Last Sunday was piano recital day. A big thank you to Paula M., Joady U., and Randy G. for stopping by to hear some music. A performance is always a learning opportunity, and this one was no exception. Some notes to self: I call this (in hindsight) a three hour per day recital program. I practiced two hours a day (and a bit more closer to the recital date). That left me with considerable work yet to do by recital day. The Beethoven Sonata Op 10 #3 was the main piece. I opened with a Bach Prelude and Fugue (Eb+, Bk 2). These six movements alone (2 by Bach and 4 by Beethoven) were easily worth two hours per day. But I tried to squeeze six more pieces into that two hours--a Chopin Nocturne, a Mendelssohn Venetian Gondola Song, and four movements from an astronomy suite by Canadian composer Alexina Louie. That should have been my third hour, but it was crammed into the two per day I try to maintain. And in addition, several weeks earlier I began work on the first movement of a Haydn Sonata, which I had no business doing.
There is, however, some good news; I found I was able to concentrate on just the music for the entire performance. This is a first for me; usually my mind wanders off to strange corners of inner thoughts for at least some of a performance. There were also many times when I was completely unaware of an audience, which is something the big pros often say happens to them. So it appears that my concentration is improving, if not my actual performances. Next time I have a much more modest program planned. Some things about the newest pieces will be discussed next time.
Our yard has become inundated with poison ivy. As I returned from my bike ride yesterday morning I noticed that the lawn care guy was cutting the neighbour's grass. I walked across the road to ask him if he knew of anyone who could help us get rid of the pesky plants. He did; himself. He will come next Wednesday and spray, as well as clean up a sizable overgrown area adjacent to our garage. A lot of other plants are thriving, too, including our day lilies, which seemed to have a good year.
In film news there are three to mention. All three are from the Criterion streaming service. My pick was Don't Look Now, a 1973 film by Nicolas Roeg. Based on a story by Daphne du Maurier, we have always somehow managed to avoid it until now. It is a sort of psychotronic murder story starring Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie. It features some lovely shots of an almost tourist-free Venice during off-season, as well as a blind woman who warns that Sutherland is in great danger while in Venice. There is also a serial killer running around doing their thing. Though it appears to follow the book, it is not a very good film. For one thing, it is way too long (as is the interminable sex scene between the two leads). For another, it's just not very gripping. It needs a gondola chase (or something). The police seem unable to catch the serial killer, even though it mysteriously and ridiculously runs around in a bright red raincoat. Except for the Venice photography, there really isn't much else to see here.
Next came two picks by Deb. Adaptation is a 2002 film directed by Spike Jonze. With a stellar cast led by Nicolas Cage, the film promised so much at the beginning. Eventually it just turns into another American film ruined by Hollywood cliches. Cage is very good playing twins, both screen writers with very opposite characters and goals. This is one of those films that American viewers likely regard as "deep," or "like a European film." No doubt that was a goal. But a film about orchids simply won't go over well in America, a theme that comes up often in the film. Despite trying to avoid the worst kind of cliches in his screenplay, Cage must bite the bullet, succumbing to Hollywood "adaptation." Once we add illegal drugs, some guns, a shooting, a swamp chase, a car accident, and lessons learned, we have a movie! This is the point of the movie. Sigh. Why tell us this, when we already know it, and have thousands of bad examples for reference? Because American audiences blah blah blah. Well, American audiences seem to like a lot of European films that don't follow the standard American formula. This isn't some kind of genius and original idea that the film comes up with. I mean, how stupid is the audience?
Lastly came a very odd little fairy tale film from Jacques Demy, From 1970, it is called Donkey Skin. This film was probably watched by thousands of French children, much to their detriment. If they had to watch it more than once, they were likely left permanently damaged. Based on a real Cinderella-like story, the use of colour is pretty amazing. And Catherine Deneuve is very pretty, especially with all the fairy princess dresses she gets to wear. The story has its bizarre moments, when the king decides to marry his daughter. But for the interference of her fairy godmother, she likely would have. And there are some funny scenes when all the maidens in the kingdom come to the palace try on a ring (no glass shoe here). The look of the film is quite good, though I'm not a fan of painting horses red. But what really ruins the film are several insipid, tuneless, utterly unmusical songs. Each song sounds exactly the same! The non-genius of Michel Legrand is on full display here. On a side note, there appear to be some Oompa Loompas in the film.
Mapman Mike
No comments:
Post a Comment