The cast of ‘Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald’ laugh about the film’s quirky poster art. Rough Cut. No Reporter Narration
A man and woman are having marriage problems, and decide to end their union after a very short time together. After a most brief attempt to reconcile,
the couple goes to court to finalize their break-up.
The judge asks the husband, “What has brought you to the point that you are now at, where you are not able to keep this marriage together?”
The husband says, “In the six weeks we’ve been together, we haven’t been able to agree on one thing.
The wife says, “Seven weeks.”
Received from Jokes Every Day.
The Good, Clean Funnies List
SEEING DOUBLE: Upon entering the Kate Spade New York show Friday morning at the New York Public Library, there was someone who appeared to be Nicola Glass, the brand’s new creative director. After being greeted, though, the truth emerged: “I’m not Nicola. I’m her identical twin sister,” said Tara Barwick, a radiologist who works in London. She said they’re frequently confused with each other, and while studying at the University of Edinburgh (in separate programs on different parts of campus pursuing completely different degrees), they would enjoy playing tricks on their friends who thought they knew them, but actually didn’t. When discussing the faux pas with Mary Beech, Kate Spade’s executive vice president and chief marketing officer, Beech revealed that Anna Bakst, chief executive officer of Kate Spade, is also an identical twin, but Bakst’s twin didn’t attend Friday’s show.
Doc Rivers, who coached the Celtics to the 2008 NBA crown, said it “really hurts” him to witness the icy relationships among his former players, especially ahead of Ray Allen’s Basketball Hall of Fame induction.
www.espn.com – NBA
One of the intriguing aspects of “Solo: A Star Wars Story” involves whether fans embrace Alden Ehrenreich and Donald Glover as they approximate younger versions of Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams. And if that seems self-evident, given a recent trend in movies — and “Star Wars” in particular — it’s a welcome departure from using computer gimmickry to “de-age,” or even resurrect, actors.
J.K. Simmons and creator Justin Marks talk about their upcoming series ‘Counterpart’ that deals with an alternative dimension. Rollo Ross reports.
Blade Runner 2049 director Denis Villeneuve reflects on seeing the original Blade Runner on the big screen and why he still loves the voice over version.
In a recent press conference for the new movie Steve Jobs, Michael Fassbender, who plays the late Apple CEO, jokingly said he “studied Ashton Kutcher” to prepare for the role. Fassbender was referencing that other Steve Jobs movie, which came out in 2013 and imagined Kutcher as the visionary in the black turtleneck. These dueling films are just the latest instance of two different portrayals of the same subject (after all, Hollywood does love to recycle material). Here, seven other double biopics.
The post Seeing Double: 7 Times Hollywood Made the Same Biopic Twice appeared first on Vogue.
BEAUTY TIPS & UPDATES BY GABBY LOVE! –Get free shipping everyday on orders $ 35+ at Beauty.com plus earn 5% back!
Gabby Loves Avon #2-
“Seneca Falls … Selma … Stonewall.” I gasped, and the other college students in our subterranean computer lab frowned at me. I shrugged by way of apology, and they slipped back into their somnolent attempts at studying.
Winter holidays had ended, and the new semester had many of us struggling to let go the comfort that Christmas and a new year had brought. However, one word had banished the lazy weakness from my muscles. One word had pushed me to the edge of my seat, staring deeper into a computer screen — so close I could discern the pixels — as the world’s most powerful man took his vows of service to my country.
Stonewall. I could hardly believe I had heard the word cross President Barack Obama’s lips when he spoke at his second inauguration. The one word, punctuating that powerfully alliterative phrase, gave me the sensation of hearing somewhere far off glass shattering — as if some transparent yet so far unyielding barrier had finally given way to a single point of pressure. Finally, I felt, the gay rights struggle had been openly acknowledged along with the journeys for gender and racial equality in this country–the same civil rights journeys that had now delivered, for the second time, a black man to the nation’s highest office.
Strange now that some short two years later, that word should so easily fracture our community as we reach an unimagined level of recognition — certainly unimaginable to those men and women who marched Christopher Street decades ago declaring this the age of “gay liberation.”
Based on the trailer, the film Stonewall will certainly be guilty of many of the accusations leveled against the historical drama. While I connect deeply with New York newcomer Danny — who literally and figuratively isn’t in Kansas anymore — and his arc from closeted child of the American heartland to urbanized radical, I do so only through the thread of my own white cis male privilege. Stonewall as a turning point belongs to all queer people, but none of us can or should deny the role our transgender sisters of color played in sparking the revolution whose eventual spoils we almost greedily enjoy today.
The trailer for this groundbreaking film appears to do what the gay rights movement has been doing since the 1990s — quietly concealing the importance and needs of transgender people behind the mask of the white male to normalize us to mainstream America. A pragmatic tactic — some might say a “necessary evil” — but unfortunately, even in 2015, one we must still tolerate.
A boycott is no answer. First, this is Hollywood we are talking about. Roland Emmerich is the same man who directed that homeland love fest that was Mel Gibson’s The Patriot — so an expectation of true historical accuracy is plainly naive. More importantly, I ask myself — who is this movie for? Is it really for those of us with queer identities or, like any other Hollywood project, is it targeting the mainstream? I am inclined to believe the latter, and I believe that we should support the movie despite its glaring historical inaccuracies for, once again, the sake of courting the “average American.”
I wrote recently about how the film Brokeback Mountain changed my relationship with my straight, conservative father. As much as he has changed, I can hardly imagine a conversation where I could explain the true importance of Stonewall to him. Too many barriers still stand — of generation, of language, of belief and conviction. He, like so many family members across the country no matter the skin color, cannot be expected to feel the poignancy of Stonewall without the pillowy reductionism that Hollywood brings to most nuanced and powerful historical moments.
The challenge of accessing queer history is hard enough for potential allies. We should not compound it by splintering ourselves over such an important turning point in our legacy just because we have realized — years after the fact — that the media representation so key to our recent victories has also coldly concealed our failures as a community.
Take the higher road. Instead of boycotting the movie — of declaring it #notmystonewall — bring a family member or friend who has started to open up to you, but does not yet know the legacy of which you are a part. Make the moment, not ourselves, the point of the conversation. Ease a loved one through the film, then seize the chance to build off the story with the facts of the summer of ’69. Hollywood has delivered us an incomplete story, but we have the chance to fill in the blanks. Let’s not waste it.
Two years ago when I heard Obama say Stonewall to millions watching, I was rocked by the moment. But for most others, those who voted for and against him, it was just another word — a carefully timed rhetorical device, used and discarded. Stonewall is more than a talking point, more than a Hollywood drama — but the path to Christopher Street is no easy one to follow. I say we should take advantage of every opportunity to convey the significance of our movement, no matter how contrived or misleading, and be responsible arbiters of the story after the screen fades to black.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Many Americans need coffee every morning, while others have developed waking needs that may not be inside of the law in all 50 states. Although the need for keeping these desires hidden seems to be quickly vaporizing into the dank air, those who fall into the latter category may now be able to more easily pass themselves off as simple, law-abiding joe drinking Joes.
“Coffee mug water pipe” makers IronMan Design told The Huffington Post that their “pipe” can be used to smoke regular or shisha tobacco, the kind commonly found in hookahs. That said, they also told HuffPost that the product is modeled after the coffee-mug bong from “The Cabin in the Woods,” a similarity that io9 pointed out. Go to their website, and you’ll find only smoking tobacco is mentioned in the product description, but the original movie version was certainly about getting “stoned.”
IronMan Design has recently released a couple videos featuring YouTube prankster Eric Bert – who is not an employee — where Bert asks for a seemingly innocuous light while holding the mug in its compact form before whipping out the secret extension. A GIF from the most recent video went viral on Reddit earlier Tuesday.
You can watch the original below, while IronMan Design said that the third installment would be coming “sometime late this week or early next week.”
Also on HuffPost:
For a constant stream of entertainment news and discussion, follow HuffPost Entertainment on Viber.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
The fifth episode of Lifetime’s “UnREAL” opens with a shot of protagonist and reality TV producer Rachel (played by Shiri Appleby) masturbating with a vibrator in the back of a van. “Chivalry is not dead,” says the male host of fictional dating show “Everlasting,” as Rachel, laying under a wool furniture blanket, tries to get off to some porn on her iPhone. The scene isn’t “sexy” — there’s no lingerie, no tousled sheets, no moaning, no male-gazey camera shots. While the fantasy of a “Bachelor”-like dating world is being created outside of the production van, the audience watches the real part of “UnREAL” unfold inside.
The scene frames Rachel’s masturbation as mundane, utilitarian, routine — which is exactly why it’s so special.
Over the last few years, we’ve seen more women getting themselves off on our TV screens on shows like “Girls,” “Orange Is The New Black,” ”Reign” and “Mad Men.” With each groundbreaking scene — and the inevitable discussion that follows — we get closer to recognizing that getting off is no big deal.
While masturbating on-screen isn’t something we see all that frequently regardless of a character’s gender, men doing it feels fairly de rigeur. (Think: “American Pie,” “Skins,” “There’s Something About Mary,” “Sex and the City,” “American Beauty,” “American Horror Story,” “Fast Times At Ridgemont High,” “The Big Bang Theory.”) It’s usually played for laughs, or as a way to bring up relationship issues when a female partner walks in on the act. The scenes might read as awkward, but not shocking.
“Male masturbation is pretty common on TV,” “UnREAL” co-creator Sarah Gertrude Shapiro told The Huffington Post. “You’ve seen it a lot, and it’s always a joke and there’s a shorthand for it. But a healthy, adult woman who isn’t having sex probably is jerking off — but no one talks about it.”
Our very language encourages a gender imbalance when it comes to open dialogue about masturbation. There is a nearly unlimited list of slang terms and euphemisms for male masturbation, but depressingly few for its female equivalent. (Is “flicking the bean” really the best we can do?) The Swedish Association for Sexuality Education made international headlines when it coined the term “klittra” last month, combining the Swedish words for “clitoris” and “glitter.”
This lack of public discussion about female masturbation might explain why people absolutely feel the need to comment on it when a woman gets off on-screen.
In “Girls” Season 1, Allison Williams’ character Marnie masturbates in a public bathroom after hanging out with a sexy artist. The scene made OK Magazine’s list of “The 5 Most Scandalous Scenes From HBO’s ‘Girls’ So Far,'” and New York Magazine asked Allison Williams how she “prepared” for it. (To her credit Williams told NYMag that she was “sort of fascinated that it’s being made into a thing.”) The pilot of “Reign” — a CW show — included a very brief scene of Kenna, a teen lady-in-waiting, starting to get herself off. Much was written about the scene and the network’s decision to trim it down — “It might have been the most risqué scene in The CW’s history had it aired uncut,” wrote Entertainment Weekly — but very little was said about the fact that as Kenna is starting to pleasure herself, she’s joined by the (much, much older) King of France! (See the clip below.)
“Is masturbation more shocking than sex?” asked a 2013 HuffPost Live segment. When it comes to female masturbation, we still treat it as such.
So what is it about on-screen female masturbation in particular that elicits such a strong reaction from those watching?
Marti Noxon, “UnREAL’s” co-creator who is perhaps best known for writing and producing “Buffy The Vampire Slayer,” thinks the general silence about female masturbation and the reaction to seeing it on TV comes down to discomfort — specifically men’s.
“I think it makes men uncomfortable,” said Noxon. “I think there’s something really scary about the idea that [sex is] not always romantic for us, and that it’s not always about needing a man there to take care of our needs. I think it’s scary for guys to see that, and be confronted with this in-your-face idea of ‘yeah, we’ve got it.'”
The beauty of these “in-your-face” scenes is that the more we see them, the less “shocking” they become. Because (spoiler alert!), in the real world, masturbating is pretty damn “normal” — and healthy. A 2009 study found that 78 percent of Americans over 14 have masturbated (though in every age group, women were less likely to report masturbating than men). Plus, getting off can help lift a woman’s mood, balance her sleep habits, decrease her stress levels and soothe her menstrual cramps.
“It’s part of being a healthy person and having a sex drive, and not always relieving it with a partner,” said Shapiro. “I don’t actually think it’s a big deal at all. I wrote this episode [and] when I first turned in the script, there were a lot of conversations about, ‘Well, we haven’t established that Rachel’s a sex addict.’ And I was like, ‘Why would masturbating make her a sex addict?'”
They decided to move ahead with the scenes (the episode both begins and ends with Rachel jerking off) after what Shapiro calls a “really interesting, fruitful conversation.” And the resulting scenes are painfully and beautifully human. Just like Rachel, lots of women masturbate. And use sex toys. And watch porn. And fall in love. And have sex. And get up afterward and kick ass at their exhausting jobs.
“My total impetus for making stuff is about humanizing women,” said Shapiro. “And I just think [masturbation] is a really normal part of being human.”
Also on The Huffington Post:
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
MINNEAPOLIS—Saying she was glad to finally be able to apply her psychiatric training, local child therapist Pamela Thornton expressed her excitement to reporters Friday at the prospect of seeing a patient with actual psychological issues. “It’s thrilling to have a kid in here for once who’s truly suffering from a behavioral disorder that legitimately requires regular therapy sessions,” said Thornton, adding that she was elated at the opportunity to delve into past traumas, evaluate recurring thoughts, and set up a treatment plan for the child who had genuine, clinically diagnosable depression. “This isn’t just some kid who started talking back to his parents or can’t sit still for more than a minute—this one could, in all reality, potentially pose a risk to himself or others. It’s kind of a treat.” Thornton later confirmed to reporters that she still planned on prescribing the same …
You have probably seen smartphone apps that purport to find ghosts in your environment. Usually there is some sort of radar-looking interface and fake science to it. It’s all silly and harmless.
But let me tell you about the ghost-finding app that someone is certain to make in the next ten years.
Imagine an app that searches obituaries online and matches those names to last-known addresses from public data. Then the app finds facial images and some sort of biography online to match each of the names and addresses. Most of us have our images on the Internet now, and that will approach 100% over time.
The biographies might be pulled from the fragments of various online social media profiles and posts. The app might find obituaries, blog mentions, or even news items. Someday the Internet will “know” all of us well enough to auto-create a bio and obituary at the time of death.
Now imagine you have this app. You could walk down a street and “see” through your phone’s screen the digitally-created floating ghosts near the last place each of them lived. The faces would be rendered from online photos and the bodies would be generic, whispy-floaty images. The semi-transparent animated ghosts would be transposed on the real-world scenery that a user sees when pointing a camera.
To add creepiness to creepiness, assume the ghost faces morph slowly from one age of the deceased as shown in photos to another. And because some available photos might show the person facing left, some right, and some straight ahead, you could animate the ghost faces to slowly look toward you as you look at them on your smartphone’s display.
A-a-a-a-a-and … the ghosts can talk. At least some of them can. Someday most folks will have a video and audio presence on the Internet. Your voice samples could be converted to whatever level of AI is available at the time. In the early generations if you tap a ghost image you see on your screen it can answer some simple, Siri-like questions about the local environment and the ghost’s own biography. Obviously you would add some ghost humor to the app so it could respond to users asking funny questions.
And if the app has a lot of photos from which to animate the head, it can also animate the lips by finding photos that show teeth and those that do not. That is enough to animate the lips during speech as long as the image is rendered as a semi-transparent, liquid-like, ever-morphing face. With that model the lips don’t need to be closely matched to the words. You want more of a zombie-mouth look to fit the vibe anyway.
Version 1.0 of this app could be limited to dead celebrity ghosts because the images, voice clips, and bios would be readily available. Version 2.0 could include anyone who had an extensive Internet presence. Eventually we will all be characters in the app’s alternate universe. (Unless we already are, obviously.)
This app will make for a great walking tour.
In Top Tech Blog:
Scientists have built a cloaking device. But it only works on small objects. Even Daniel Radcliffe is too tall for it, in case you wondered. Industrial designers will probably show interest if only to make the buttons on all of my devices even harder to find.
And how about a case for your phone that harvests meaningful energy from your phone’s radio signals? Do you believe that works? I don’t. But only because it sounds like the sort of thing that never works. I hope it does.
And NASA successfully tested an electromagnetic propulsion unit in a vacuum. Ironically, it did not suck. (Vacuum humor!)
Blah, blah, blah best graduation gift of all time, not counting money.
I just saw Monday March 30th’s edition of the ongoing series Broadway By The Year and I’m already penciling in (make that inking in) the next two nights, which take place on Monday May 11 and Monday June 22. Where else can you see two dozen legends, hot stars and rising talent for about $ 50? I’m not a big cabaret goer and this show — which mixes Broadway talent with cabaret stars — reminds me of what I’m missing. And the next edition includes names like Patrick Page and the brilliant Bobby Steggert, among many others. It’s always crowded but if you jump you can get tickets. I only wish there were more young theatergoers in the audience: it’s the most enjoyable musical theater history lesson in town.
The conceit is simple: each night of Broadway By The Year focuses on 25 years of Broadway, tackling at least one song from a show that premiered each year. Sometimes it’s a world famous standard, other times a little known gem or just a silly throw-away that’s fun to do. You get to hear how musicals developed, catch some great rising talent and enjoy some favorites given fresh life. It’s the linchpin of producer, creator and host Scott Siegel’s empire of musical theater events both at Town Hall and throughout the city.
The night proper kicked off very promisingly with Beth Leavel growling and kicking and having a blast on “Blues In The Night.” I remembered it was written for the movies, but only hardcore theater buffs probably knew the song was so popular it was highlighted later in a Broadway revue called Priorities Of 1942. That’s the sort of trivia Siegel sprinkles throughout in his brisk introductions. He’ll offer up a nugget and then end with, “…and that show was My Fair Lady,” which invariably sends a ripple of pleasure through the audience. Happily, he now only calls for an encore bow when the applause demands it; the tight intros and no fake second bows keep the evening at an enjoyable 150 minutes.
Every edition has its own character and this one was dominated by comedy. John Bolton emphasized the worldwide popularity of Oklahoma by singing the title song in German and Japanese. Julia Murney and Ben Davis (who was great on Broadway in Violet) each did solo numbers but they really shone on “There Once Was A Man” from The Pajama Game, with Murney showing off her comic chops. Rising cabaret star Molly Pope was a pistol doing an unplugged version of “Too Darn Hot” from Cole Porter’s Kiss Me, Kate. She’s one of the talents you spot during these revues like this and make a point of going to see them in their own shows, soon.
The last time we saw Jeremy Morse, he was preparing to tackle How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying. Here the appealing Morse returned with a razor sharp take on “I Believe In You” that makes you sorry you missed him. His only failing seems to be that he’s a Phillies fan. (Though it could have been worse; he could have been a Boston fan.) And again, someone should do a musical about Mickey Rooney and Morse should star in it. Or at least a revival of Babes In Arms. Steve Rosen was also fun in the goofy “Don Jose (Of Far Rockway).” It really was a silly evening, all in all.
Her comic timing was exquisite and KT Sullivan looked ready to step right back into a revival of Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, which she delighted in almost exactly 20 years ago to the day on Broadway. That sense of theater history coming alive is one of the pleasures of the show, with Sullivan reprising one of her big career moments, linking today back to her revival in 1995 back to the original Gentlemen Prefer Blondes starring Carol Channing way, way back in 1949. Channing also came alive via Lee Roy Reams, who was in one revival of Hello, Dolly! and directed Channing in her last (of many) revivals of that show, coincidentally also in 1995. Reams knows the show inside out and his palpable pleasure at putting over a medley of tunes from it was a nostalgia fest in and of itself.
He was proof that hitting all the notes perfectly isn’t how artistry happens, though of course knowing how to use the voice you’re working with on any given night is key to a good performance and career longevity. Lari White had a rough night on “You’ll Never Walk Alone” from Carousel. Hey, it ain’t easy, and stumbles for various reasons (health, not enough time to rehearse amidst a busy schedule, a changing voice) are inevitable in a show like this done for love not money by all the performers. Only fools think auto-tuned and dull perfection on TV shows like Glee are the standard to expect.
And it doesn’t always matter. The handsome leading man Ryan Silverman (who has an old school Broadway voice and starred recently in Side Show) charmed in a duet from West Side Story then held the stage and filled the hall with ease on the show’s finale “On A Clear Day You Can See Forever.” He just missed that last big note (and the one before let you knew it wouldn’t be easy) but that didn’t detract at all from his warm presence and complete command of the song and the audience.
Still, the moments of perfection shine all the brighter. Jenna Dallacco is one of the talents handpicked by Siegel during his annual “stars of tomorrow” showcases. The best often perform as the Broadway By The Year chorus, which had the curtain raiser tonight with “We Did It Before,” a good example of an interesting number keyed to WW II that you’d never hear anyone perform these days but was fun to check out. Many go on to careers in theater and cabaret and here was Dallacco returning for her solo debut at Town Hall and this event. She did “Small World” from Gypsy with conviction and ease. You’d easily confuse her control and song-first approach to the material with the great Liz Callaway. That star delivered a delicate, moving version of “Look To The Rainbow” from Finian’s Rainbow that was a master class in serving the song. It’s one of those moments that makes Broadway By The Year worth returning to again and again.
Here’s Molly Pope at 54 Below singing “But The World Goes ‘Round.”
Hey, if Shakespeare couldn’t make up his mind what to call this romance, why should Bedlam Theatre decide how to perform it? In a clever decision, Bedlam is offering up two spins on the same tale, both performed by the same cast on succeeding days. Some actors play the same roles in radically different styles; others play different roles from one night to the next. Mind you, in these trim, playful adaptations (both running two hours or less), pretty much everyone seems to be playing everyone else if only for a moment or two. Shakespeare is famed for his cross-dressing heroines and characters donning disguises; Bedlam doubles down on that with glee.
Have you heard of Bedlam? If you’re a theater-goer in New York City, almost assuredly. They’re the theater company du jour and deservedly so. I missed their break-through production of Hamlet alongside Saint Joan but they’ve continued that run and that approach. They’re a company of actors tackling two classics at once in repertory: last time it was a delightful Sense & Sensibility along with a solid Seagull; today it’s Twelfth Night and…Twelfth Night.
I was under the impression that the two productions would contrast more dramatically, with one lighter and one darker. Not so; both are essentially larks, though unquestionably there are differences to be noted. Some things, however, remain constant. The five member cast is excellent. The direction by Eric Tucker (who also performs) is sharp and rewarding. The laughs are plentiful.
Great fun can be had by attending both versions; indeed, a repertory company revels in having actors tackle different roles in succeeding shows so watching them tackle the same role differently is a rare pleasure. I’d recommend a few days or at most a week between performances (though I saw them on consecutive days quite happily.) Nonetheless, Twelfth Night is solid but What You Will is the more assured and effective version.
You can bring along your own edition of the First Folio to try and follow along, but it’s not necessary. Both versions tell the tale of identical twin siblings, a brother and a sister separated at sea in a disastrous shipwreck. Both Sebastian and Viola — as alike as two peas in a pod — imagine the other is dead. Viola, as Shakespeare’s romantic heroines are wont to do, dons male attire and becomes the much appreciated aide to Duke Orsino. He is wooing — or attempting to woo — the lovely Olivia. (Even Viola and Olivia are playfully similar names, aren’t they?) Viola as his manservant is sent to woo in the count’s stead and Olivia finds herself passionately drawn to this comely youth. (Indeed, the Duke Orsino must admit he’s unreasonably attached to the lad as well.) Meanwhile, Olivia’s drunken uncle Toby Belch and his friends pull increasingly cruel pranks on the priggish steward Malvolio. When Sebastian shows up, everyone is thoroughly discombobulated until true love finds its mark.
Shakespeare always has fun with gender bending, but Bedlam takes it to a new level here. Women are playing men who play women who play men. Men play women who play men who play women. Everyone falls in love with everyone and it’s all tremendous fun. Sometimes too much fun. Tucker’s What You Will is the better version because it feels more focused on character. The Twelfth Night version is wackier and the hi-jinks sometimes seem to take place for their own sake. It savors the nuttiness of actors switching roles to a fault, with one high point featuring the actors tossing around hats and other props as they madly switch from one role to another. Toss in some puppetry and other devices and you’ve got a free-for-all. It’s energetic and fun but not as emotionally rewarding and no more laugh-inducing than the other.
Tucker’s meta-concept for Twelfth Night is less rewarding than the more focused work on What You Will. Here, everything from the setting (which begins and ends under a plastic tarp evoking the sea) to the character switches feel of a piece. The cast is clothed in creamy white and beige colors (courtesy of costume designer Valérie Thèrése Bart) that evoke a certain aristocratic privilege without tying the story down to a particular time period. Color runs riot and while I’m not sure why the blood red paint became increasingly prominent (this is not a bloody play) it felt purposeful and I went with it.
The music is strong throughout. Excellent Americana-style tunes performed by the cast filled Twelfth Night while recordings of classics by Billie Holiday and others proved very effective in What You Will.
I was crazy about Tucker and especially Andrus Nichols in Sense & Sensibility (she played the lead there); it was one of my favorite shows of 2014. They both shine again here, with Tucker a marvel at drawing laughs out of a snort or askance look as he exits the stage. It puts me in mind of Mark Rylance and there is no higher praise than that, especially for an actor/director/company leader like Tucker. Susannah Millonzi was also very strong in the dual roles of the dimwitted suitor Sir Andrew Aguecheek and a deadpan take on Olivia’s gentlewoman Maria.
But this time I fell hard for the talents of Edmund Lewis and Tom O’Keefe. Lewis of course played many roles, but his most notable work was as two very different and very satisfying takes on Malvolio. The butt of jokes in Shakespeare’s plays are not often characters I find very interesting. But Malvolio has a storied history among great actors. Ian Holm reportedly tackled him many times, and others who assayed it include Simon Russell Beale, Patrick Stewart, Derek Jacobi and Stephen Fry in the glorious edition that played on Broadway in 2013/14. Heady company indeed.
Lewis proved why the part is so tempting, despite its secondary status; he found depths of feeling and complexity in this stock villain, along with the humor that is so natural to it. I really have a problem with Shakespeare here. Malvolio’s sins (essentially, telling the drunken Belch and the rest to stop making a racket at one in the morning) are very modest while the genuine cruelty they engender is way out of proportion. I was hoping this production would cut or minimize that cruelty. It didn’t, nor did it solve the problem of this imbalance. But the staging in What You Will was excellent — the torture was evoked perfectly simply by having one actor twirl a light bulb on a long cord to light the scene on an otherwise darkened stage. And Lewis made the discomfort real enough to satisfyingly unsettle the final, otherwise romantic finale.
O’Keefe was equally appealing and charming while tackling the jester Feste and the long-lost brother Sebastian (and Sebastian’s sister and Cesario and more — it’s that kind of double bill). His singing and playing of tunes in Twelfth Night (he did the musical composition along with Ted Lewis) was very winning. And his Feste was a marvel. The Twelfth Night version of Feste was winningly sly and sexy, to the point where one wondered why Olivia didn’t fall for him. The What You Will Feste was childlike without ever condescending. And his Sebastian was soulful, somehow letting you believe he fell immediately in love and would indeed get married at the drop of a hat. As with all the actors involved, I can’t wait to see him again.
On a bare bones budget, the cast and technical team deliver satisfying entertainment. The Twelfth Night take revels in those frantic, all-aboard changes of characters with actors swapping parts almost mid-sentence. The What You Will version is highlighted by showing one actor play two characters at the same time, such as when O’Keefe had Feste accosting Sebastian to great effect. Both are worth your time.
Bedlam clearly deserves arts funding and its own space and a long-running hit (how I yearn to see their Sense & Sensibility again) and a long, long life. Rylance had his Globe. Anyone up for providing them their signature space?
THEATER OF 2015
Honeymoon In Vegas **
The Woodsman ***
Constellations ** 1/2
Taylor Mac’s A 24 Decade History Of Popular Music 1930s-1950s ** 1/2
Let The Right One In **
Da no rating
A Month In The Country ** 1/2
Parade in Concert at Lincoln Center ** 1/2
Hamilton at the Public ***
The World Of Extreme Happiness ** 1/2
Broadway By The Year 1915-1940 **
Verite * 1/2
The Mystery Of Love & Sex **
An Octoroon at Polonsky Shakespeare Center *** 1/2
Fish In The Dark *
The Audience ***
Josephine And I ***
Posterity * 1/2
The Hunchback Of Notre Dame **
Lonesome Traveler **
On The Twentieth Century ***
Radio City Music Hall’s New York Spring Spectacular ** 1/2
The Heidi Chronicles *
The Tallest Tree In The Forest * 1/2
Broadway By The Year: 1941-1965 ***
Twelfth Night by Bedlam ***
What You Will by Bedlam *** 1/2
Thanks for reading. Michael Giltz is the founder and CEO of the forthcoming website BookFilter, a book lover’s best friend. It’s a website that lets you browse for books online the way you do in a physical bookstore, provides comprehensive info on new releases every week in every category and offers passionate personal recommendations every step of the way. It’s like a fall book preview or holiday gift guide — but every week in every category. He’s also the cohost of Showbiz Sandbox, a weekly pop culture podcast that reveals the industry take on entertainment news of the day and features top journalists and opinion makers as guests. It’s available for free on iTunes. Visit Michael Giltz at his website and his daily blog. Download his podcast of celebrity interviews and his radio show, also called Popsurfing and also available for free on iTunes.
Note: Michael Giltz is provided with free tickets to shows with the understanding that he will be writing a review. All productions are in New York City unless otherwise indicated.
Entertainment – The Huffington Post
Entertainment News-Visit Adults Playland today for the hottest adult entertainment online!
Hot Tip Alert!
SEATTLE—Praising her incredible physique and wide array of intangible qualities, Louisville men’s basketball coach Rick Pitino told reporters Friday that he has absolutely loved what he’s seen thus far from freshman cheerleader Danielle …
Looking for a custom suit but don’t know where to start? Two of New York’s top tailors explain the do’s and don’ts.
Unless you’ve been under a rock for the past day, the hashtag #TheDress has come across your time line or wall. But while #TheDress and its color-shifting ways has folks questioning their peepers, there is an end to the mystery – sort of.
The Huffington Post did everyone a favor and dug deep into the #TheDress and collected as much information as it could about this dress from a variety of outlets. Even the BBC World News team had their own in-studio debate about the dress this morning in its London studios. That’s right, folks. This thing has gone quite viral.
We take a look at what has been discovered about #TheDress, how it came to the world’s attention and share some commentary on the following pages.
The post Seeing Things: What People Are Saying About #TheDress [PHOTOS] appeared first on Hip-Hop Wired.
Ladies, take note — this is how you get dressed.
Over the past couple of days, Hollywood has been upping its style game and we are très impressed. Poppy Delevingne wore an unexpected black floral dress that left us awestruck, Kiernan Shipka was her usual adorable self in a pink strapless number and America Ferrera made a strong case for the color red in a show-stopping ensemble.
Check out the best-dressed stars of the week and let us know if you agree with our picks.
Ferrera is a total bombshell in this tight red dress. Not only does it hug her curves in all the right places, the bold hue really pops against her dark hair and olive complexion.
Nicole Kidman in Armani Privé
Nicole Kidman is a dead ringer for Grace Kelly in this stunning strapless gown. The intricate beading and creamy ivory color are the picture of elegance. Kidman’s black belt and shoes may seem a little heavy for such a delicate dress, but we are willing to look past it as the rest of the ensemble is spot on.
Nicola Peltz in Prada
The “Transformers” star looked statuesque in this iridescent blue column dress with crystal embellishments. Despite the major cut-out on front, the dress is balanced out by the longer hemline and high neck line.
Poppy Delevingne in Vivienne Westwood Gold Label
Every single thing about this outfit is impeccable. The dress is an interesting take on the floral trend; it helps that it looks like it has been expertly draped, as the asymmetrical neckline is hanging off of her body perfectly. Nude pumps were also a great choice with this otherwise busy ensemble, while Delevingne’s pulled back hair really shows off that fierce red lipstick.
Kiernan Shipka in Marni
Cute, fashion-forward, age-appropriate — Shipka’s dress embodies everything she’s known for.
Chrissy Teigen in Elisabetta Franchi
Teigen clearly knows that white and gold is one of the best color combinations out there. Her short, plunging dress is great for the warm weather, while her slicked back hair is an easy way to avoid summer frizz.
Kate Middleton in Alexander McQueen
Yes, we may have seen the Duchess in this outfit before, but if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The military-inspired top and skirt are a nice change from the feminine dresses we normally see her wear.