I’m not a fan of musical revues and rather indifferent to the music of Buddy Holly.  Musical revues are a dangerous choice to do, as you run the risk of alienating potential audience members who don’t like the music making up the revue.  That would be me, as I’m not really all that attracted to the music of Buddy Holly.  But, with low expectations, I figured I’d enjoy “Buddy: The Buddy Holly Story” more than I expected.

Buddy starts with a rebellious leader of a band on a country show who just wants to play rock and roll.  After playing a rock and roll song on the air, without permission, he’s fired, but also set up with a recording contract.  And so begins the career of the legendary Buddy Holly.

Unfortunately, I did not enjoy “Buddy” more than I expected to enjoy it.  The trouble, however, is not Circa’s production.  It’s the show itself.  “Buddy” is heavy on the performance of Buddy Holly’s songs and light on the story of his life.  I went in knowing very little about Mr. Holly and came out knowing more about his life, but not because of the show.  Everything I learned I learned from my companion for the evening, who filled in all the gaps for me at intermission and after the show.

The show is poorly paced.  This could be Circa’s fault, but it seems the show offers too much opportunity for poor pacing.  The first act is heavy on the recording sessions, with little short scenes depicting an ever increasingly tired band, except for Buddy, working all night.  The scenes are broken up by dips to black, which last too long and slow the pacing of the show down.  It’s hard to enjoy when you’re sitting in black listening to canned music almost more than you’re watching the actors play out that night of Buddy’s life.  This could be fixed with shorter dips to black.  Much shorter.

Act 2 starts promisingly in the pacing department, but ends up more of a mess than Act 1.  The first part of the act is actual scenes with dialogue and story advancement.  We watch as Buddy meets a girl, marries her and then leaves for a tour with her warning him of nightmares she’s having about a fire ball in the sky.  Finally!  I’m learning something and enjoying the show!  Then, it descends into a long string of Buddy Holly songs, with very little in the way of storyline, as the rest of the act plays out in concert style.  My companion said he felt “like a groupie on a boring tour.”

The end of Buddy Holly’s life is also problematic.  We’re right in the middle of a fun song, with the audience dancing and clapping, when the lights dim, the song stops and a voice announces the deaths of Buddy, Ritchie Valens and The Big Bopper.  A spotlight lights each from the top as their deaths are announced.  It could be an emotional, tragic moment, but the crowd is clapping over the front of the voice over, so you miss the first part.  Then, when it’s done, the show goes right back into the upbeat, fun song.  The audience doesn’t have a chance to let the tragedy sink in, let alone acknowledge it.

One more negative, before I focus on the positives.  Much of the cast lacked energy.  The approach to scenes with dialogue seemed to be laid back, with a slowness and an energy-less performance.  It couldn’ve been that I was watching the second performance of the show’s run, so the actors were still warming up to the show.  Still, it brought the energy down.  Way down, in fact.  That’s where the “boring tour” comes in.  I had trouble being excited and having fun because most of the actors on stage seemed to not be having fun.  And those who were trying to perform with energy were pulled down by those without energy.

Okay, enough of the negative.  The major positive of the show is that the actors perform their own instruments.  I prefer live musicians accompanying stage shows to pre-recorded accompaniment.  The live music adds to the energy of a show.  So, Buddy gets major bonus points for actually having the actors perform on their instruments.  And, they do quite well performing and will only get better as the run of the show continues.

Todd Meredith is a likeable Buddy Holly.  He has to carry the show, so he’d better be good.  Unfortunately, he’s the one who’s trying to perform with energy, but it’s held back by the lack of energy of those around him (other than Tristan Layne Tapscott as Jerry, the drummer, who adds some nice humor to the show).  I think Meredith’s performance would be more notable were the energy of the rest of the cast raised so that his could go through the roof.

The standouts, however, are Teddric Alexander Matthews and Aurianna Angelique as the Apollo Singers.  They kick off the scene at the Apollo theater with more energy than the rest of the show combined.  (Well, the concert ending the show is pretty high energy.  But, I’m talking performance more than just the music.)  Finally, I was into the show, ready to jump out of my seat.  They were exciting and giving their all.  I wished, for a moment, we were watching “Apollo: The Apollo Singers Story” just so we could see more of them!  These two are above and beyond the rest of the cast in what they offer the audience on stage.

Vaughn Irving also does a fine job as Ritchie Valens.  He has high energy and “La Bamba” was one of my favorite numbers.

Linda Boelsche is also worth mentioning.  As Vi Petty, she offers a character more than anyone else on stage.  She has very nice delivery and, along with Jerry the Drummer, some of the funniest moments on stage.

Once the show hits the final concert of Buddy Holly’s life in the second act, the energy really ramps up, bring the audience to its feet, at a couple of points.  (I know, I’m using the word energy a lot.  But, energy is the key to making this performance fun.  I keep mentioning it because that’s what this show is missing, for the most part.)  The actors seem to most enjoy themselves while performing, with all of them on stage singing, dancing and actually playing their instruments.  How can you not have energy here?

I, personally, did not enjoy “Buddy: The Buddy Holly Story” all that much.  But, I think that’s due to my expectations.  I wanted to learn something about Buddy Holly.  The show didn’t offer that.  It’s more of a chance to perform his songs than it is the story of his life.  For me, it’s too heavy on the songs when I want the story.  That’s not to say it’s bad, though, and that you should avoid it.  That’s just my opinion based on my personal taste.  I think anyone who likes the music of Buddy Holly will have a great time at the show.  Just expect to hear more songs than to learn anything about the legendary performer.  Study up on his life before the show, if you don’t know about it already, and you may enjoy the performance even more.

“Buddy: The Buddy Holly Story” runs through March 22 at Circa 21 Dinner Playhouse in Rock Island.

Posted: January 24th, 2008 under Theater.
Comments: none

27 Dresses — Fox 2000 Pictures

Katherine Heigl stars in a movie that was supposed to come out last week, but was bumped to this week — 27 Dresses — a movie that’s supposed to be better than it is.

Heigl plays the “always a bridesmaid, never a bride” girl, whose served in the sidekick wedding position 27 times.  Now, she’s on the sidelines again, watching her sister marry the man she loves, played by James Marsden, who’s getting a lot of exposure, lately.  Good for you, James!

This was so promising.  But, critics are calling it overly formulaic, uninspired and an insult to the romantic comedy.  The thing is, if you like romantic comedy and you like Katherine Heigl and go for emotion over execution, you’ll like this.   There’s just nothing special about it.  For a better date night, go rent the classic romance “Somewhere in Time” instead.

Cloverfield — Paramount Pictures

It’s arguably the most anticipated horror film in a long time — Cloverfield, formerly known as 1-18-08, formerly known as Untitled J.J. Abrams Project.  Yes, the man behind the hit TV series Lost is behind this flick, too.

The movie starts at a going-away party in Manhattan.  The party quickly takes a turn for the worse when a monster attacks the city. It’s basically a Godzilla movie told through the video cameras of those attending the party.  And, it’s effective.

The film runs a short 80 minutes, roughly.  But, it’s good that it’s short, as the filmmakers gave it the right amount of pacing to make it an effective thrill ride.  And, the monster is something to behold.

“27 Dresses”, on the other hand, is not.  Don’t waste your money at the theater.  Wait to rent it, only if you like romantic comedy lite.

“Cloverfield,” on the other hand, is the first must see movie of 2008.
While this isn’t as groundbreaking as expected, it is well told, well paced and well put together.

Posted: January 17th, 2008 under Film.
Comments: none

This is the time of year to be particularly choosy about the movies you see at the theater.  Hollywood tends to toss out the lesser films to bide the time until the Summer movie season starts in mid-Spring.  But, there will be a few pearls among the swine.

That does not include Ice Cube’s newest film, First Sunday, a petty criminal comedy set in a church.  Ice Cube stars as Durell, a bumbling criminal partnered with his best friend LeeJohn, played by Tracy Morgan.  To raise money owed to pay a debt in order no to lose his son, Durell hatches a plan to rob a local church.  Instead, they learn a valuable life lesson from the parishioners they’re holding up.

Barf.

How does that alone not sound like a bad movie?

In execution, it’s predictable and preachy.  Neither of which is good.  Tracy Morgan is funny, but the whole movie feels like a Tyler Perry wannabe, sentimental at the end, but not as funny up to that point.

What is laughable is the casting of the latest video game to silver screen adaptation — In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale.

Jason Statham, you know, the Transporter?, plays Farmer, a man on a quest to rescue his wife and avenge his son’s death by taking on the Krugs, the animal-warriors responsible for both.  The Krugs are led by the evil Gallian, played by, hold on while I stifle my laughter, Ray Liotta.  But what’s even funnier is the casting of the king.  He’s played by Burt Reynolds.  This could be the greatest comedy of all time, and it’s not meant to be!

There are some notables in the film, LeeLee Sobieski, whom we haven’t seen enough of, as well as John Rhys-Davies and Ron Perlman, without prosthetics.

The biggest problem isn’t the casting, however.  It’s the director, Uwe Boll, a man with a reputation for being a hot-head and a director who doesn’t really know what he’s doing, but sometimes makes a decent film.  This isn’t one of them.  Audiences are laughing at some of the most serious moments, as the actors deliver the cheesiest, most cliche lines in the genre.

Posted: January 10th, 2008 under Film.
Comments: none

I don’t like horror movies.  A good psychological thriller, yes, but not horror, which makes reviewing this week’s only new release, “One Missed Call”, hard for me to swallow.

In the movie, people receive cell phone messages from themselves in which they hear their own deaths.  The messages reveal the how and the when, which seemingly can’t be avoided, even by deleting the message.

Beth is the central character, who witnesses two of her friends die within days of each other after receiving said calls.

She teams up with a detective, whose sister died in a similar way.  Together, they’re trying to figure out the mystery behind the calls in order to stop from receiving one themselves.

First off, it’s a phone horror, so expect a lot of false jumps from phones ringing.  Second, don’t expect much fresh material.  Doesn’t this sound familiar?  It’s a sort of “The Ring” mixed with “Final Destination” with maybe a dash of “The Grudge”.  It’s not, really.  But, it has hints of them in it.

“One Missed Call” is not one to see in the theater.  Your money would be better invested in Sweeney Todd or I am Legend.  But, “One Missed Call” is worth renting, as it’ll be scarier while watching at home, especially if your cell phone rings during the movie.

Posted: January 4th, 2008 under Film.
Comments: none