Review Film Marathon

HEAVY THEMES IN A LIGHT STYLE

Michiel Bulthuis

Seven graduate films by the Nederlandse Film en Televisie Academie [transl. Dutch Film and Television Academy] The premiere is over and the first nerves have ebbed. There is nothing to be ashamed of for the students of the Nederlandse Film en Televisie Academie. The seven films screened during ITs make up a colorful collection. This year, many leading parts have been given to children, just as in the children’s series Het Mysterie van de Volle Maan [transl. The Mystery of the Full Moon]. Five children with the aid of a magical book have to defeat all kinds of monsters. In this episode, they face a werewolf. The big difference with the other movies is the extensive use of special effects. Every trick of the trade is used to make the show as youthful as possible, in which they succeed. The episode emanates the feeling of a children’s series. The kids are smart and their tiresome parents are troubling them in their pursuit of saving the world. Of course, there is also a scary man in a long leather jacket who eventually turns out to be a good guy. Het Mysterie van de Volle Maan could just as well turn out be a success. The most personal film is Wes, an autobiographical film about a growing up too fast. The inexperienced actor Wesley Rietkerken excels as the eleven-year-old boy that is about to lose his mother. By using his natural acting style, Wesley tries to show how Wes strives to be both a child and a grownup. A big story excellently told in a short amount of time. Sacha Draait [transl. Sacha Turns] is different. This film is about a young woman struggling in her quest for love. In the pottery workshop in which she works, a play of attraction and rejection originates between Sacha and her boss John. The story is not done justice, as the situation is so complex that is just needs more time to be told. In the movie’s thirty minutes, the audience is granted almost no chance to sympathize with Sascha. It is made clear that she is mentally unstable, yet she gives almost no motive to feel sorry for her. Every now and then she does. The scene in which she is cozies up the workshop, there is a glimpse of the true Sacha. Constructed and depicted equally beautiful. Blijf bij me, weg [transl. Stay with me, Gone] is meant to be an experiment. The story was predetermined, although all dialogues were improvised. Apparently, a strong framework is all that a good film needs. A hefty fight sets the mood in the first scene. The apparently futile dialogues in the following four scenes tell everything without explicitly telling something. A powerful quality of narration. A successful experiment. Iliriania is this year’s most abstract film, except without ever becoming vague. After the war, the Kosovarian painter Migjén is left with only his daughter. He leaves for the Netherlands with her to rebuild their lives. As she starts going to school, the old traumas flare up. Migjén’s internal struggle is represented through symbols. He, along with the audience, shifts between reality and the world in his head. The viewer becomes part of his emotions and thoughts. This works surprisingly well. The moment he conquers his trauma turns out to be liberating for the audience as well. This year’s highlights are Bingo and Jacco’s Film. Bingo is a Moldavian gypsy that leaves for the Netherlands and ends up living in illegality. Along with the Russian Sergei and the Chechen Umar he earns a wage by demolishing houses. From the get-go, the movie captivates by its boyish playfulness and subtle humor. This light style does not obfuscate the seriousness of the story rather it enhances it. Bingo is a tough fellow. Despite the barren circumstances, he stays positive. The audience is hit hard as an accident further disorders his live. Bingo is easy to watch, hard to let go of. Jacco’s Film also brings a heavy theme in a light style, now from the viewpoint of a ten-year-old child. It is a touching story about people that like to escape to a fantasy world. Jacco’s Film is above all a very funny film showing the daily live of the ten-year-old Jacco. Remarkably pleasant and meticulously constructed. Text and image perfectly add up to each other. The use of warm colors and the addition of drawings just give that little extra. The future of Dutch cinema looks very promising.

Interview Andrew Loretto

 

DON’T BE AFRAID OF REVIEWS
‘The worst review you can get: it was fantastic!’

 

Interview with Andrew Loretto
By Michiel Bulthuis

Theater producers and art critics are often each other’s opposites. Andrew Loretto is a bit of both. He explains the general use of art criticism, and more specifically how it concerns the producer of theater.

Loretto is the artistic director at the Irish Chol Theatre. He writes theater pieces and is involved in organizing several theater festivals, including the National Student Drama Festival in Scarborough.

In this context, he often writes reviews for personal use: as a reminder, to order his thoughts, or to simply express his views. For a year, he practiced the job as reviewer by writing at the English-version of the free tabloid Metro.

It often concerns him that art criticism is allotted almost no space in big papers. Online magazines are often lacking. Experienced critics have a reliable voice that is often absent in reviews on the Internet. ‘Everyone can be a critic these days, but the reviews online are often hurtful,’ he argues with concern.

Next to that, reviews are more than just an opinion, Loretto thinks. A critic must explain his piece, pay attention to the way the piece was realized and how the piece fits within the cultural context in which it was produced.

About the significance of reviews, he is not doubtful. ‘A review really records the live experience. A digital recording never captures the essence and I think a written piece can.’ Because of that, a review is also able to represent an image of time, the way of thinking, the important themes, and the way these themes are dealt with.

Reviewers are not useful merely for future generations. Theater producers can use reviews to improve their pieces. ‘Festivals like this can be very scary for young theatre makers. It’s maybe the first time they are critiqued by people that aren’t friends or family. The nice thing is that not everything has to be perfect.’

He encourages young producers to be hungry for critique and use it to improve the work. ‘The other day I read an old review of one of my first shows. I didn’t really agree with it at the time, but I do now.’ He collects as many opinions as possible: from reviews, but also from the audience and relatives. ‘The worst review you can get: it was fantastic! I’ll respond with: okay, thank you. So, what didn’t you like?’

His most important message to young producers: don’t be afraid of reviews. ‘So what if you get a bad review? Don’t worry: the work’s still there. Nobody died. Let it rest for a while and use the critique to improve your work later.’

————————————————————————————-

Loretto compiled two lists of tips. One is for theatre makers: how to deal with reviews? The other one is for critics: how should they approach a review?

Tips for theatre makers
1. Be aware that you always remember the negative reviews. It’s human nature. Use a positive review to give you a pat on the back every once in a while.
2. Don’t feel the need to respond. Listen, and let it digest.
3. Whatever you do, don’t write an angry letter. That’s always silly.
4. If you don’t understand something that someone wrote, try to find out more. For instance, by writing a letter. It’ll depend on the critic if he’ll write back, but you can always try.
5. Always remember: a review is one person’s point of view.
6. Criticism of your work is not about you. Don’t take it personal.
7. Remember that the critic is doing his job. And his job is to have an opinion.

Tips for critics
1. Be passionate about what you’re seeing. Good critics want to see good work. They want to see art progress.
2. See as much work as you can. Try to be aware of trends so you can place things into context.
3. Challenge yourself. Don’t stick to one genre.
4. Research how (theatre)work is made.
5. Know your audience. Be aware of what they know and what they expect from you.
6. Be passionate in your writing. Have an opinion. No one is interested in the middle line.
7. Be fair – no one sets out to make a bad piece. But: being fair is different to being kind. Artists need to know what is working.
8. Be true to yourself. Your readers will know if you are not.

Review Wust

Wust

A Funny Funeral Thanks to Simplicity

Michiel Bulthuis

A strange sensation, but still: funerals are funny. To make this clear, director Paul van der Laan (Bambie) and nine students of the Amsterdam School of Theatre and the Kleinkunstacademie do not need to resort to crude jokes, slapstick, or merriment. Wust, one of the first performances during Its festival simply shows a funeral. This includes the clichés, embarrassing moments, and strong emotions that go along with it.

The lights in the theatre are still on as a coy woman hesitantly walks the stage. She does not speak. She greets the audience and slowly shuffles towards a freezer. Again she does not speak. You would better get use to this, as awkward silences have the upper hand in Wust. The modesty of the play affects the audience and this causes a true funeral atmosphere. Apart from a few bursts of laughter, the theater is mouse-still.

The extended silences on stage are sometimes interrupted, not only by clumsy dialogues but also by a number of musical pieces, of which the most are a cappella. They are all beautiful songs that deserve a second listen. Nine people singing simultaneously is an overwhelming experience as well as a pleasant variation on timidity.

Unfortunately, the play takes a completely different direction in the ending when it turns out that the man in the freezer was not as enjoyable as presumed. This twist turns into an impressive climax, yet ultimately it detracts from the piece. The plot suddenly becomes vague, more explicit and the idea of the play is hard to discover. After the twist, Wust taps into a bunch of subjects, but it does not explore them in depth for them to leave a lasting impression.

Artistic development script: Diederik Ebbinge. Directed by: Paul van der Laan. Dramaturgy: Marijn van der Jagt. Performed by: Christine de Boer, Daan Colijn, Roos van Erkel, Milena Haverkamp, Elise Schaap, Yentl Schieman, Annefleur Schep, Pepijn Schoneveld & Cathelijne Vaarkamp. Producer: Mathijs te Kiefte (student opleiding Productie podiumkunsten), assistant to the producer: Mara Aronson (student opleiding Productie podiumkunsten)