tree, might have added to the atmosphere. I kept wishing there was any kind of small Christmas decoration during the entire show.
I also had a hard time following the plot during several of the skits. The Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer skit was all sorts of confusing because for some reason they made the reindeer have a green nose and made him not a reindeer. There were several other instances where the plot seemed to be so convoluted I wasn't sure quite exactly what was going on.

Thirdly,
The lighting at times didn't quite spotlight all of the actors on stage. The opening scene, in particular, was troublesome as you could see Josh and Aisha fine but Connie appeared to be standing in the dark for a good majority of the scene. It would have been nice to be able to have lighting on each person. It wasn't noticeable for the whole show, but I did notice it now and then.

Lastly,
There were times where it seemed like someone would just be talking without any reason to be talking. Between a few scenes, Josh had a voice-over where he listed off names of Christmas characters and songs and a whole slew of other things that I wasn't sure why they were being mentioned.

 If it was funny, that would be one thing, but I'm afraid to me it just seemed like someone listing off things.

Since the show's run is over, I'm writing this more as a recommendation about some of the things I noticed for next time.
Theater is hard. Producing a good show is even harder.
This one might not have worked as well as it could have, but, everyone involved still put in the time and effort to make it happen and give the community an artistic endeavor to attend.

Despite my thoughts and the thoughts of some others involved in the theater community here, there were still people who were laughing and having a good time at the show. That's really what it's all about.

I'll be watching for the next show sometime later this spring. My hopes are that some changes will be made and the people who care about getting better will improve and the theater will experience another insurgence. Great Falls will be a much better place for it.

"Come Blow Your Horn" at the University of Great Falls, Nov. 9

Taryn Judah and Tim Stoddard in Come Blow Your Horn. 

Last night I watched the UGF production of "Come Blow Your Horn." It's an entertaining, albeit slightly flawed, show.
First let's get into what I thought worked well and why I feel is worth purchasing a ticket to see. If you're not aware of the plot, I'm not going to go much into it, but you can read up on it here.

The show is directed by Ed Moran and stars UGF students Glen Weeks, Payton Henley and Taryn Judah, UGF alumni Janette Conley and community members Tim Stoddard and Sarah Hood.
Moran and Michael Gilboe together did a great job of casting the roles. Each piece fit well and the on-stage chemistry made it easy to get lost in the story of these fallible characters.

Glen and Tim, the lead characters, especially did a fine job with their dialogue-heavy parts. They hardly ever fumbled a line, and if they did it was very quick and hardly noticeable, almost as if it was written that way.
I think some of the funniest parts of the show, for me, involved Janette's answering the telephone what seems like a dozen times and her inability to find a pencil despite there being a jar with 5 or 6 pencils visible to the audience.
It might not sound that interesting describing it, but once you see it's execution, or if you're familiar with that part of the play, you'll understand it's brilliance. Conley for her part did a great job of playing the typical Jewish-sounding mother from Manhattan.
 Her accent, too, was by far the best of the bunch, which isn't to say there was a bad accent in the show. I've heard some really bad accents at other shows and was pleasantly surprised at how well they were done this time around.

Janette Conley in "Come Blow Your Horn"

While Weeks and Stoddard were the leads, for me the women stole the show. It was by far the most fun whenever Sarah, Janette and Taryn were on stage. You couldn't help but start to long for them to get back up there when they were gone.
They also play three distinctly different characters which is a credit to their skill as actors and the well-written script from Neil Simon.
I also loved how Payton, who played the brothers' father, has a chance to show both his soft side and his hard-ass side. Too many times in plays and movies we see one-dimensional supporting characters who only have one emotion throughout the entire show. This script has some of that, but a few of the supporting characters get to show their complexities that real human beings are capable of feeling.
Finally the set and the costumes were well-done, also. A bad set or bad costumes can make a show look bad. The set pieces, costumes and lighting weren't all that noticeable, mostly because they didn't have to be, but they didn't take anything away from it either.
If anything the apartment seemed a little TOO big, but the actors used nearly all of the space and it never took anything away from the performance.

If I was going to nit-pick, I'd say that because they had a piano on stage, they could have had someone perform on it, which is similar to the trope "If you introduce a gun in act one, you better have somebody fire it in act three."
Nobody sat at the piano and it was not a central part of the apartment, but just having it on stage there's likely going to be a portion of the audience who expects someone to sit down and play it.
With that I'll get into a bit about what I didn't like as much about the play.
Glenn and Tim in act one convincingly set up their characters. Watching it and you believe that Glenn is the freewheeling playboy and Tim is the naive younger brother who's not nearly as worldly or experienced with women.
But the third act, to me, is a bit of a make-or-break moment. In act three we see Tim's character turn into the playboy and Glenn turn into the rule-abiding sibling. It's a difficult role reversal but one that I feel is the take home portion of the play.
My problem with act three is that it seemed as if both Tim and Glenn were less comfortable switching their roles. Maybe that's how it's supposed to be played, but I had a hard time grasping how quickly both characters changed and how subtly unnatural it felt. Mind you it wasn't bad, there were no bad performances. And, as a non-actor I can only imagine how difficult it must be since you're essentially playing two characters in one.

Glenn Weeks and Sarah Hood in "Come Blow Your Horn"

But, I would have liked to seen the natural flow of the brothers' characteristics show in the first to acts carry over into act three.
A part of me wanted to see Buddy's suave side come out more. Maybe if, for instance, he had a scene where he romantically kisses a woman. That might not have been in the script, but something like that might have helped.
Also, at one point Buddy says to his brother, and I may be paraphrasing, but he says something along the lines of "I've changed completely thanks to you, Allan." I kept thinking, well, I wouldn't say that's entirely true.

Because this was the first time I've actually seen the entire show, I may be commenting on something that's written into the script. I stand by the critique either way, however, because if you're going to make characters change their identifying traits, I feel it should be done confidently and convincingly.
It was an admirable attempt, I'll give them that, and they have nothing to be ashamed of with their performances. I just kept waiting for more. I kept hoping for that artistic moment that moves the audience into seeing the world a bit differently, or feeling something that they might not have if they chose to stay home or go do something else.
So, in conclusion, I do recommend that everyone see "Come Blow Your Horn." It's a funny show that meets the bar of expectations that continue to be pushed higher in our fledgling artistic community. The performers all work well together and you'll leave the theater with a smile on your face.
It's a good, funny show -- just not quite a great one.

All photos were taken by Michael Gilboe.

Album review of Jacuzzi Boys' self-titled CD

I recently gave a listen through the new Jacuzzi Boys' album, which comes out Sept. 22 through Sub Pop Records.

On the band's Facebook page, they describe the album, saying "It’s like that movie you once saw. The one with the boy and the girl and the plastic lounger on the beach. “Be My Prism” was the invitation. “Black Gloves” and “Double Vision” the promise. “Dust” was the rising tide. “Rubble,” the dirty uncle. “Hotline” was the lightning storm, and “Ultraglide” was the ending, the part where he drove her home with the windows down.You remember you liked it. It stayed with you while you swam alone in your pool that night.

Right off the bat, I found that the album doesn't take a whole lot of thinking to digest. It's light, breezy and smooth. It has a light bit of rock solos and riffs to it, but not enough to make you feel like you're listening to anything but alternative pop-rock. 

In a way I would describe it as a take on the "Big Me" era Foo Fighters. 

I felt it a little too simplistic at times. Other times, I felt like it had just enough of the elements to make the sound work. 

In a way making an album is a bit like cooking a meal. You have the ingredients, the cooks, the equipment and the skill/experience of the people making it happen. 

With "Jacuzzi Boys," the cooks seem to be talented enough to make some decent music. But, don't expect a Led Zeppelin-like complexity to the tunes. 
Whereas a band like Arcade Fire might be Julia Child, the Jacuzzi Boys are more akin to Rachel Ray. 

Some of the highlights for me are "Heavy Horse," "Hotline" and "Rubble," which might be my favorite track of the album. I found myself listening to it two or three times in a row.

That was in contrast to "Domino Moon." The song has some heavy riffs and aggressive pacing, but they're kind of negated by the overly laid-back vibe from the vocals.
I found myself wishing there was more angst in the singer's approach

 Then, finally, on "Ultraglide," there's still something that feels a little off about the vocals matched up with the music. It's got that very lo-fi feel to it. I think that sound can make your band seem endearing. Some of the songs on this album, it does. On this song, it sounds a bit amateurish.

If I were summing this album up, I'd say first and foremost, this is good-time music. 
The artwork, too, is a trip. The cover art is probably the funkiest I've seen in a while. There's really no way to describe it with words, but you can see for yourself here: 

 The handwritten linter notes on the inside and cursive track listing on the back makes it feel very indie/hipster. It's like one of those albums that's unheard-of listening to on anything but a record player. 

As far as the music goes, I wouldn't be surprised to see some of these songs on the soundtrack of a romantic comedy or two.
 But, as far as advancing the genre, this album doesn't do much in that regard.  Maybe the next album they'll try some more risks and take things to different places that you might not expect. 

The potential is there, so I'll definitely have my eyes on what these guys end up doing next. 
 

"The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (Abridged) at Montana Actors' Theatre-Great Falls, Aug. 31

Levon Allen, Josh Wendt and Bob MacNamee perform a scene from "The Complete Works of Willam Shakespeare (Abriged)

Last night at the MAT, I experienced several oddly specific theater firsts.

I was kicked out of my seat so one of the actors could sit in it. I was (fake) puked on, twice, by Mr. Levon Allen, and I was asked to run laps back and forth on stage during the second act. I thought it all was great fun.

This script calls for audience participation just at the right moment, in my estimation. From a director's standpoint, you need to have the audience on board totally with you or else it won't work. Once they're invested in the story, then you can get them to do anything, almost.

A big part of what makes it work is the fact that Levon, Bob MacNamee and Josh Wendt have great onstage chemistry.

Which is good, because it's hard to perform all of Shakespeare's plays at once, sort of, if all of the actors aren't on board together.

Much of the performance is dedicated to parodying Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet. Some of the other plays are mixed in, as well, but aren't given as much time. They're still funny and effective in their condensed versions.

There's also several popular references, subtle Shakespeare references and physical gags. All and all it's a nice mix. Plus, Levon is quite funny in a dress. A man in a dress is ALWAYS funny. That should be written in the official rule book of comedy. It's never not funny, even if you try to make it so.

Thinking about it more, in a way, Josh, Bob and Levon are like conductors taking the audience on an adventure. I think that effect worked better at times than others, but more or less, the audience is as much a part of the show as the actors.

The costumes, props and lighting really were handled well, also. Sometimes in a show the props can detract from it if they don't fit in with the feel the actors are giving. For this show, however, the props and costumes fit the mood perfectly.

I also appreciated the fact that the script includes passages right from Shakespeare. At times I found myself yearning for more actual Shakespeare, but, that would've made it a different show.

Essentially this was the Naked Gun of Shakespeare. And, that's okay.

As I was leaving the theater, one of the ladies in front of me said to her friend "I haven't laughed that much consistently for a long while."

That, to me, speaks more about the play than anything I can write. That's what people will be telling their neighbors.

I've been thinking about some critical things I can say, but I can't think of many.

The weakest scene, to me, was the middle part when they read the combination of Shakespeare's comedies from the sheet-music stands. About midway through it, I found myself waiting for them to get back to the physical acting.

I guess it created a contrast. I'm just not sure it's quite as effective contrast as some of the other ones they used. But, it still had it's funny lines that engaged the audience. Maybe just the stands between the actors and the audience created a barrier, ever so subtle, that made the difference.

All and all, though, this is a quality show. Levon, Josh and Bob are all confident in their performances. It's a small thing, maybe, but it makes a big difference.

I recommend seeing "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (Abridged). It only shows for one more weekend, so catch it while you can.

"A Little Murder Never Hurt Anybody" Aug. 24 at the 3D International in Black Eagle

Kirsten Kreutz and Dyllan Storm interact in a scene from "A Little Murder Never Hurt Anybody"

Last night I had a front-row seat at the 3D International's dinner theater showcase. Anytime a place offers guests the chance to enjoy a meal, and some live theater, my interest is already piqued.

It's hard to recommend if the show, or food, is bad, but last night I'm confident in saying that the show, and the meal, were both solid.  

"A Little Murder Never Hurt Anybody," follows the Perry family at New Year's Eve. Mr. Perry, following his friend's loss of his wife, finds that he wishes to kill his wife so he, too, can enjoy the freedom and independence that his friend now does.

So, Matthew, played by Allen Lanning tells his wife Julia, played by Tianta Stevens, that for his New Year's Resolution, he vows to kill her.

Julia, taken a bit back by this, doesn't believe he has it in him to do it. And, she's mostly right. She vows to stay alive to see their daughter, Bunny, played by CMR senior Kirsten Kreutz, marry Donald, played by Dyllan Storm. The final pieces to the puzzle are the cunning butler Butram played by Dan Mitchell and the clueless inspector played by Keern Haslem.

The reason this premise works is the nonchalant attitude the whole cast has when it comes to killing people. As audience members you don't see any deaths on stage, mostly, and it's a very tongue-in-cheek approach. That, to me, is the source of the most amusement -- seeing how blasè a group of people treat such a serious crime.

At the same time, many of the laughs come from the cluelessness of the characters, particularly Keern's inspector, Bunny and Matthew. I find it difficult to make morons come off as funny without resorting to cheap gags, but they pull it off nicely here.

Keern Haslem lays motionless in a scene from "A Little Murder..."

Between the second and third acts, I believe, the 3D staff served the audience dinner. I chose the salmon, which, although was a LITTLE dry, it was still enjoyable.

Maybe another sauce on top of the salmon would have added to the flavor. But, a minor complaint this is. At my table, the other people all had different options -- steak, chicken, prawns and pasta. Everyone seemed satisfied with their meals. Having a full bar right next to the stage was a great perk, too!

More than anything, I think this play shows what a group of experienced actors can do with a good script. The characters were believable, everyone's timing was spot on, and you found yourself engaged in what happens. Everyone is likable even the main protagonist/antagonist Matthew, who's trying, and failing, to kill his wife.

The fact that each of the characters have equal importance throughout the show only gives more proof of how well it all works together. It was truly an ensemble performance.

If I were going to give any constructive criticism, it would be that I felt that at times the plot was a little predictable. You could see things coming a scene or two before they happened.

Again, this is minor, because I suppose not every story needs a twist ending or a surprise character or some kind of ambitious goal to make your audience go out and change the world.

Sometimes, we want a show that gives us good laughs and a happy ending.

One more thought is I guess the price tag might keep some people from attending.
$70 for two people can be expensive. I look at it as a matter of what you pay for and what you get in return.

You're paying for dinner and a live show. Many shows cost $35 without dinner. You can spend $70 on a dinner, easy, without seeing a show. Having both makes $35 reasonable, I can understand that for some people it's a bit out of their price range for entertainment, however.

As such, I recommend seeing "A Little Murder Never Hurt Anybody" at the 3D. It plays again on Sept. 13 and I was told they will have two more encore showings later next month.

Electric City Invitational Poetry Slam @ Magnificent Seven, Aug. 3

Last night I had the pleasure of judging the inaugural ECC poetry slam featuring some of my favorite local poets.

It was a difficult task to judge mostly because I respect each of them. Anyone easily could have won the competition.

Ultimately, I felt Ian Court was the deserving winner. His first poem brought out captivating, harsh and real emotion that felt what it would be like to be a cougar shredding through its prey.

I don't believe he was speaking about his mother in the poem. It was, however, about SOMEONE's mother, and he had a lot to say that was well-presented, authentic and touched the audience in a way that as a poet you strive to do with anything you write.

The difference, I feel, between a decent poem and a great poem, is taking the emotion of a rant, exploring it and creating something literary that makes that feeling blossom into art.

Plus, a great performance poem sticks with your listeners.
I'm sorry to admit it, but I've already kind of forgotten what some of the poems were about. A good poem, to me, is one that you remember days after hearing it.

On that note, I really enjoyed Jeff's opening poem about his unborn child. It was sweet, direct, full of intriguing metaphors and phrases, and in Jeff-fashion, leaves you with a sense of "hey, all right, maybe life isn't so bleak."

What more can you say about Jeff's poetry? He's established his voice, and it shines through every piece he reads, much like Krystine's. Her expressive voice is well-established. The intruigue comes when she does something new...much like everyone. Her writing and performing are both equally moving.

It came as no surprise, then, that Krystine had her game ready for her new poem.
I felt it really touched on hope and optimism nicely.
Perhaps the only down side to reading a new piece is that it's not quite as polished. But, that, to me, is an acceptable trade-off because you're presenting something unique for the very first time. I guess I value that over something that we've heard several times before delivered excellently.
Similarily, if Krystine reads her piece again, I look forward to seeing how she improves upon it. :-)

Sarah Raines, who took second place, read a piece about a man and a woman and how while they're connected in some deep way, they'll never be involved in something messy, which relationships tend to be. It's kept, as she puts it "clean and dry," which works on the literal sense, they're at one point standing out in the rain, and the figurative one.

That dual meaning takes a certain amount of literary magic to make it work. Her repetition of the phrase "Clean and Dry," cuts to the heart nicely. That, added to her ability to deliver the piece, made her an easy choice for the second round.

She had a couple of flubs performing her second piece, which was a bit unfortunate given that the rest of it was delivered excellently. I felt she may have won the slam if she performed her third piece, Proof, second, as it was touching and really made a connection with the audience. The fact that it was totally off-the-cuff and full of emotional pauses really added to the effect.

Traci Rosenbaum's poem, I felt, was the best written one of the night. I gave her a 10 in the literary category. Her performing was a little flat, which happens. Several times I've written what I felt were great pieces..on the page. Then, however, when I go to the mic and perform them, they come out not as powerful as they seemed on the screen while I was typing them.

That happened a bit with Traci's poem, I felt. Her performing is strong, but firstly, she is a wonderful writer. She makes me a little jealous, truthfully, because I've heard several of her poems and they're always quite moving. :-)

Allen Lanning's piece about Montana getting it right was thought provoking. It was bold, strong and to the point. At times it felt it was a bit too much on the storytelling side vs. the poetic side, but it had plenty of strong, well-crafted language.

Allen's poem made me think of what a real poem should be. How does one tell the difference between a rant, a poem and a short story? Should there be a way to seperate them? They're all poems in the sense that they're being performed on stage at a poetry slam. But, can a poem be a strong opinion delivered with flare? Can a poem be a string of obscenities repeated every sixth word?
Or, is a poem only something that follows an established formula such as Iambic Pentameter or a Haiku?
It's an interesting discussion, and one I'm not sure there is a right answer to.

Finally, Anissa impressively made the final round despite not knowing she was supposed to be performing!

 For whatever reason, I had a bit of a hard time hearing her first poem, but she was extremely engaging. Her mannerisms are wonderfully natural and draw in you with laser-like focus. She's grown as a poet by leaps and bounds, which is impressive given that she was a great poet already.

Like Sarah Raines, she flubbed a bit on her second poem. It wasn't that noticable, but in a competition those are the little things that stand out. It didn't take away from the message or emotion, however.

Her third poem, which, I was happy we got to hear, was also perhaps her strongest. The final line, which I might be paraphrasing incorrectly was, "How can dying be so beautiful?" was probably the best closing line of the night.
 Choosing between her and Sarah for second place was the hardest ruling to make. If I had to pick one over the other 10 times in a row, I'd probably go back and forth every time.

If you're a fan of poetry, like I am, you had plenty to love about the Poetry Invitational. A diverse mix of poets delivering new shit, old shit and wonderfully unscripted shit left for a great night out on Machinery Row's patio.

I look forward to the next one, and hopefully this event helped raise more awareness in the community that the poetry scene here isn't some overnight fad.

And that, I feel, was the biggest success of the night.

Gosh it's been forever. Here's a review of Mudhoney's album "Vanishing Point"`

Well then.
Most of you probably thought I've vanished from the planet.

Turns out, you CAN'T trust chimpanzees to write reviews. Lesson learned. :-p

I was gone for a while, but I'm back. Also, I recently was given 12 CDs from Sub Pop Records in Seattle. One of them was Mudhoney's newest album "Vanishing Point."

Listening to the entire track list, there's 10 breezy tracks, earlier today, I literally chuckled out loud in the middle of the office.
"I Like It Small," especially, is hilarious. Like, if somebody told me one of the original grunge rock artists would someday release a song called "I Like It Small," with the following lyrics, I would've thought you were crazy. But it works.

Excerpt of Mudhoney's "I Like It Small" 

"I don't need no magnum
A snub nose would do just fine
And I'll take GG Allan
Over long dong silver any time"

It works because they're obviously in on the joke, and they rock the shit out of it.

EDIT:
After a closer listen to this song it isn't TOTALLY funny.

 They're also talking about their preference not to be a big-label, major-radio-airplay, arena-touring band. It takes a few listens, but it's definitely in there.
So, there's that, too. That's probably the real message of the song. And in a way, it's a rather deep one. You don't HAVE to be a Nirvana or Soundgarden to consider yourself a successful band. :-) I dig it. 


Another highlight for me is the track "Chardonnay."

"But for me you don't do nothing.
I see through the ole charrade.
I Hate you Chardonnay

You're the soccer mom's favorite sipper, 
Well I can't think of nothing sicker, 
Get the fuck out of my backstage." 

Nobody else is writing songs like this, I can guarantee you this.

Finally, the album ends, fittingly, in my estimation, with the song "Douchebags on Parade."
After a haunting intro where you're almost not sure if the same album is in the player anymore,
Mark Arm (The lead singer dude, duh!) starts in going off about the literal parade of douchebags.

This might not be the most serious album in the world, but why does it need to be? It's rockin', it's fun and I get a kick out of listening to it.

What's funny is I saw these guys when they were in Missoula opening for Pearl Jam. The set was rather forgettable for me, though, mostly because I think I was so psyched to see Pearl Jam.

They could've had Kanye West and Macklemore opening for Pearl Jam together and I wouldn't have cared for it. Maybe I should have listened a little closer!

So, that's it. Check out "Vanishing Point."

And then, like I said earlier, I have 12 new CDs I've been listening to, and I plan on reviewing all or most of them.

Let me know what you think!

Steel Magnolias, May 11 at MAT-Great Falls

"Steel Magnolias" by MAT I feel has the right combination of what a good MAT show needs -- emotion, humor, a basic yet distinctive set and a varied cast of characters who work well together.

While I felt "Medea," lacked a certain few key elements to reach a large audience, "Steel Magnolias," for the most part delivers the goods.

"Steel Magnolias," is directed by Krystine Wendt and Jeff Scolley and stars Tiffany Staigmiller as Ouiser, Sarah Raines as M’Lynn, Ali Shildt as Annelle and Jean Hawkins as Clairee. Shelby is played by Casey Ayres and her understudy Sarah Meyers, who was featured Saturday night. Wendt also appeared as Truvy, although she was not on the original cast list. 

Like I said above, I felt the show hit the right notes and leaves audiences feeling for these women. 

"Steel Magnolias," if you're not familiar with the plot, is an adaptation of Robert Harling's play written in 1987. A movie by the same name was produced in 1989. 

The highlight performances for me were Staigmiller's brash, loud-talking Ouiser, Raines' ability to tug at your heartstrings toward the end when, without giving too much away, she is confronted by a great loss in her life.

She has a real presence on the stage in how she moves, the way she becomes M'Lynn and the conviction in her lines. 

I also particularly enjoyed Shildt's innocence portrayed in Annelle. She at times was funny, but never anything but gentle in a somewhat-naive sort of way. It doesn't take long before you start to see people you know like Annelle, who's very much the newcomer to the neighborhood.

Wendt, as well, gave a solid performance as Truvy. It's probably the best role I've seen her in recently, although like the last one it's one she didn't appear to plan to take. Nonetheless she played Truvy well, who is a linchpin character. 

The story spoke to me in a unique way in that Shelby, one of the central characters in the play, is diabetic and suffers through an episode during act one. It's one of the constant pieces of conflict throughout the play, and motivation for Harling to write the piece.  

As a fellow diabetic, I can sympathize what that is like entirely too well, but as such I noticed a few problems. 

Firstly, as any diabetic might tell you, you're never out and about without your blood testing machine. I didn't notice Shelby having it once, which made it a little less believable for me. Secondly , when a diabetic has a low-blood sugar attack, it takes a while for your body to return to normal. 

When Shelby goes into a hypoglycemic attack, however, after she has some orange juice, she almost instantaneously comes out of it. It doesn't QUITE work like that. It would have been nicer to see a little more time between her episode and her recovery. 

Also, Shelby appeared to have flubbed a few lines in the second and third act. It didn't take me out of the scene too much, but it was a slight distraction. 

This show being Meyers' first foray into acting, I might forgive these a little, but a random person who watched the play off the street who wouldn't know that might not. 

Still, she played the part well and there were moments where I got lost in her character. The down-to-earth dialogue, the witty humor and consistent character development all made it easy to forget you were watching a performance. 

While I felt the first act went on a little too long with banter not central to the story, the second act started with a real bang and I instantly got right back into feeling the characters personalities.  

By the end of the play you feel like you know these women and the type of people they are. To me that says something about the script and the women's performances. 

In conclusion, I recommend seeing "Steel Magnolias," which wraps up this weekend and next with shows on May 17, 18 and 25. 

This is a good show to see if you're looking for an emotional journey between six women all at different points in their lives. It has humor, drama, and a touching end. It's a solid piece of theater worth the price of admission despite the few minor issues.  

The Dead Legend at UGF review

Aisha McManus, Kelsey McNeil, Clay Vermulm and Ken Taylor in a scene from UGF's "Dead Legend."

Last week I was invited to see one of the final dress rehearsals of "The Dead Legend," which, is a reprisal of UGF's 2011 production "After Hours at the Dead Legend."

The updated version of the musical has a lot to like -- catchy and layered songs, some funny dialogue and some awesome costumes.

There are a few moments that don't work so well, also, including some off-key singing on one or two songs, one noticeable logical error and a few moments where I could not hear exactly what the performer was saying and/or singing.

But, let's get to the things I like, first.

"The Dead Legend" was written/created by Michael Gilboe, Keern Haslem and Glen Weeks in 2011, with additional help from Amber Koesling, Sarah Raines, Sawyer Edmister, Emily Busby, Jeremy Hudson, Ken Taylor and Dana Jo Forseth.

The updated script stars Hudson as Bela Lugosi/William Shakespeare, Kari Roat as Minnie Pearl, Matt Way as Errol Flynn, April Wendt as Janis Jopliln, Sawyer Edmister as Frank Zappa, Kelsey McNeil as Lucille Ball, Brendon Winston as Sid Vicious, Rachel Altman as Judy Garland, Clayton Vermulm as Harry Houdini, Tamara Greenlief as Elizabeth Taylor/Charlie Chaplin, Ken Taylor as Humphrey Bogart, Jessica Burton as Marilyn Monroe, Glen Weeks as Chris Farley, Kaitlyn Taylor as Eartha Kitt, EJ Moran as Jim Henson, Mary Wilmore as Clara Bow, Amanda Cetnarowski as Ginger Rogers, Sarah Raines as Amy Winehouse and Aisha McManus as the mysterious woman.

The story in a nutshell follows the above dead celebrities who all gather and perform in a nightclub. While there, they slowly start questioning where they are, how they got there and what it all means.

If you leave liking one thing about the show, it will most definitely be most of the songs. They're catchy, they help tell the story in a layered conceptual way, and are fun to listen to, for the most part.

The cast from UGF's "Dead Legend." 

In a way, it's kind of surprising how a story featuring legendary musicians who are singing material that's not their well-known hits can work, but it does in its own way.

Secondly, I loved the costumes each of the characters are dressed in .Some of my favorites were Sid Viscous, Minni Pearl and Frank Zappa. The costumes not only add to the immersion, they lead the way.

If I were to pick my favorite song of all of them, I would say its "Great Escape."
The mechanic between Hudson and Clay, who had to escape the box before Hudson was done singing, worked great.When Hudson would start singing faster and Houdini would start trying to escape faster was a nice touch.

I also enjoyed everything about Kari Roat's performance as Minnie Pearl. She's a bundle of energy, fun and entertainment while she's on stage. Even if you have no idea who Minnie Pearl was, you will enjoy her portrayal anyways.

Glen's portrayal of Chris Farley made me crack up the most throughout the show, I'd say. His and Matt's portrayal of Errol Flynn together hitting on the ladies, unsuccessfully, left me audibly laughing several times. Some of the inventive pick-up attempts through the running gag kept me in stitches.

I also enjoyed Sarah Raines' portrayal of Amy Winehouse. She captured the spirit of Winehouse wonderfully, and Sarah always has a solid singing voice. She makes the character's confused and strung-out mood hers and it shows. I enjoyed her as Judy Garland in the first incarnation, and I felt she did just as great a job as Winehouse.

At the same time I don't think the show lost anything by giving Judy Garland to Rachel. She brings a new energy to the role and she can sing and entertain just as much as Sarah did with her. She's got a great voice and I enjoyed hearing her sing.

With that here are a few things I thought could've been done a bit better.

With Winehouse, one aspect of the script I felt took me out of the story, ironically enough, came when she first appears into the nightclub, however. The scene shows Amy Winehouse appearing later in the story than the rest of the characters. Not knowing she's dead, she believes she's in a dive nightclub somewhere on earth. She's encouraged to perform, which she does, because she's a performer who can't be kept from an open stage.

While I enjoyed the song she sings, logically the whole time I kept thinking, "If Amy Winehouse didn't know she was dead and that she could not sing her own songs, why would she start performing a song we've never heard before?" It's later explained that the reason the singers don't perform their hits is because, "While you are dead, your music is still alive.".

Secondly, I felt while some of the performers' singing most definitely improved even from the first run-through to the final rehearsals, some of them still weren't up to the level of quality I would have liked to see them at.

I know not everybody can have award-winning singing voices as well as anyone. But, perhaps knowing this the writers could have worked more to bring out the actors' strengths.

Instead of giving Errol Flynn a duet with Ginger Rogers, for example, they could have given him a great in-depth comedic skit that allowed for Matt to use his strengths as an actor beyond the ones he already appeared in. I'd say it's easier to do in an original script where writers had the ability to change scenes and songs vs. doing a well-known musical that can't be changed.

I like Matt's portrayal of Flynn. He's funny, energetic and believable. He brings a high level of enthusiasm for every role he performs. On the night I watched it, though, he also was pretty off key through most of the duet.

So, say this were a real nightclub that existed before certain celebrities died.
If this were real, I highly doubt the owners would ask, say, Graham Chapman to sing anything. Everyone loves Graham Chapman from Monty Python, but no remembers him as a great singer. It doesn't make him less of an entertainer, singing just was not one of his strengths.

There also were a few moments where I could not hear what a few of the actors were saying on stage. It was rare enough that it wasn't a big issue, but I did find myself missing what was said because either the performer was speaking too fast or not loud enough. Also, there were a few times where the microphones went out and I couldn't hear the singer as much.

Despite these few moments, though, on the whole I enjoyed the show. I saw the original incarnation when it came out in 2011, and I still enjoyed seeing it again. I recommend checking it out before the cast and crew takes it to the New York Musical Festival this summer.

Plus, the fact that it all was created here in Great Falls by UGF students and staff members should be a source of pride for folks here who also care about the arts.

To sum it up, I found it to be an entertaining show that will leave you laughing and humming the tunes to yourself as you drive home.

Review of Jeff Scolley's "Lessons Learned" spoken word album

To me, listening to Jeff's album "Lessons Learned," is a bit like taking Jeff with you whenever you press play on the device of your choosing.
The poems, the emotion, the words all are faithful adaptations of Jeff's live performances, which isn't always easy.

When you record something that's great in person, there's always a risk that it loses something in the process. But, not here.

"Lessons Learned," opens with "Dear Broken Spirit," featuring Jeremy Hudson on guitar. Hudson also appears on "In Horizon," and "She." At times the tracks he's on sound a little similar. But, the emotional dynamic he adds to the album outweighs the similarity of his contributions.

For anyone who's been to an Open Mic Night, or a Poetry Slam at MAT, you will recognize many of these poems on the album.

Even if you've heard them many times, though, the feeling is still fresh. The best way I can think to describe how Jeff's poems make me feel is by likening it to sitting around a campfire with friends and family as the sun starts to set. That warm, tingly, "everything's going to be OK" feeling as you roast marshmallows and tell stories and laugh together.

Not all of the poems evoke this emotion, but enough of them do that I think it's safe to say when you put on this record, expect to feel something similar.

I think some of the best tracks on the record are "She," "In Horizon," and "Ollie Ollie," the live track featuring  Naveah and Darius Nickels."
If you're looking for three tracks that best represent this album, those are it.
"Ollie Ollie," again, is a poem that's recognizable for anyone who's heard Jeff perform. Adding the singers and the live crowd, however, gives it an extra bounce that elevates it from good to great.

Not everything on the album is great, although much of it is quite good.

Some of the poems tend to sound a little too similar. "She," and "Ursa Major," strike the same notes and seem to cover almost identical ideas.They just feel to be separately creative ways to say the same type of thing.

Another problem might be more in the way performance poetry is consumed more than anything Jeff does here.
The best way to take in this album is to sit down somewhere comfortable, put it on and just listen.
It doesn't seem to have the same effect if you say, put it on while you're working out, or while you're at a party. It's not that kind of album. Not that it has to be.

No, I think this album works well if you're in your car on a long road trip, or maybe while you're reading a book, although, again, this album kind of demands more attention than that.

If, say, every time you played this album Jeff Scolley appeared in front of you and started reading his poems. That's almost what this is like. That's not a bad thing at all.

I was a bit on the fence about whether every track needed musical background. One one level I think it would have helped the album in that it'd give the pieces another element to feel.
But then on another level, I like the way after hearing a music-backed track, that silence behind Jeff almost adds its own intimacy to the piece. I guess it's a matter of personal preference. Maybe some of the pieces just didn't flow as well with music behind them.

In the past I've said I felt Jeff needed to take more risks and try things new and different. I have to hand it to him here in that he did take a few risks. Adding the singers, and performing it live, could have gone horrible. If one of the singers was off key, or if Jeff misread one of pieces, even in a tiny, hardly-noticeable way, would have affected the track in a bad way.

But, he pulls it off. The singing works, the live crowd reactions work, you can hear Jeff clearly throughout the track. It's likely the one piece that will get the most attention, and justifiably so.

In conclusion, then, I liked the album and enjoyed hearing the poems again, even if I've heard most of them multiple times before.

If you have a few minutes to yourself, put this album on and find out for yourself what emotions it evokes. That's one of the coolest things about spoken word poetry, in my mind.

The only limit to what you can feel is you.

Medea, March 16 at MAT-Great Falls

Last night Lana and I went to see Medea at MAT and I thought while the individual performances were solid, particularly those of Bethany Mason, who plays Medea, and Jeff Scolley, who plays her husband Jason, the whole production lacked a qualitative connection to the audience.

I felt the cultural gap between ancient Greece, where this play was originally performed, and current day was a little too big to bridge here.

Firstly, a few words on what I liked.

The scenes between Bethany and Jeff were legitimately dramatic, with real human emotions at play. Medea plays a woman scorned who's searching for a solution to her situation. She might be a bit crazy, yes, but viewers can almost see where she's coming from.

Jason, her husband, has taken up with another woman, and has seemingly cast Medea aside. This in of itself is something that's instantly relatable, and always will be no matter how much time has gone since the scene was originally written.

I thought Jeff really shined in the the final scene, as well.

Without giving anything away, Jeff delvers a healthy dose of anguish and when he delivers the lines, you can't help but feel that emotion, as well.

Bethany, too, did a great job in delivering each of her lines, which were many.

 It never felt as if she were stumbling through a scene to get to another one, or that she was out of character at any moment. As soon as the lights went up, she was Medea through and through.

With that, I'll say my main criticism with the show was that throughout the entire show I never received an answer to a basic question -- why?

Without sounding harsh, I'm not blind to the hard work it takes in producing any show, I couldn't help but feel as if I was unsure of why this play was being shown in front of me.

To better explain what I'm getting at here, I'll share a bit of a conversation I had with Ed Moran not too long ago.

Ed, as you may or may not know, has long been a play director in Great Falls. Some of his recent plays he's directed include "No Sex Please, We're British," and "I Hate Hamlet."

Ed and I talked a few months ago about how the one thing a successful theater must do is get people in the seats. The balancing act comes in holding your artistic integrity intact while giving audiences reasons to see the show.

Meaning, while you certainly don't want to pander to the lowest common denominator, you don't want to do something that's totally over their heads, either.

Audience members here in Great Falls, the ones who regularly attend plays, at least, are fairly easy to please.

In my opinion, a theater should not have to cater to them because they love almost anything you do.
The goal, if I were in charge, would be attracting people who don't regularly come to your theater.

Now, back to Medea, I had a difficult time deciphering who this play was geared toward. Is it young couples? Young men? Women? Children?

I don't think it would be women as Lana told me one thing that bothered her was the misogyny rampant throughout the play.

In one scene Medea "attempts" to mend her relationship with Jason, saying she should have been supportive of her husband's decision to find another wife and that she should have been helping plan the wedding.

Our modern sensibilities say that's not okay. Indeed, a play of this nature hearkens back to times when women were treated differently from men. It was a different cultural acceptance where men were supreme masters over women. It's not like that anymore, so perhaps to see a play go through those scenes seemed a little absurd.

Next, I felt the music chosen to back up certain scenes only put the question mark of who this play was for into greater focus.

At one point during a scene between Medea and the King, played by Dyllan Strom, which got a bit romantic in tone, smooth jazz was played in the background.

You don't need to be a music expert to know that jazz didn't exist in ancient Greece. It probably wouldn't distract many, but if you think about it, it seems a little strange.

The same goes with the use of Beethoven pieces played intermittently throughout. Beethoven was a 16th Century composer.

But then, if one questions why more modern music was used, you have to start to think what music would have been more appropriate. They could have found some non-time specific music or music from ancient Greece, but then how is that any more relatable? Rarely anyone will appreciate or recognize music from ancient Greece.

If you extend that line of reasoning further out, how can one assume modern audiences will relate to a play based in ancient Greece?

Yes, the emotions are still being felt today, and yes, this type of show was not being done anywhere else in town, and finally, yes, it was a chance to explore some interesting relations between a man and woman. All of this is true.

But, when a theater already has several hurdles to jump over in terms of getting people into the seats, because, let's face facts here: it's not an easy feat to sell out shows in Great Falls; why would you choose to place more hurdles in your way with a script that was written thousands of years ago?

I say this out of a place of love, concern, admiration and respect. While we had some misgivings about possibly why there weren't more butts in the seat, both Lana and I enjoyed the show. The performances were good. There was plenty to like here.

I just felt that this play was a bit too outside the realm of average people to understand. Maybe that was the point. But, as Ed told me, and I might be paraphrasing a bit here,  but he said basically,
"We all do this to see people in the seats. We all enjoy that feeling of a packed house and a standing ovation. It's why we do what we do."

So yes, you CAN present an ancient Greek horror-tragedy. You CAN even have several great performances within that play. But, my question still remains. Why should you when you risk performing it to half-empty rooms?
Especially when we have, even in Great Falls, multiple entertainment options.

If I'm a typical Great Falls native, looking to spend $30 on entertainment, is it unreasonable to think that I'd rather go to a nice dinner, see a rock band, buy a video game or a new DVD than go see an ancient Greek tragedy, even if it is live theater and I know about the plot?

The answer should be fairly obvious.

Junior Cascade of Talent showcase, March 3

By Sarah Raines
Raines is a classically-trained vocalist with a degree from NYU. She currently teaches private voice and piano, and she is also the choir director at the University of Great Falls.

Sarah Raines

The first thing I noticed about the 2013 Junior Cascade of Talent show was the MC. What I liked were the tidbits about the performers that he shared with the audience. For example, a little boy and girl who did a dance together are best friends. The MC also told us that a girl who danced to an acoustic version of “I Need A Hero,” dedicated it to her grandfather.

Unfortunately, the MC’s energy wasn't as engaging as the performers. Perhaps that’s because a group of kids under the age of 14 has more energy than any full-grown adults.

The MC seemed lost, forgot portions of his introductions, and mispronounced several names. I was also distracted between sets because the stage hand was dressed almost too scruffily. In my experience, stage hands wear solid black in order to be less distracting as they move set pieces

The young performers, however, were excellent.

There was a variety of acts: from piano to saxophone, ballet to hip-hop. They performed songs by artists from Etta James to Adele.

The dances, mostly from students of Miss Linda’s school of dance, were amazing. I would expect no less from Miss Linda’s, especially since I had the chance to work with Miss Linda’s dance teacher Jackie Newman when she choreographed UGF’s Chicago last fall. Another thing I especially liked about the dances were how age-appropriate they all were.

That leads me to the singing.

I would never discourage a young person from singing and performing, but I am partial to age-appropriate songs. Young singers who perform adult songs sometimes fall into the trap of imitating instead of showing their own unique voices. Yet it was obvious that every singer chose a song that she (all the singers I saw were female) really loved. That is key. Watching those singers truly enjoy themselves on stage is what makes the audience enjoy it.

The instrumentalists were awesome as well. Each of them played high level pieces with better technique than many adults.

The saxophone rendition of “Duel of the Fates,” from Star Wars was well-done and a cool song choice. I appreciated its uniqueness. In general I felt the acts that stood out most were the ones that brought something unexpected. For example, it was unique to see a dance duet between a little boy and girl that had a park bench as a prop/set piece.

From a stage tech stance, the lighting was really great. The lighting design really added to the performances and was a subtle, but important touch that added a feel of professionalism to the show. The young performers will get a real treat seeing how cool and professional everything looks when they see themselves on the DVD.

If I were to give any advice for next time, I’d ask the organizers to consider presenting a piano accompanist and offering every singer, dancer, and instrumental soloist the chance to perform with a live musician.

Maybe this opinion is just my old-school classical training showing, but I would hate to see live music become a lost art. Live music has a very organic and rich sound to the audience member.

As a performer it is a different and more refined skill to collaborate with live accompaniment as opposed to memorizing an exact timing of a recording.

In that same line of thought, I would also encourage future participants to experiment with collaboration. Sing duets and trios. Get instruments together. Choreograph a dance to your friend’s piano solo. Ask someone to accompany you on guitar. Dance teams offer a great avenue for collaborating and working in groups, but I think it can add more variety and a stronger learning experience if you work with other performers.

All in all, I found the entire show quite enjoyable and entertaining. I went to watch and support one of my private voice students, and I fully expected to be bored during everything but her song. However, I learned not to underestimate the young talent in this town. It was fun, and we should all look forward to next year.

Magnficent Seven Part II, March 2, 2013

The Magnificent Seven show returned to Montana Actors' Theatre-Great Falls last night and although I had to leave early, I do have a few thoughts about the evening.

The first thing I noticed was the giant spread of food as we walked into the theater, which Joe Ryan's mother provided. Her deviled eggs were delicious. So were the meatballs. The food was a serious upgrade this time out, most definitely.

Tales from Ghost Town

As for the show, most of the acts we saw killed it.

The first group, Lucky Valentines had a tight sound that perhaps only two people who understand each other intimately can have.

Lana said the melodies they sang were some of the hardest to perform, and they did them well. They did several Patty Smith covers and mostly originals.

Plus, I always love me some fiddle songs. They did several. It was a great way to start the show.

Another of the highlights for me was Tales from Ghost Town from Bozeman.

The guy, a one-man band who played drums, guitar and harmonica, and also singing, got it done with some upbeat down-home barn dance anthems that had the whole room rocking. He could have played for much longer than he did and no one would have minded.

I also must say that Tyson Habein did an excellent job at organizing the artwork behind the stage. Each of the pieces were both separate but fit together in a theme with similar shapes and colors. Whether the artists were the same or not, it was a cohesive display of art that made the stage shine.

Moving on, I was a little torn on Patty Hearse and the Mortician.

Saif Alsaegh performs poetry

Yes, at times the vocals got drowned out by the instruments and yes it was loud. But, as their set progressed I kind of got the feeling that was the point. Like I told Lana, you don't listen to Metallica for the amazing vocals. You listen to them to hear them rock the f@*$ out. Patty and the Mortician had that feel to them. Hopefully they can get the vocals to come across better in the future.

Plus, Joe Ryan did a decent job of adjusting the levels to help Paisley's voice project.

Before Patty and the Mortician, Saif Alsaegh performed some of his best spoken word poems.

The original plan, as I gather, was to have Joe Ryan play with him on guitar and Josh Wilkinson on drums. Before Saif started, Joe apologized and said he had to help one of the bands set up so he couldn't play..
I was a little bummed, mostly I feel he does a better job of playing behind a poet than Josh did on this night.

I'm not saying Josh did a bad job. His sound is so unique it's always a treat to hear. I'm just not sure it worked with Saif for some reason.

And, before Saif came up, Josh did a good job with his own set. It was fun, interesting and included several songs I've never heard him do before. I would have loved to hear "Jessica Simpson," but I suppose that's kind of an "Open Mic" song. Josh still has a little of that Open Mic sound, meaning when I hear him I think of the times I've heard him play there.

Aside from "Jessica Simpson," which really we wanted to hear for nostalgic reasons, perhaps, it might have been fun to hear him play a few other different songs than ones we've heard a lot in the past.

Then, with his playing together with Saif, all I'm saying is I felt like they weren't quite on the same page last night. At times Saif would be performing a dramatic piece about his relationship with god and religion, and at the same time it felt like Josh was playing it a little too positive and a LITTLE too loud for my liking.

Perhaps it could have used some more minor chords, I'm not sure. If they had more time to prepare together it might have worked better, but, it was by no means a bad performance. Anytime Saif reads it's a treat because his poems are so good!

All and all it was a fun night and the room was packed during the entire time we were there.

One final thought is that I think people still aren't quite sure how to dress for the event.

Some people dress casual, some people dress up and others still wear semi-casual clothes. And indeed, that's true of almost all events in town, it seems. It's not a huge thing, but I suppose Tyson and Joe could give people a dress code guideline for next time. I might suggest giving a gentle suggestion so folks have an idea of what to wear, (or what not to wear.)

Finally, I look forward to seeing what the Habeins and Mr. Ryan present next month. :-)

Quick clarification about this blog

I'm sure that most people who read this can connect the dots here, but if not I'm taking this chance to make it explicitly clear if it ever becomes fuzzy in the future.

This blog is 100 percent mine and mine alone. I speak for myself here, that's it.

If anyone has a problem with anything written in this blog, which no one has yet but it's certainly possible it could happen, the views expressed here come from me, Jake Sorich. I do not speak for any other party either implicitly or explicitly stated.

When you visit this site, you're doing so understanding it's a place where I state my personal opinions about cultural events and releases I find interesting enough to write about.

I'm also not trying to compete with anyone else's opinions about the same types of things happening around town.

 I'm of the opinion that the more opinions we can bring to the table about any given subject, especially as subjective as art and culture, which very much leans more subjective than objective, the better.

Finally, I'm not profiting from this blog at all, either. I write these views as a way of promoting arts in our community with the attempt to help raise awareness, and create an honest dialogue about what we're creating. The more we can be honest with each other about our creative undertakings, the better. We can never grow until we learn where we must improve, first.

Hydr8 (Gabriel Vasichek)'s album "Empower Now" (with video)

Gabe Vasichek's new album "Empower Now," offers a collection of dense, unique and worldly songs.

The first thing to hit me was the diversity from track to track.

It's almost as if each song is a room decorated differently but with enough similar items that you know it belongs to the same person.

 Some tracks, such as the first one, even feels as if it's two songs in one. If we're using the house analogy, the intro to the first track is the porch that leads directly into the rest of the home.  

The intro starts with Didgeri-Dan's didgeridoo playing. Brothers Dan and Gabe have been known to jam out at a few open mic nights bringing something that's unlike anything else, maybe anywhere.

After about a minute, the song switches gears and gets into the main riff that Gabe sings over. It's memorable and funky.

Michael Gilboe, who produced the album at his Copperhead Production Studio, has created multiple layers in each of the songs that all seem to fit together.

Gabriel Vasichek

The didgeridoo returns for several more of the tracks, as does vocals from Nikki Brown, who easily has been one of my favorite performers to hear sing at open mic.

Even if you're not into the rest of the songs, hearing Nikki sing is worth getting the album alone. Like Gabe told me during our chat last week about the album, "It's sweet like honey."

She sings alone on "Moving Forward," and with Gabe on "Blue Skies and a Rainy Day."

Another highlights for me was on "Send Me Back Home," during the chorus where the backing music changes dramatically to an almost march-like beat. It's chillingly effective. The bridge gives the track a nice touch, also.

Finally, everything about "So Many Ripples" makes me giddy inside. It might be my favorite track aside from "Moving Forward."

While there's a lot to like here, every album has it's flaws -- this one included.

Gabe and I talked about this in my Tribune article, which you can read here, about how the album doesn't shy away from it's weaknesses. We talked a lot about how if you never do something out of fear of missing perfection, you'll never achieve anything.

With that in mind, Gabe's vocal range is rather small. He's a great songwriter and performer, but he's never going to hit the high notes that stretch a voice's range. He's also a little off key in a few tracks.  I think the most pronounced instance is on his duet with Nikki mostly because she's singing in one key and while Gabe is almost in that key, it's a LITTLE off. It's still a good track but that pitch difference is noticeable.

Dan and Gabe Vaishcek at a recent open mic. 

One also could argue that the album's density is too dense.

I happen to like it, though. I think it gives the album a real meaty sound that offers listeners some exotic flavors.

If you're looking for an album that has one concept or one sound with variations of that sound, this might not be the one for you, though.

 I think that diversity speaks to the type of performer Gabe is, though, so I have no problems with it.

 If anything I would say it makes trying to explain what kind of music it is difficult. That's not a bad thing, though, as you just really have to listen to it to understand.

At the end of the day, the album has many tracks that seep into your consciousness. Upon listening to them I can still hear them in my head. Plus, given that Gabe is such a literary songwriter, I'm sure each song has layers of meaning I might not get unless I listen to it again and again.

I would have loved to hear more of Gabe's insanely amazing throat singing. He gives us tastes of it on a few songs, but I would have loved to hear him just rip into it for a full track or two.

If you enjoy big sounds with thoughtful lyrics, this album is for you. Gabe's an intelligent performer who takes his songwriting/singing and playing seriously. He and Gilboe assembled a strong cast of local talent around him.

This album's rooms all come alive and are well worth visiting.

To order the album, visit www.hydr8music.com.

"I Hate Hamlet" at UGF, Feb. 14

Lana and I went to the opening of "I Hate Hamlet," last night, and I can say with confidence that the show is as funny and entertaining as advertised.

If I were to sum up the plot in one line, I'd call it a love letter to theater, which I find ironic in that the name proclaims a hatred for the most famous theatre writer's most well-known work.

For anyone unfamiliar with the show,  it's the story of the character named Andrew Rally, a recently unemployed TV actor.

Clay Vermulm and Wally Bossie in a scene from "I Hate Hamlet" 

Rally and his girlfriend Diedre move to New York after his TV series where he plays a young doctor is cancelled.

The story starts with Rally being led into a retro-looking apartment by his real estate agent. The apartment formerly belonged to John Barrymore, a well-known Shakespeare actor with a colorful history. The story is centered around Rally's decision to play Hamlet or to go back to Hollywood and take a cheesy part on another TV show. Barrymore comes back from the dead in an attempt to guide Rally to take the Shakespeare part.

For the UGF production, Barrymore is played by Wally Bossie, Rally is played by Clay Vermulm, Diedre is played by Kristi Doll, . Tianna Harland plays Rally's real estate agent Felicia, Tim Stoddard plays Gary, Rally's Hollywood producer friend who presents him with a unique opportunity I'll explain more later, and Joanna Kauffman plays Lillian, Rally's agent. As Joanna was sick on Thursday, her understudy Krystine Wendt stepped in to play Lillian.

The show is directed by Ed Moran.

The best part, to me, was the onstage relationship between Wally and Clay. The way they worked together as a teacher showing the world of theater to his student seemed real, mostly because you could say it was real. This is Clay's first foray into acting while Wally has been an actor/director in many stage performances over the years.

Wally made the role his and his timing on his lines, his positioning on stage and his ability to ham it up like an actor such as Barrymore would, is worth the price of admission alone. 

When I say "ham it up" like a Barrymore actor would, that means being a person who's lovable but also totally controlled by his impulses. Barrymore drinks, he flirts with multiple women, he over acts, and yet you end up loving him almost BECAUSE of his impulses. It's a unique role and Wally pulled it off nicely. 

Then, when I talked to Clay last week for an interview in my Tribune article, which you can read here, he told me that the role was a great one for him because in it he plays a person who's learning to act, much like himself. Also, Wally's character Barrymore helps teach Clay the finer points of acting, which again mirrors the student/teacher role between Wally and Clay as people and not just their characters.  

The story, however, isn't just about a man learning to act, however. That'd be dull and I really doubt anyone would care to watch that. 

Clay Vermulm and Tianna Harland in a scene from "I Hate Hamlet"

The conflict comes from Barrymore and Diedre pushing Rally to take the Hamlet role and Gary's urging that he take the Hollywood gig, a role in which he plays a teacher with superpowers, for fame and fortune.  

It raises questions about what it means to be an actor, what it means to pursue art vs. fame and how actors deal with this conflict regularly. It's a fascinating dynamic. 

I also credit Ed for working with the actors and the tech designers to pull the show together. He's been doing theater for a long while and he knows how to make it work on stage. This show is more proof of that and he really gets the most out of everyone. 

Finally, I credit Clay for pulling this off and making it seem like he's acted in plays before. His dialogue with all of the characters, his internal monologues, the way he comes across as a hot-shot TV actor who knows how to go through the motions but fails to understand the craft of acting, all were presented with grace and ease. 

When I heard Clay was cast in the production, as he was new to acting I wasn't quite sure what to expect. Having seen it now, though, I feel he played the role the way it was intended to be played. I look forward to seeing him in more roles in the future. 

Now, though, that I've got all that gushing out of my system,  seeing as this blog is called "Good, Bad, Great (Falls)," though, I can't simply go on with praise without pointing out a few weaknesses. 

Here they are. 

Firstly, let me say that I thoroughly enjoyed Kristi's portrayal of Diedre. She was sassy, came across as a believable character, and projected her lines wonderfully. She's a talented actress and I'm willing to say she will make any role given to her interesting. 

Kristi Doll plays Diedre in a scene from "I Hate Hamlet"

My critique is of the character she plays. Diedre is in love with innocence and the pageantry of the theater. Her ideal man is one who is strong and sensitive, bold and reserved and willing to put up with her craziness.

And is she crazy. 

Part of me wished Diedre had more redeeming qualities. By the end of the play, I was asking myself why Andrew stayed with her as long as he supposedly had. 

She's a 29-year-old virgin, she lives off her parents money, she urges Andrew to do something he doesn't want to necessarily at first, (even though it turns out he does,) and this part is worth repeating -- she won't have sex with Andrew, even though he's been the best kind of boyfriend a girl could hope for. It's fine to want to keep your abstinence, I'm not trying to make a political statement here, I'm simply commenting on how that seems to be the center of Andrew's frustrations with Diedre. It does help drive the plot, so I can appreciate that.  

I think the fact that Diedre's role works in the scenes she's in without making it grating speaks to how well Kristi plays the part. She brings a certain kind of glee to Diedre. She's a happy girl, even if she's slowly driving Andrew bonkers. If she complained about things or brought any kind of negativity with her character, she would be totally unwatchable. 

Before I start on my second point, I will say that knowing the situation behind how this happened, I'm willing to look past this.

 At the same time, a typical audience member who doesn't know what happened isn't going to know that Krystine was playing Lillian because Joanna was sick. 

Last night, I felt that the scene between Barrymore and Lillian lacked chemistry. Lillian was Barrymore's old flame and the scene sees them reuniting and revisiting those past memories and, perhaps, past physical connection. 

If the chemistry works, in situations like that you, as an audience member, want to urge the characters to get together. You hope they get closer and closer until they finally embrace and kiss or what have you. 

With Barrymore and Lillian, I was left expecting that Lillian would leave and we as an audience would be OK with that. 

Tim Stoddard as Gary and Clay Vermulm as Andrew in "I Hate Hamlet"

Also, I wish Krystine would have either gone with the accent in full, making it either as over the top as possible, or simply not have used one. Her slipping in and out of the accent made me feel like I was taken out of the play for a moment. 

I like Krystine as an actress. She's a versatile performer who has plenty of energy and personality. She's also a great improv performer. 

This wasn't her best performance last night, but like I said, I'm not sure how much prior preparation she had with the role. 

When I received the cast list last week, her name wasn't on it. I was a little surprised to see her there because I didn't even know she was involved. 

It will be interesting to see where Joanna takes the role when she feels better. 

Another misstep, to me, was after the scene with Lillian and Barrymore. We're subjected to a little TOO long a period in darkness. I don't know, I started to wonder if maybe there was a problem or if the lights were broke or what.  Maybe that was done on purpose, but like I said, it started getting near the point of "um, what's taking so long?" territory. 

Then the scene after the lights came back on confused me a bit. 

Before the lights cut out, we watch a scene where Gary explains a commercial offer to Rally where he plays a guy who's selling nuts along with a hand puppet. It's a funny bit because of the absurdity of the commercial and how silly commercials can be and how low actors stoop to find work. 

Then after the break, Barrymore is sitting on the couch watching the TV and that ad comes on with what sounds like Andrew's voice. 

That made me wonder if the darkness was supposed to indicate a leap forward in time and Andrew had gone back to Hollywood to do the TV show and commercial, or what. It was never explained, so I'm not sure what that scene was supposed to mean. Rally soon comes back into the apartment  and I realized where the setting was supposed to be and that we were still in present day. 

In conclusion, I recommend seeing "I Hate Hamlet." 

The humor is sharp, the costumes all looked great on the performers, the set designers made it LOOK like a place where a John Barrymore type would live, and all of the actors projected their lines well. There was never a moment where I stopped following because I could not hear them. 

It's markedly different from "Chicago" but in a good way. There is more than one way to pull off a great show. When I think back to last year's shows, the improvement has been stark. 

This show at times surprised me, at times made me laugh and made me ask philosophical questions about what it means to be a performer. 

Thanks to Katie Pipinich for the photos! :-)