Here's one that I did one year with a couple friends.
Musicals are fantastic, can you blame us for wanting to be a part of the magic?
January 29, 2010
January 20, 2010
Enter The Chamber At Your Own Risk
Friday night, there's a slight chill outside as sixty-something CreComm students enter the Rachel Browne Theatre for a night of entertainment. Little did they know what they were in for.
This year, the In The Chamber series put out a show called Last Men. The show consisted of two pieces, the first, called The Last Man in Krakendorf, and the second, The Last Man in Puntarenas. Both pieces were one man performances, centered around men having an identity crisis.
The show begins with a peculiar and seemingly completely unrelated scene as we witness a couple in bed fighting over the covers which leads into one of the most awkward handjob scenes I could fathom. After about a minute and a half the "woman" exits the room and we see actor Steven Ratzlaff fighting a disembodied voice as he screams from the bed that he still has chaos in him.
The first play starred Gordon Tanner as a frustrated businessman as he works through confused feelings talking to a video camera. Tanner's character is going to send this video to his boss if he doesn't get arrested first and so the entire time he battles between not bothering to finish recording, and finishing in time.
Tanner delivers a passionate speech about the treatment of hogs on hog farms and about the business system in general, presenting us with the idea of a new and old system. Both systems consisted of sections, the old system; Who Fucked Up? You Fucked Up. You're Fired. and the new system consisted mainly of we all fucked up together, why did we all fuck up together, and what did you do to cause us all to fuck up together.
Another idea that Tanner offers us is one that his character claims to be the drive behind human error, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Both funny points and well explained, however, after this point in the play Tanner slowly lost my attention.
In a well acted and interesting performance Tanner's energy doesn't let down once, but one can only take so much. The entire play was a monologue and after a while begins to sound preachy. I think it definitely could've been a little bit shorter and it would've been more successful.
The second performance starred Steven Ratzlaff, and to be totally honest that's probably the most I can tell you. Ratzlaff as well delivers a well acted monologue.. that seems to never end. He gets into terms far too complicated to continue to hold the attention of the average audience member. Ratzlaff is giving a speech to collegues at a sort of dinner party and can't seem to stay on topic or within the boundaries of typical politeness.
Ratzlaff talks about the loss of his son, as well as his wife leaving him and their relationship's deterioration. He talks, well, a lot really, and by the end of it all I wasn't really sure what exactly to take away from what I'd seen.
Both actors did a superb job performing, and their energy was fantastic, you could feel their words as they spoke, however, their words began to lose effect as we drew closer to an hour in each monologue. I wasn't a huge fan of the production, but I would have to say I would see those guys act in another play anyday.
This year, the In The Chamber series put out a show called Last Men. The show consisted of two pieces, the first, called The Last Man in Krakendorf, and the second, The Last Man in Puntarenas. Both pieces were one man performances, centered around men having an identity crisis.
The show begins with a peculiar and seemingly completely unrelated scene as we witness a couple in bed fighting over the covers which leads into one of the most awkward handjob scenes I could fathom. After about a minute and a half the "woman" exits the room and we see actor Steven Ratzlaff fighting a disembodied voice as he screams from the bed that he still has chaos in him.
The first play starred Gordon Tanner as a frustrated businessman as he works through confused feelings talking to a video camera. Tanner's character is going to send this video to his boss if he doesn't get arrested first and so the entire time he battles between not bothering to finish recording, and finishing in time.
Tanner delivers a passionate speech about the treatment of hogs on hog farms and about the business system in general, presenting us with the idea of a new and old system. Both systems consisted of sections, the old system; Who Fucked Up? You Fucked Up. You're Fired. and the new system consisted mainly of we all fucked up together, why did we all fuck up together, and what did you do to cause us all to fuck up together.
Another idea that Tanner offers us is one that his character claims to be the drive behind human error, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Both funny points and well explained, however, after this point in the play Tanner slowly lost my attention.
In a well acted and interesting performance Tanner's energy doesn't let down once, but one can only take so much. The entire play was a monologue and after a while begins to sound preachy. I think it definitely could've been a little bit shorter and it would've been more successful.
The second performance starred Steven Ratzlaff, and to be totally honest that's probably the most I can tell you. Ratzlaff as well delivers a well acted monologue.. that seems to never end. He gets into terms far too complicated to continue to hold the attention of the average audience member. Ratzlaff is giving a speech to collegues at a sort of dinner party and can't seem to stay on topic or within the boundaries of typical politeness.
Ratzlaff talks about the loss of his son, as well as his wife leaving him and their relationship's deterioration. He talks, well, a lot really, and by the end of it all I wasn't really sure what exactly to take away from what I'd seen.
Both actors did a superb job performing, and their energy was fantastic, you could feel their words as they spoke, however, their words began to lose effect as we drew closer to an hour in each monologue. I wasn't a huge fan of the production, but I would have to say I would see those guys act in another play anyday.
January 17, 2010
So I'm Predictable.
But I can't help but be excited for the upcoming Sex and the City sequel.
Especially as I'm sitting watching the original SATC movie you can't help but love the four girls in their never ending quest for love.
Especially as I'm sitting watching the original SATC movie you can't help but love the four girls in their never ending quest for love.
January 8, 2010
April Fools' from Taco Bell
After spending some time researching what one would call the pseudo-event, I have realized that I don't know what to believe anymore.
A pseudo-event in a nutshell is an event or stunt put on for the sole purpose of promoting something or someone.
I would have to say that from what I've seen so far in this field, Taco Bell seems to know what to do to get the public's eyes on them.
On April 1st, 1996, Taco Bell placed full page ads in 6 major American newspapers announcing that they had purchased the Liberty Bell renaming it the Taco Liberty Bell.
The ad read:
Taco Bell Buys The Liberty Bell
In an effort to help the national debt, Taco Bell is pleased to announce that we have agreed to purchase the Liberty Bell, one of our country’s most historic treasures. It will now be called the “Taco Liberty Bell” and will still be accessible to the American public for viewing. While some may find this controversial, we hope our move will prompt other corporations to take similar action to do their part to reduce the country’s debt.
In a press release, Taco Bell claimed that the bell would be dividing its time between Philadelphia and the Taco Bell headquarters in Irvine. Taco Bell compared their purchase to adoption of highways by corporations. Taco Bell's arguement was that they were “going one step further by purchasing one of the country’s greatest historic treasures.” The company continued, “Taco Bell’s heritage and imagery have revolved around the symbolism of the bell. Now we’ve got the crown jewel of bells.”
Later that day after being "hammered" by phone calls, the company issued a second press release admitting to the huge hoax and instead saying that they were donating 50,000 dollars towards the upkeep of the bell. According to Taco Bell’s marketing department, their sales increased by over half-a-million dollars during the week of April 1st, compared to the week before.
Success? I think so.
This isn't the only prank Taco bell has pulled.
You can read about this prank that Taco Bell pulled in 2001 here.
Crafty buggers.
A pseudo-event in a nutshell is an event or stunt put on for the sole purpose of promoting something or someone.
I would have to say that from what I've seen so far in this field, Taco Bell seems to know what to do to get the public's eyes on them.
On April 1st, 1996, Taco Bell placed full page ads in 6 major American newspapers announcing that they had purchased the Liberty Bell renaming it the Taco Liberty Bell.
The ad read:
Taco Bell Buys The Liberty Bell
In an effort to help the national debt, Taco Bell is pleased to announce that we have agreed to purchase the Liberty Bell, one of our country’s most historic treasures. It will now be called the “Taco Liberty Bell” and will still be accessible to the American public for viewing. While some may find this controversial, we hope our move will prompt other corporations to take similar action to do their part to reduce the country’s debt.
In a press release, Taco Bell claimed that the bell would be dividing its time between Philadelphia and the Taco Bell headquarters in Irvine. Taco Bell compared their purchase to adoption of highways by corporations. Taco Bell's arguement was that they were “going one step further by purchasing one of the country’s greatest historic treasures.” The company continued, “Taco Bell’s heritage and imagery have revolved around the symbolism of the bell. Now we’ve got the crown jewel of bells.”
Later that day after being "hammered" by phone calls, the company issued a second press release admitting to the huge hoax and instead saying that they were donating 50,000 dollars towards the upkeep of the bell. According to Taco Bell’s marketing department, their sales increased by over half-a-million dollars during the week of April 1st, compared to the week before.
Success? I think so.
This isn't the only prank Taco bell has pulled.
You can read about this prank that Taco Bell pulled in 2001 here.
Crafty buggers.
