2022 - 2023 Archives

Beauty and the Beast Review

July 9, 2023

Man, after being starved of social interaction for the past month and a half, it felt really nice to get out of the house to see Beauty and the Beast. The show was fun in that it brought in a lot of performers from Blue Valley productions that I never thought I'd get to see perform again. The show had some fun performances, and, well... actually, I didn't care for this show too much. But I'll start with the good stuff.

Like I said, it was good to see a lot of Blue Valley's finest up on stage one more time. Baylee Countryman, Barak Snir, Owen Unrein, and even Nolan Stewart had small roles in this show, and it was a delight to get to see them perform again, especially Stewart, who was a highlight of Mary Poppins and whom I was previously disappointed to only see in one show.

In a more major role, Cannon Simpson plays Cogsworth, a role he fulfills very well, given the show's confusing explanation of the talking furniture. Simpson bounces off Bennett Chapman's Lumiere very well, and serves as a fun illustration of Simpson's acting range. Wait, just a brief detour, how do they have food in this castle? Do they have a garden or even a farm? It looks big enough. Are the scythes, buckets, and hoes sentient? If so, why don't we ever see them?

Anyway, the other major BVHS inclusion was Brynn Friesen, who plays Mrs. Potts, by which I mean she does Mary Poppins again. Don't get me wrong, it works, but I believe Henry Monahan said it best, describing her performance as "Mary Poppins Returns". I mean, Mrs. Potts is older than Mary Poppins, but the similarities in character make the performance work. Friesen's singing voice helps a lot, of course, given that she has to sing the title song of the musical.

I think that Andrew Hand played the Beast pretty darn well, bringing a ferocity to the Beast that makes him truly frightening. Peter Dessert's Gaston was interesting; although I was unconvinced at first, Dessert really went ham on one of Disney's best villains, and had a fresh dynamic with Gage Pfannenstiel's LeFou unseen in prior versions of the story. The costuming tripped me up at first, with Dessert's first look reminding me of Barney Fife from That said, I think there's a problem here with the writing.

The original Beauty and the Beast film strikes a very careful balance in making the Beast the good guy and Gaston the bad guy. The musical, in a word, butchers this. I haven't seen many Disney musical adaptations of their famous works. The Lion King musical works wonders by adding in a deleted Scar scene from the original film and making him all the more sinister. The Aladdin musical's Jafar, on the other hand, feels much flatter and less menacing than the film version. In the Beauty and the Beast musical, at least this version, the problem is not with the villain being boring or uncompelling. It's that the Beast is an abusive monster and Gaston is a likable clown with some outdated ideas. Gaston is, arguably, the hero of the musical's story, and that's a lot easier to argue than it was with Reverend Shaw last year. And his death, in this, is far more unceremonious than in the film; in the movie, we dwell on Gaston's fall for a moment; in the musical, he just vanishes without a second mention. The Beast, on the other hand, has an extreme temper, but acts like a gentleman when he can to get his captive to fall in love with him and (checks notes) "make him a man". He's not a great guy, and rather than be a sweet story about looking past experiences and not judge a book by its cover, this feels like a warning about falling for someone really, really bad.

Anyway, I'll have to give best performance to Bennett Chapman's Lumiere. He played the character energetically, capturing the vibes of the movie version while adding something of his own to it. He was one of my favorite parts of the show.

Anyway, until next time, remember: No one falls like Gaston, from the walls like Gaston, no one meets their end from great heights like Gaston. He's looking very cadaverous lately! Nobody dies like Gaston!

So I Watched All of the Twilight Movies

June 27, 2023

I finished the final Twilight movie, Breaking Dawn — Part 2, a few weeks ago, and I don't know how to feel about it. This is a fun movie — more fun than any other Twilight film. It's probably better than any of its peers aside from the first film. And yet, the film's lack of self-seriousness doesn't feel like the third film's irreverence, but a Sam Raimi Spider-Man camp.

This film is basically an X-Men movie. The plot is that the main character, Bella Swan, now a vampire, and her vampire husband, Edward Cullen, have a half-vampire child named Renesme (barf). The Volturi, the evil and corrupt ruling coven of Italian vampires, believe that Renesme was a human child turned into a vampire. Such creatures are known as "immortal children". Their lack of self-control and permanent immaturity combined with their extreme powers makes them incredibly dangerous. Thus, Bella and Edward must assemble allies to face the Volturi. Carslile, the head of the Cullen Clan and Edward's foster father, believes a peaceful solution must be reached, but the others suspect that they may have to fight.

This is the fun part: assembling a bunch of different vampires with a bunch of different superpowers. One has electrical powers, another can control the elements, and Bella has shielding powers. Meanwhile, one of the Volturi has magical dark tentacles. It's kind of awesome. And then, they gather and have a massive battle with the Volturi. I'm of two minds here. The battle is epic, but the one crucial flaw of it is that hardly anyone uses their superpowers. But aside from that, Carlisle and Jasper die, but the good guys manage to kill the major Volturi. Stuff goes down.

And then it's all a dream.

I partially like this twist, because it gave us a bit of resolution to the allies assembling, and the battle was apparently not present in the books. It gave us a vampire battle to remember, but resulted in a peaceful resolution where everybody lives. The problem is the Volturi. It's been established that the Volturi lead tourists to their deaths in Italy, that they make up charges to slaughter entire vampire covens just to isolate and recruit one of their members with unique powers, that they rule with an iron fist and that they are paranoid about human technological advancement. These are villains that must be dealt with, something that a pair of Russian vampires point out. But when the danger of a battle has passed, the good guys walk away. It was their chance to overthrow a treacherous and increasingly paranoid aristocracy, and they abandon it.

To me, this feels like the beginning of a franchise about super-powered vampires fighting Volturi. The main villains of the franchise are still on the loose, still killing innocents by the dozens, still slaughtering covens. It's an unsettling feeling; Bella and Edward are living out their happy life (and Jacob is grooming Renesme because of the last movie's deus ex pedophilia) while innocent tourists are being lured to their deaths by Aro (the Volturi leader) and his allies. And Aro's lines near the end of the film indicate that he is becoming increasingly paranoid about human technology and its capacity to destroy vampires. How long before he decides to declare war on humanity? How long before the threat of the Volturi reaches a breaking point? The world of Twilight is doomed unless someone saves it, and this is where the franchise ends? Give me the movie where the Russian vampires storm Italy and rip the Volturi apart. I want to watch that film.

Oh yeah and there's some Bella and Edward stuff and I think they do the Monster Mash again at the beginning. I don't care. I like the X-Men stuff. My final ranking of the Saga would probably go as follows:

1. Twilight

2. Breaking Dawn — Part 2

3. Eclipse

4. Breaking Dawn — Part 1

5. New Moon

So I watched The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn — Part 1

June 19, 2023

I feel icky. If Twilight is the good one (man, what a world we live in), New Moon is the boring one, and Eclipse is the fun one (occasionally), Breaking Dawn — Part 1 is the gross one. Lucky for me, the good stuff happnes first, and the icky stuff happens second, so I can start with the stuff I like.

The first act of the movie is the build up to the wedding between Edward, our favorite vegetarian, and Bella, the hamburger he fell in love with. This is my favorite part of the movie, because we just get to hang out and vibe with the side characters we kind of like. There's fun interactions, a few good jokes, and a very shirtless Jacob. Paging Robe Guy? Anyway, I wish we'd gotten a more thorough conclusion to the relationship between Bella and her father, but maybe we'll get that in part 2.

But now it's off to the honeymoon, because who's ready for a SEX MONTAGE?! I know these movies are in love with montaging everything, but seriously, only the first movie really pulled it off. Well, the training montage in the third movie was okay. Anyway, yeah, so Robert Pattinson drops his utility belt (though we don't get to see his batarang), and the pair do the Monster Mash. He drives a wooden stake into her coffin. Anyway, it's really uncomfortable, because one of the characters is cold and lifeless and the other one is a vampire. And I'm really sorry for the Batman and vampire puns.

But now, Bella is pregnant for some reason, so she has to be taken care of, and then the werewolf leader wants to kill Bella and her unborn child to eliminate the threat they pose. Jacob and two side characters we don't care about show up to help the Cullens protect Bella, but they're running low on animal blood. Also, Bella says that if she has a girl, she'd combine her mother's name (Renee) with Edward's (Esme) and name her child (gags) Renesme. Oh, but it gets worse, because she plans to name a boy after Edward and Jacob, calling him EJ. First, Jacob is her EX-BOYFRIEND. Don't name your child after your ex-boyfriend if you can help it. And second, Charlisle was right there.

So she gives birth and then kind of dies, and I didn't watch the birthing scene, and I don't recommend you do either. Edward extracts the child and bites Bella to turn her into a vampire. But it doesn't seem to work. And then Jacob gets mad and goes to murder the baby, who is a girl (ugh, Renesme) and then, he imprints.

Okay, imprinting. Oh my gosh, freaking imprinting. Let's consult the wiki. Imprinting is the involuntary process by which a werewolf finds their soulmate. Sorry, by which a shape-shifter, which is apparently distinct from a werewolf in the expanded lore (weird), finds their soulmate. The process happens upon first seeing the person, at which point the stranger becomes the shape-shifter's sole focus, to the exclusion of all other people. They start as an older sibling, and then grow into best friends, and then they start to date. It's unclear how much choice the imprintee has on the matter, but it is definitely involuntary for the imprinter.

And Jacob imprints upon a newborn infant.

Gross, gross, gross, gross, gross. Ick. No. I hate it, get it away. Don't make me ever watch this movie again. End of review.

So I Watched The Twilight Saga: Eclipse...

June 17, 2023

Make it stop.

I will give the third Twilight movie this much: it's better than its predecessor, though not as good as the original. I can't believe that the film Twilight is now the gold standard against which to measure all the others, but here we are.

Eclipse takes itself less seriously than its two predecessors. On the one hand, this irreverence makes the movie breezier and funnier than its predecessor by striking a lighter tone and improving over New Moon's drudgery. One the other hand, this takes away from the original's earnest sincerity. Twilight was clearly made by people invested in the story, while New Moon felt somewhat soulless by comparison. I'm not convinced that the creators of Eclipse particularly cared about the project, at least not the teen romance aspect of their story, but at least moved away from the insincere self-seriousness of New Moon in favor of greater entertainment value.

What this story's creators did care about, however, was cool vampire stuff. This is the first movie in the series to feature a major battle, and the stakes feel like a natural escalation. The plot features Victoria, the vengeful mate of the first film's antagonist, who only briefly appeared in New Moon, converging with New Moon's main antagonists, namely, evil Italian vampires called the Volturi. The plot feels pretty good, with the Cullens and werewolves allying with each other to protect Forks (and Bella because she has protagonist powers) from an army of freshly created vampires. We get some insight into some of the side characters and come to understand the Cullen clan's respect for their patriarch, Carlisle, even if we see little of him this film. The film, like the previous two shines when it puts focus on the side characters. This time, that less means the human characters from Forks and more the vampires, but still.

Also, Charlie gets a few scenes to shine here. And the music is good. And the licensed music is a little bit better placed than in New Moon. Alright, now for the bad stuff.

If I wasn't team Edward before, I certainly am now, because Jacob is icky the whole time. I've heard people say that Jacob is a bit less creepy than Edward, but at least Bella is with Edward throughout this film, making Jacob's advances that much worse. I'm not going to touch this film's sexual themes, but they are quite loaded. Additionally, the movie gets rid of much of the human supporting cast, and often times the film drags, though not as noticeably as the last installment.

Ultimately, the movie had cool fight scenes, interesting monster lore, and not much else. I don't care about the werewolves, I kind of care about the vampires, and ultimately the film is a mixed bag. If anything, these sequels are giving me a newfound appreciation for the first film, which I suppose is a crime in its own right. There's only two more to get through. Thank goodness.

So I Watched The Twilight Saga: New Moon...

June 16, 2023

A couple weeks ago, I gave the film Twilight a shot with an open mind. While the movie wasn't anything to write home about, there were things to like about it. So I went into its sequel, The Twilight Saga: New Moon, hoping for the same. Except... New Moon is not good. Not that Twilight is, per se, but its sequel is far worse. The film drags, sucking almost every bit of personality out of the first movie's vibrant town of Forks, which was a highlight of the first film.

Alright, let's start with what I liked. The film's themes about mental health are handled... okay, but not great. The movie does an alright job of trying to sell Bella with Jacob, but not amazing. Anna Kendrick shows up for five minutes, and elevates the movie's weak writing far more than it deserved. Michael Sheen was amazing as always as the film's villain, Aro. But if you want more Michael Sheen, watch Good Omens, it's much better. Oh, and at one point Edward takes his shirt off, and then one of the Volturi vampires (evil Italian vampires) hands him a robe, and I commented that that guy needs to be around the whole time to hand out robes to Edward and Jacob whenever they take their shirts off, which is a lot. Finally, both fathers, Carlisle Cullen and Charlie Swan, are very compelling characters. Bella reconnecting with her father is perhaps the best plotline in these films, and in spite of Carlisle's relative lack of screen time, he's still one of my favorite characters, and is clearly the source of many of Edward's good qualities.

Alright, time to rip this movie to shreds. A large part of the movie revolves around the close friendship between Bella and Edward's foster sister Alice (who is played pretty well), except that they don't have any scenes with each other for most of the movie and don't seem close at all. The movie is dreadfully boring, and its werewolf lore is painfully dull. Also, the werewolves are supposed to be these rageful, uncontrolled beasts in this movie. And they're all American Indians. I'm just not going to touch that weird bit of lore. Jacob isn't a very interesting character, and there's very little personality there. Hey, I guess that makes him a match for Bella! The other werewolves get basically no development, unlike Edward's family. And the entire story is just painfully boring. The werewolf reveal at the midpoint is nowhere near as impactful as the vampire reveal from the first film.

The film's cinematography is also a downgrade. Sure, we more or less got rid of the weird blue light, but now, outside of a few vibrant forest scenes, the move doesn't do anything interesting with color like the first one did. Its score is fine, but its usage of licensed music is far worse than that of its predecessor. And the film's montages are a step down, too.

In short, The Twilight Saga: No Moon wiped away most of the original's charm and replaced it with Taylor Lautner's abs. Oh, and I guess that leaves the question of whether I'm Team Edward or Team Jacob? I guess if I had to pick, I'd go Edward. There you go, David Edwards is team... wait a minute...

So I Watched Twilight...

June 4, 2023

Twilight has long been the butt of the joke, usually in terms of the film version, and I hate not being in on the joke. So I figured that I'd watch it, because I can't fairly make fun of something I have not seen. I recommend watching it the way I did — with a family member or friend who shares your sense of humor that you can bounce off of at various intervals during the film. This makes it significantly more interesting.

Anyway, I wanted to give the film a fair shake. After all, there are people who love it, and I wanted to make a good faith effort to see why. That said, I also see some of the reasons people hate it. So, without further ado, here is my review of Twilight.

The main character, Bella Swan is as bland as they say. Her main personality trait is desert, because she used to live in Phoenix and has now moved to Forks, Washington, a small town that is decidedly not desert. Other than that, her personality is negligible. She seems to have a passing interest in mythology, largely influenced by her attraction to the film's leading man. She dislikes dancing and is vaguely selfless and empathetic. And she dislikes sports and all of the vaguely masculine stuff her father likes, like sports and hunting.

The first act of the film is easily the most interesting. The story there is about Bella reconnecting with her father, the local sheriff. This is probably the relationship in the film that had me the most interested, as the pair slowly reconnect. The movie depicts Charlie as a father who hasn't been a father very much doing his best to raise a seventeen year old girl right. This C-plot, however, gets little resolution. While Bella and her father have a falling out when she is being chased by an evil vampire and has to go on the run to protect him during the third act of the film, we never see them patch it up; it just seems to happen off-screen by the end of the movie. Which is a shame, because that falling out scene made me feel emotions.

Anyway, after introducing Bella's father and their relationship, we also start to get to know Forks. I know it's a cliche to say that a director makes the location of a film a character of its own, but this movie makes a good case for it. Part of this is likely out of necessity; the film has quite a few side characters, and so making them representative of Forks' human community and the town itself works. Watching closely, you see the characters perform small acts of kindness for each other throughout the film. We do see bad people in Forks, but the movie paints a largely positive picture of this community. And while Bella's whole center of attention thing is mildly irksome, she does help both of her female friends — one of which is played by Anna Kendrick, who turns in a pretty good performance for such a small character — find prom dates. It's these little moments that sell you on Forks and Bella's place within it, and it was these moments at which Bella's character was most endearing.

There's a subplot in the movie about Charlie (Bella's father) trying to track down the animal that killed one of his friends, not knowing that that "animal" is actually an evil vampire, which had a small town mystery vibe I kind of dug.

The colors the film used were done pretty well, too. Phoenix, Bella's starting point, was lit neutrally, while most of the scenes in the cold, foreign Forks were lit in cold, blue light. Yet at certain points throughout the film, when Bella and Edward are at their closest, the film will adopt a warm, yellow lighting, like at the dinner scene or the prom scene. And then, at those moments when Forks really comes alive with beauty, the film find a compromise with a vibrant, green lighting that really makes the natural landscape pop. And on a similar note, the film's score is relatively effective. Sometimes it will cut to rock music, and I can't tell if they're needle drops to licensed music or just part of the score, but either way, these sections can be hit or miss, though I liked them well enough.

Okay, I suppose it's time to talk about the bat in the room. I'll give the third-best Batman this: he's more interesting than Bella. (One and two are Conroy and Mazouz, four and five are Bale and Arnett.) Alright, I'm going to get all of the stuff I liked about the sparkly vampires (at least the good ones) out of my system now, so that I can wrap up the positives. The vampire reveal at the midpoint was done well, and the vampire superpowers were cool. While Robert Pattinson was not particularly interesting to watch at first, when he got to get out of his shell later in the film, his performance was actually fun. While I don't care about the other vampires much, Edward's relationship with his foster father Carlisle was reasonably compelling. Also, as toxic as Edward and Bella's relationship was, you have to give them props for depicting an active relationship, something films struggle with today. My mother compared it to Anakin and Padme in Attack of the Clones, and as much as it pains me to say this, Twilight is slightly better. And while the vampire lore wasn't exactly interesting or good, it was at least defensible; the whole burn in sunlight thing, after all, came fairly late in the game and was popularized by the film Nosferatu.

Okay, but seriously, this guy is creepy. Let's ignore the fact that he's an old dude ninety-eight years Bella's senior. He's a total jerk to her for the first act of the film. And then there's this turn to attraction that doesn't make any sense. And then, when he says that he constantly wants to kill Bella, she doesn't care for some reason, even though she definitely has other romantic options. And then he says he loves to watch sleep and has been doing so, stalking her, since they met. And she is not at all frightened by this. Big red flags. This is not a film from which to draw romantic advice. (This film is also kind of a metaphor for abstinence, but there's also a sex positive reading to it. I don't have time to get into all of the weird theming behind this.)

The film is also poorly written. The dialogue is mumbly and awkward, neither natural nor poetic in nature. The film's villain, while delightfully cruel, is ultimately bland and uninteresting.

Anyway, it's hard to say anything critical about this film that hasn't already been said. Maybe it was more entertaining to me because I kept pausing to crack jokes. Maybe I was actively seeking out the good bits. Like I said at the beginning of the review, people love this movie, and there are reasons for that. The central love story was not good, but the story around that wasn't awful. Ultimately, Twilight is better than people would have you believe, but not good in my opinion. My final verdict: I don't recommend it, but if you're going to make fun of it, at least watch it. I don't plan on watching it again.

Daily Campfire Ask Me Anything

May 12, 2023

Hey, it's time to do an Ask Me Anything for Daily Campfire reviews. Here's how it works:

• Anyone can email me at djedwards@bluevalleyk12.net (I don't trust you guys with my personal email, sorry) or fill out this form and submit up to three questions about me, my blog, or anything else. If you email me and wish to remain anonymous, you must specify this.

• On May 19, 2023, I will answer any questions submitted on my blog.

• I will answer almost any question. I'm willing to answer very personal questions, but I may not answer questions about other people I deem intrusive.

Anyway, go forth and ask your questions about David Edwards? Want to know how I run this blog? My romantic history? My feelings toward apricots? You can find out next Friday right here on Daily Campfire reviews; all you have to do is submit your questions!

Playing Pretend With School Funding At the Keatons

May 10, 2023

I love the Keatons. I plan on writing about it more in my Performing Arts Showcase ranking, but the Keatons really are a highlight of the year — a chance at playful ribbing, an opportunity to celebrate a full year of in-jokes, some of which I actually got. The ability to see a bunch of your friends in the same place. It's been a long, long year. There have been out of state get-togethers, break-ups, Break-Up Bingos (congrats to the winner, you know who you are), good shows, mediocre shows, lots of improv, Worst Buy, overstuffed Prom groups, injuries, friendships, rivalries, crowdsurfing, writing, controversial jolts, and lots of love. The Keatons are goofy, but there's a sincerity about them. You see how much we're losing with our Seniors, how much we're gaining with our Freshmen. You see Yarnell get to be open and sincere.

I I appreciated the shout-out, by the way; going to every show is kind of hard to fit into my schedule. Also, Grant's light show was an excellent way to start the night. The various songs were hilarious, and "Yarnell" was almost worth having to hear "Peaches" every minute of every day in Winter Park. "Am I a Muppet or am I a Man?" is a classic, performed to perfection. The more serious performances were also enchanting. This show really did a good time of honoring the year and showcasing the talent of the theater department. It's been a good year.

I can't do this forever, but I think the Daily Campfire needs to be a tradition here at Blue Valley. Which is why I'm looking for a successor. There are a number of candidates already, but I'm going to need some help in finding more, so I can narrow down who my co-writer and eventual successor should be. There are four requirements that a candidate must fill:

• Not in any Theater class

• Not auditioning for the musical or doing crew

• In the graduating class of 2025, 2026, or 2027.

• Decent writing ability

• Able to attend all theater shows.

With multiple writers, the second and fifth requirement may not be necessary, though they are preferred. Reach out to your friends, see if they're up for it. I don't want the Daily Campfire to disappear when I do.

Thanks for a good year. Go thank a crew member.

And until next time, remember: I love you guys.

BVHS 2022 - 2023 Final Theater Ranking

We're finally here: the Masky Awards. Everything has led to this: My final ranking of every theater show this year. Throughout my ranking, I will also be giving out awards for the following categories: Best Actor (per show), Best FNL writer, the Flavian Doucet Vampire Award, the Ashton Barlow Award For Most Tragically Passed-Up, Excellence in Villainy, Best Director's Choice, Worst Director's Choice, Best Onstage Romance, Best Death, Best Set Design, Best Fight Scene, and Best Stage Kiss. Also, remember that I don't rank improv shows. You ready? I'm ready. Let's do this.

This theater season was different from last year. There were fewer bad shows; while about half of last year's shows were mediocre, all the shows this year were high quality with the possible exception of Rock of Ages. However, this year's shows didn't really reach the heights of last year's. To put things in perspective, this year's best show was about as good as last year's fourth best show; this year's worst show was about as good as last year's fourth worst show. Part of this was the fewer amount of shows this year compared to last year, but a burgeoning underclass this year will see a return to form next year, thankfully. So without further ado, let's get into the ranking.

7. Rock of Ages

Rock of Ages wasn't bad. It had some good laughs, some good songs, some good performances. But the show was less than the sum of its parts; much of its music, especially early on, felt low-energy. The show wanted to be a parody or subversion of 80s musical movies, but it didn't help that it was a proper jukebox musical and didn't really trod too far from the beaten path. The worst attempt at parody when the show announced its intention of a big first-act closer. The show's only real attempt at subversion is when Drew and Sherrie abandon their dreams to get with each other, but that felt hollow, especially when Lonny says "I bet you didn't see that coming." But the show has its charm, with quite a few blueberries dotting its bowl of bland oatmeal.

Best Performance

Dylan Casey gets best performance in this show. Casey has spent much of his tenure at BVHS underrated and underutilized, but in this show he was fully allowed to shine, and he killed it, making the otherwise tiresome fourth wall breaks palatable. Casey is fun, entertaining, and a blast to watch.

Best Romance

No, sorry, the leads in this show weren't especially memorable. I'm talking about everyone's favorite side couple, Franz and Regina, played by Hayden Hughes and Myah Dobbins, two of my favorite actors from this show. Their onstage romance is sweet and innocent, and the characters make eachother better. Everything you want from an onstage romance, especially one that's given time to develop naturally instead of shoved down your throat.

The Ashton Barlow Award For Most Tragically Passed Up

For context on this award, last year there was an actor named Ashton Barlow who I kept passing up for Best Performance, which was a tragedy because of the number of great performances he delivered. So, in his name, I will be giving this award toa senior who has consistently put out great performances but never earned a Best Performance on this blog; in this case, Ben Samuelson. From Vladimir in Anastasia to Mr. Banks in Mary Poppins to Drew Boley in Rock of Ages, Ben is a talented actor who has simply never had the good fortune of being the best in a performance. So for that, I give him this award, because he's a great actor.

6. Friday Night Live

Getting only one FNL this year was disappointing, but the sketches made up for it, being better than either of the performances last year. I've been told that my experience with the show's dress rehearsal was significantly different from the live performance; apparently Discord Moderator Birthday was much better, and Morbius was somewhat bungled. But still, this was a quality show, with a lot of standouts.

Best Friday Night Live Writer

The best writer for this show has to go to Henry Monahan, who delivered a killer Morbius sketch and a great Dracula segment to boot. Both sketches were hilarious, and I've already discussed the brilliance of having Morbius be a perfect match for his date. Speaking of which...

Flavian Doucet Vampire Award

Okay, so Henry Monahan is no Joey Compton as a vampire, but he still played not one but two terrifying vampires this year, both with Morbius and Dracula during FNL. (For those who don't known, Flavian Doucet is the main villain of my young adult dystopian fantasy series and more importantly, a vampire.) Let's hope there are more vampires next year. Until then:

He's Morbius

He's glorious

He's got more bius than all of us

His hunger is insatiable

He's totally untraceable

He'll suck your blood

And save the day

The church hates him because he's... a vampire

He's Morbius

He's glorious

And he'll morb all over you

It's Morbin' Time!

5. 30 Neo-Futurist Plays From Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind

I loved this show; it was a blast. This is the kind of show you just have fun with, without any real deeper meaning. Yarnell mainly picked comedy plays for Too Much Light, and I think the variety was enjoyable, even if it was a bit bizarre. I may have a slightly different perspective on the crowdsurfing scene, but the show's level of audience interaction was intensely enjoyable. My only complaint is that I wish it had come later in the year so that it could have been a bit more referential, like Oranges was last year. But all in all, this was a solid outing for fifth hour.

Best Performance

Jackson Liekhus really brought his A game to this one. The show's variety prevents there from being recurring characters, but Jackson had one of his most memorable performances, even if it didn't quite top his in Trap, in spit of this being a superior show to that. Maybe we'll see more of him in the future.

Best Stage Kiss

When you read that this was one of the awards, you may have been confused; there were no stage kisses this year, unless you count the one from Rock of Ages. But you were wrong. Because in the play "Every Time a Bell Rings, An Angel Gets to Salivate", Myah Dobbins does kiss an audience member. First of all, I admire the courage; I would not lock lips with a stranger. Well, I guess it depends upon the stranger. Anyway, this one kind of wins by default, plus by merit of the boldness at play.

4. Towards Zero

My review of Towards Zero was probably the most controversial of the year. In hindsight, the show dragged quite a bit, even if it was an engaging murder mystery, and the solution relied upon the layout of a nonexistent house far too much to be practical. Actors like Henry Monahan, Barak Snir, and Cy Conaway shined in this production, and its well-crafted plot an deep characters give in more nuance than Too Much Light, raising it above the previous one.

Best Performance

While she's always been a good actress, Reagan Harwood (whose last name I finally decided to spell-check, sorry about that) was an extremely effective red herring. Harbwood plays the shy Mary Aldin to the point where we may see a touch of resentment. Aldin is a woman who is watching her life drain away from her, and Harcwood plays that to perfection. So good job, Reagan Harqwood, you did good.

Best Fight Scene

Towards Zero has the closest thing to an exciting fight scene in its finale, in which Neville gets free after his capture and attempts to kill Audrey Strange. It ends with Inspector Leach shooting Neville, and is a thrilling action scene to end the suspenseful show on.

Worst Directors Choice

People keep saying that the show would have been boring without the green lighting sequences in the show, but frankly, while I admit the show occasionally dragged, it was still an engaging and suspenseful mystery, and I don't see how the green lighting segments helped with that. No, this was a bad choice through and through, and an overly intrusive one at that. Nobody actually in the audience of the show seemed to enjoy it, and frankly, it wasn't a great decision.

3. Crafting a Killer

Another example of disparity between audience perception and performer perception. Crafting a Killer was a tightly-written one-act play that managed to highlight some great actors and tell a gripping story that held your attention throughout. I loved this show, and frankly I think that it is underrated in our school's theater community. Sure, the characters weren't particularly distinct, but the premise was executed to perfection. This is a good show, and while I may be crazy to put it this high, I think it was remarkable.

Best Performance

For the first performance, the obvious choice is Nick Hays as Doctor Van Slyke. Nick Hays played a cold, clinical, and uncaring doctor to perfection, and it is by far his best performance yet. Jenna Ross was the one that stood out in the second performance as Brown; she's an actor that almost got the Barlow award because of how great she's been and because of how close she came to getting Best Performance in A Midsummer Night's Dream, but thankfully, she ended her high school acting career on a high note. Well, there's still the Keatons, I guess.

Excellence in Villainy

I must give this award to Nick Hays as well, who felt sinisterin this show. I've already talked about his performance twice, so it's hard to really add anything that I haven't already said.

Best Death Scene

Colton Fieger does crew a lot of the time so we only really get to see him in improv shows, but when he's onstage, he steals the show. In this show, he played White, and he really nailed Brown's death scene, making me really feel for him as he died. It's tragic, really.

2. A Midsummer Night's Dream

We're in the endgame now; only two more shows left. Midsummer was an enchanting experience, whimsical in nature. It felt composed and mature while also being silly and goofy when it wanted to be. Combine that with several good performances, and you have yourself a darn good show. One aspect of the show I neglected in my original review was the set design; sure, the set was basically one bench and nothing else, but that bench was an immersive bench, one used to great effect throughout the show. Depending on the circumstances, it could be a log, a bench, a pair of thrones, or anything else. The atmospheric ambience made it so that the show felt so real with such a minimal set, and part of that is probably the direction, which was actually some of the best we've seen in this show.

Best Performance

Despite The Spectacular Spider-Man's slander that the part needs little rehearsing, the role of Nick Bottom is actually one of the highlights of the show, and while he can be a bit of an ass sometimes, Cy Conaway plays the character to perfection, channeling a self-important actor turned comic relief. (And yes, that was a donkey pun, which is not cursing, according to John Green. Also I have a much higher opinion of Cy than any potential misinterpretation of that pun might suggest.)

Best Director's Choice

This show had some next level direction. While the choice to set it in the 1920s didn't help or hinder the show much, the choice to cut it down and which parts to cut down was probably the best director's choice made this year. Yes, it did feel that the show reached a conclusion a little quickly, but it also contributed to the experience, giving us the essentials of the show and cutting the rest. It's a lot of what made the show good, to be honest.

1. Mary Poppins

I'm Mary Poppins, ya'll! Okay, so admittedly, Mary Poppins did not live up to the quality of Anastasia, but it was practically perfect in every way, except maybe on the villain front. So many of the performances were so good, and the story felt fairly fresh, made for people who had seen the film and perhaps wanted something different. If Rock of Ages was on the level of Trap, this was on the level of Dracula; very entertaining, but not quite exceptional. Still, I very much enjoyed this show.

Best Performance

Okay, so yeah, the best performance in this show was Nolan Stewart as Michael Banks, and I stand by that. I am still regretful that this is the last performance of his that I will see; he really stole the show. But among the high schoolers in the cast, Cannon Simpson was probably the best as Burt. He really captured some of Dick Van Dyke's original energy while adding his own flare to the role.

Best Set Design

Okay, I honestly considered giving this to Midsummer for that gosh darn bench, but no, Mary Poppins had a really good set. It stood out to me the first time, and it stands out again. This was really the only option; they build a whole house set for it. The other shows all had no real sets, sets prone to collapse and damage, sets that blocked the audience's view of the performers, sets that I banged my head on, or the world's best bench. So it's kind of a default, but Mary Poppins wins this one.

After this, I'll do one more article for the Keaton Awards, and maybe a couple of others if I want. I'm still posting in the Weird Articles section under Bonus Content; I've got a new article over there about why Superman is the best superhero, and a Wonder Woman fancast is coming soo. It's been a good year. Maybe we didn't get as many shows as I might have wanted, but what we got was good. I enjoyed myself. Thanks for reading my blog; it means a lot to me that you value my opinion. And thanks for another great year of theater; it's been a blast. Go thank a crew member; they don't get enough credit. So until next time:

1. Let's go fly a kite

2. And then then Cinderella met her god brother, who happened to be half donkey.

3. DAVID (as HENRY (as SARA (as LILLIE (as TYLER (as AUSTIN (as OWEN (as HARRISON (as SAMMY (as BENNETT (as JENNA (as COLTON (as CY (as NICK))))))))))))): Interesting. This has never happened before. Are you sure you aren't Red?

4. y = 1/x

5. I let strangers rub their hands on my sweaty body for a Barak Snir trading card. I have no regrets.

6. It's Morbin' Time!

7. We're gonna miss you, Dennis. And I mean that.

Why Crafting a Killer Works and Trap Doesn't

April 22, 2022

Crafting a Killer was the BVHS theater show of the year, and a really good one at that. People in it feared it would end up like Trap, the black sheep of last year's shows, destined to be remembered as a joke that took itself too seriously. And yet, Crafting a Killer was startlingly good in spite of its seemingly nonsensical script and outlandish science fiction concept. Why? It all has to do with premise.

In story structure, there is the concept of a "fun and games" section in the first half of the second act of a story (in a three-act structure; in a four- or five- act, this can last the whole second act) in which the story delivers on its premise, or its elevator pitch. In Mrs. Doubtfire, this is Daniel dressing up as Mrs. Doubtfire, babysitting his kids, and trying not to get caught; in Mean Girls, this is Cady and her friends trying to take down Regina George; and in The Mitchells vs. the Machines, this is the Mitchells dealing with the robot apocalypse and trying to come up with a plan. After the first act sets up the premise but before the midpoint evolves the premise with a twist or other major plot beat.

In this section, stories, especially those with one major hook, take their premise and explore it. Instead of adding elements, this section is meant to highlight the effects of the one major tweak. And this works best when the idea of the premise, the rules you're playing by, are made clear at the start, or revealed by the halfway point at the very latest. Sure, you can have a final-act twist, but the audience should understand the playground as soon as possible, especially dealing with a high-concept idea.

A show that does this remarkably well and one of my favorite TV shows period is Severance. The premise, according to Wikipedia, reads:

A biotechnology corporation, Lumon Industries, uses a mindwipe medical procedure called "severance" to separate the consciousness of their employees between their lives at work and outside of it. Due to their increasingly divergent life experiences, the consciousnesses of the employees in the work place (dubbed "innies") gradually split from their consciousnesses outside of it (dubbed "outies"), to the point that they become distinct personalities with their own agendas. One severed employee, Mark (Adam Scott), gradually uncovers a web of conspiracy at Lumon, and the mysterious project the employees are unknowingly working on.

What makes the show work is that unlike other shows, who shove in more and more clues that point toward a central mystery and that definitely make sense together and instill great trust that the show runners know what's going on in their own show and haven't gotten Lost in their own hype. Anyway, everything that happens in Severance is a logical extension of its premise. How would the corporates motivate the "innies" to work? How to workplace romances work in this setting? Is the procedure reversible? How would the outside world react to this procedure? There is a central mystery to the show, but even that is a natural extension of the premise: at first you and the show consider the benefits of not having to sit through work yourself, but the reverse is also in question: what is a company trying to hide that they have to make sure that none of its employees remember their time at work? The point is that the show takes its premise, lays down the ground rules, and then explores its premise. It's a show I definitely recommend.

So let's get back to Crafting a Killer and Trap. In Crafting a Killer, the ground rules are laid out right at the start: eight candidates are attempting to fill a vacancy as assassins for a government body and must compete in a series of tests to get the job. Those who fail will be killed by nanobots injected into their bloodstream, and the candidates will have their bodies switched with each run. That's essentially the premise, and while the show doesn't go to huge lengths to explore it like some TV shows do, nothing new is brought in. The show works because the show plays fair and doesn't interrupt the story with exposition; it just gets it all out of the way at the beginning so we can sit back and enjoy.

Trap, on the other hand, takes a good long time to set out its rules; the word "pharonoch" isn't mentioned until halfway through the play. The concept presented is so out of left field that it is impossible to anticipate; the first part of the play doesn't feel fair because it sets up a mystery we have no way of getting any closer to solving until the whole thing is revealed. The problem is that Trap's very conception is contradictory; it uses a high science fiction premise that needs thorough explanation and exposition, but also wants to be a detective story about gathering the evidence and slowly putting the pieces together. The two don't work together; the explanation is all or nothing, it has to be explained and is too abnormal and complex to be pieced together through clues; if you interpreted the clues the play gives you up to the fourth scene and proposed anything close to the actual explanation, it would be an absurd prediction. The play is trying to be two things and thus fails at both. One way writers handle this is to reveal the main concept right away as a legend or story and have the detective gradually come to realize that what they heard may actually be true. This sacrifices some of the mystery for dread and synergy.

So that's why Crafting a Killer worked and Trap didn't; it understood its premise and executed it well. And until next time, if you ever have trouble in identifying a pharonoch, I hear they can't sing, so you'll only find them in seventh hour. Now, if you'll excuse me, Henry Monahan wanted to tell me a secret.

Crafting a Killer Review

April 20, 2023

Wait, this show was good? Everybody beforehand told me than no, it was gonna be awful, it was going to be another Trap, overburdened with high-concept science fiction and badly written suspense. And yet, this show was significantly better than Trap.

This was mostly a writing difference, though the production was arguably much superior on this show. In a way, this was the perfect show to end the year with. I plan on writing an article a bit later down the line about why Crafting a Killer succeeded where Trap failed, a topic I've wanted to talk about for a while that I think Crafting a Killer did well. But aside from that, the show utilized the medium of theater well; as a continuous, one-act scene that tells a complete story, it's doing something that was specifically made for theater. This was, perhaps, the fatal flaw in the stage adaptation of Towards Zero; so much of it relies on the layout of an invisible house that its medium dilutes its mystery. But Crafting A Killer's story is better suited for the stage than any other medium, which already set Crafting a Killer on higher footing than most other plays the theater has done. The show was likewise extraordinarily suspenseful, with tangible stakes. The one problem I think the show had is that it didn't let us get to know the characters very well before switching them around; the only ones with a particularly distinct personality were Red and Green and maybe Yellow. There's a reason that most television shows wait until at least most of the way through their first season to do a body swap episode; it's a concept that really only works if you know the characters. And even then, it works better in animation because the characters usually swap voice actors, too. The hat gimmick did a lot to improve this problem and prevent it from eating up the show, but it was still present: we didn't know these characters.

Okay, so that's the writing side of things, and I don't really have anything to say about the directing. Sure, it was probably a bad idea to do both performances on the same night, but I think the concept was interesting and this was the only show it really could have worked for. The lighting was effective and the sound did its job, and that was an important one in this show. The set design really immerses you, but the hanging windows made a few audience seats undesirable.

What made this show great was how it featured actors who often don't get a lot of stage time. People like Lily Milkus, Tyler Thalblum, and especially Austin Casey got to shine when they rarely do and show us what we can look forward to next year. The casting made it so that everybody got some time in the spotlight, a definite strength of the show.

Which brings me to the performances, the first of which I enjoyed more. Highlights from this version are Harrison Jones, who made good use of his limited stage time, and Colton Fieger, whose death scene was intensely horrifying. This version, however, was carried by its Best Performance, Nick Hays as Doctor Van Slyke. Nick was a precise scalpel whose uncaring nature made the play truly terrifying. This is easily his best performance to date, and a dang good one at that.

If Hays was a precise scalpel, Owen Unrein was a butter knife. I dislike being negative, and Owen Unrein is a good actor, but this was a miscast. Unrein stumbled over his words and failed to convey the precise wickedness of the character in the way Hays did. Unrein is a good protagonist and a decent narrator, but as a villain his performance left something to be desired. Still, he improved as the show continued, and the one thing he did do better than Hays was the final reveal at the end when he put on the red hat. And his performance might not have seemed as weak had Hays not knocked it out of the park but twenty minutes before.

 One highlight from the second performance was Sara Schumacher, who turned in her best performance since Brothers Grimm Spectaculathon. She adapted well to each character and was memorable throughout. Austin Casey comes out strong as well in this show, and I think it'd be interesting to see him in some bigger roles in the future. Henry Monahan was Henry Monahan; he showed up with some top-notch acting, not standing out as much as he often does but still giving us the old Monahan charm we've come to expect. The best performance from the second show, however, was Jenna Ross as Brown. Personally, I think she would have been the best cast for the second doctor, but as it stands, her casting works well; she embodied each character to perfection, especially as Red.

On the main page, I plan to write the Why Crafting A Killer Works When Trap Doesn't, and then a Keaton Awards article, and that'll be it for the year. I'm still doing some weird stuff in the Weird Articles section, so feel free to check that out if you're bored.

And until next time: Alright, did everybody learn a valuable lesson about experience each other's hardships? Yep? Body swap!

Rock of Ages Review

April 4, 2023

Man, Myah Dobbins can really sing. More of her, please and thank you.

Before we begin, a quick lesson in theater edicate. Please do not blurt things out so that the entire theater can hear them during the show. If you absolutely must blurt something out, do it in between scenes when people are clapping anyway, and even then I would err on the side of caution. It ruins the show for the rest of the audience, the cast, and most importantly the extremely handsome Junior sitting in front of you who just wants to enjoy the show. Also, stay off your phone. Theater is a very sacred experience, and when you disrupt that, you awaken the ghost of Paige Pritchard. You know, the theater kid who vanished a few years ago during the last production of And Then There Were None. It is said that the Curtain Phantom will haunt anyone who disrupts a theater performance at BVHS. And you don't want to met with the Specter of the Stage.

Anyway, now that we've covered that, let's jump into the review. Rock of Ages was the theater department's weakest show this year. I wasn't really drawn into the show until the end of the first act, and the music felt kind of awkward for a lot of the first act. I'm a theater critic, not a music critic, but some of those early songs felt kind of out of tune. Thankfully, the music got much better starting with We're Not Gonna Take It (again, Myah Dobbins can sing). Still, the show tried to be a parody of 80s jukebox musicals while not actually doing much new with it. Sure, the show subverted convention by having its characters walk out with a different dream than the one with which they entered, but this didn't feel like a suitable enough parody to justify the meta humor. Breaking the fourth wall can work, but this show took it too far, which ended up clashing with its more serious elements. And the references to Yarnell and Dollins and Fifth Wall felt a little bit forced. This is the closest thing we've gotten to an absurdist comedy, which is a shame given the succeess of the fairy tale parodies of last year.

Still, as usually, good acting carried the show. Baylee Countryman and Ben Samuelson were good leads, Samuelson was solid as always. I was excited when they finally gave Grant Kozisek a few lines to sing, seeing as how good he was with "Playing the Game" in Mary Poppins. Oh, yeah, and Ava Gartelos also did very well. And Jordan Shah was kind of a surprise hit, capturing the stage very well during his appearances.

Alright, let's get to the heavy hitters. Before the show, Hayden Hughes was a popular pick for Best Performance. I agree that his performance was pretty epic, even if he doesn't quite get the title. He can play funny, he can play sentimental, and he can dance. Honestly, the full range of Hayden's acting ability is something that we haven't really seen yet, and frankly, I think that's a shame.

Cannon Simpson was another candidate for best performance, especially during the first act. He's a good actor his role in this was hilarious, and he came very close to getting the prize. That said, there may just be one performance that topped his.

Okay, yeah, surprise suprise, Best Performance goes to Dylan Casey. Dylan made the parody and fourth wall breaks significantly more tolerable. He captured the audience and lit up the stage. I don't know what else to say, except that he's got a lot of talent. Congrats, Dylan, you earned it.

As you all know, I usually put out my final ranking article at the end of the year, between the final show (which approaches quickly) and the Keaton Awards. I jokingly compared that article to the Golden Globes in relation to the Keaton's Oscars. Anyway, I need a name for my awards, and I can't think of one yet. What I can say is that I'm considering the following awards for my 2023 line-up:

Best Performance (per show)

Best Performance For Best Show

Best FNL Writer

Ashton Barlow Award For Most Tragically Passed-Up

The Flavian Doucet Vampire Award

Excellence in Villainy

The Fredrick Boasson Award For Crew & Stage Management

Let me know if you have any suggestions for additional awards I can hand out, and if you have a name for my own award article.

And until next time, I'm not asexual, I'm just British.

Fifth Wall: Harry Potter Review

March 27, 2023

Well, they certainly shook things up. This new edition of Fifth Wall saw a new game (for this troupe at least), a surprising shift where Grant Kozisek wasn't in the center of Pan Left Pan Right (Grant's great but he's always in the center), and a few noticeably missing crew members. The long break between the last show and this one led to the night being a refreshing way to kick off Prom weekend. Nick Hays's absence led to me actually missing his consistently bad guesses in Late for Work. The new game where one performer acted as the hands of another performer was fun, though not especially so. Forgetful Fairy Tale is again a welcome addition to the roster, one that showcases the talent of the MC (in this case Sammy). My apologies for WorstBuy, by the way, my mind went blank. But hey, it was fun to watch the performers fail to guess a nonexistent store. Anyway, this show was fresher and more original than most of its predecessors, but not especially noteworthy. Sorry, but this review is a bit short.

So until next time, remember, don't forget your jacket during trips to the far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far North.

Midsummer Night's Dream Review

February 22, 2023

A Midsummer Night's dream is fun, light, and breezy, a show that doesn't overstay its welcome and gets in quite a few laughs, in spite of it being performed, rather ironically, in the middle of the winter. It's hard to dislike; the dialogue is surprisingly smooth for a Shakespeare play, and when the clever witticisms of the 16th century can't carry the laughs, the physical comedy has you rolling in your seat. The over-the-top acting and direction were able to effectively compensate for the, well, Shakespearean dialogue, along with stellar delivery.

The show's plot felt simplistic enough but was a jolly good time. The 1920s aesthetic neither significantly contributed nor detracted from the experience; I know they were going for a sort of mob boss aesthetic with Theseus, but it didn't quite land, and generally, it was a little disappointing that the slayer of the minotaur and the queen of the Amazons didn't get more attention in the show. But hey, that's a gripe with a playwright who died four hundred and seven years ago, so I won't linger on it.

The performances were solid; the theater department has a good team this year. All four lovers gave good and entertaining performances, but my personal favorite was Jenna Ross. Having already seen a rehearsal for this show, I honestly went in thinking I'd give her best performance, and while I ended up changing her mind, it felt like the show melted a little when she first came onto the scene. Ross is an actress who can convey deep emotion, a side of her we don't get to see a lot of, what with her getting cast in comedic roles all the time for some reason.

The subplots with the fairies was fun enough; Crawford and Jones gave satisfactory performances as Oberon and Titania, with Jones's ability to command respect and play off of Henry Monahan's Puck being a particularly highlight. On the topic of Puck, Monahan gave one of the night's best performances, and was definitely the right cast for that character, though I would have liked to see him in the green face paint. (We'll see if anyone else gets that reference.) Along with Ross, I considered him for best performance, especially because of how eloquently he delivered the closing monologue.

As for the play subplot, this was some of the best material in the show. Sammy Robertson played Peter Quince very well, and it was fun to see her bounce off of Cy Conaway. Also, the costume design for her character was particularly good; it escapes me who did the costuming, but they deserve plaudits. This show also featured Austin Casey's best performance to date as Snug, who played a fun and energetic lion. Though the final play within a play was a bit anticlimactic after the attention given to that subplot throughout the show's run, I suppose the play being a flop was intentional. And I guess having an intentionally serious play unintentionally turn to comedy is a Trap that's fairly easy to fall into.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, lions and asses, it is time for my choice of best performance: Cy Conaway as Nick Bottom. Yeah, it's the obvious choice, but it's obvious for a reason. This show feels like Conaway's acting chops fully realized, his talent on full display. What might be overacting in another show or another role fits Nick Bottom perfectly.

Another slam dunk for the theater department. Quite the streak they've got going; let's hope Rock of Ages doesn't ruin it. So until next time, remember: polyamory could have solved all of their problems.

On Criticism

February 6, 2023

I like watching theater shows. I like writing. That's why I started this blog. I'm glad when people read them. And on the topic of the blog itself, I feel there's a few things I need to clear up: about my process, my opinions, etc.

It is perfectly okay to disagree with my reviews. Opinions are subjective, including mine. You're welcome to share your opinion with me, refute my arguments, and the like, but to get angry at me for a bad take is pointless. If you are in theater, I may at one point criticize a performance of yours. If you want to share your own opinions, via word of mouth or even a blog, that's perfectly fine. It costs a single dollar a month to maintain the dailycampfire.org domain through Google Domains, and the only other bar to entry is the ability to frequently attend theater shows and articulately voice an opinion on these shows. And if there are any Sophomores or Freshman with an interest in doing my job, I am always looking for a successor.

I derive my opinions based upon my enjoyment. A show must be, first and foremost, entertaining in order for its deeper themes to hit. Entertainment can be derived from humor, suspense, action, drama, fear, or many other sources. If a drama doesn't intrigue me, then its deeper themes of poverty and change are lost. If a comedy's humor doesn't land, then its unique premise is lost.

It is no secret that I tend to enjoy musicals and comedies more than horror and especially drama. This is a personal preference, and I try to view shows as objectively as possible and engage with the art. But I am biased, and that is hard to avoid.

I try to see shows more than once if I can, and those with multiple performances can grow on me as I notice details I didn't prior. Shows with high levels of audience participation are often more memorable, for better or worse.

I sometimes lend my unique voice to various articles. I try to keep jokes and personal anecdotes to a minimum, but occasionally I include one or two, especially inside jokes. This is more common when reviewing shows with high levels of audience participation, as my experience with the show will be different from others.

I try to focus on performances in reviews, but I am a writer at heart and often base large swaths of a review on writing and directing. Good acting can elevate material, but it can't always save a badly written show or an intrusive directoral choice. I don't always mention every actor in my review, often leaving out major ones. Often this is due to my forgetfulness; if I leave you out, it doesn't mean your performance was bad or even mediocre.

Every show I choose a best performance. I try to remain objective, avoiding showing favoritism towards friends. This sometimes leads to unfair bias toward or against those I know, depending on how much I offset any personal affinity toward people. Picking a best actor is extremely subjective; I often mention those others I considered. It is most difficult for the main musical and mainstages; the audition process usually leads to an all-star cast that I have trouble picking amongst. I have a tendency to picks supporting actors in smaller roles for Best Performance. This is partly due to a desire to bring smaller roles to the forefront and partly because a minor character who leaves a strong impression is often the result of good acting, and an easy way to distinguish acting from writing.

I don't often mention crew. Crew is a very important set of jobs in a show that deserves more respect and attention, but more often than not a talented crew is an invisible crew.

I rank the shows I see. This list is hard to assemble. Just because a show is near the bottom of the list doesn't mean that the show in question is necessarily bad; it just says that I thought the other shows are better. Last year, I actively wished I could see half the shows that were performed. This year there has not been a single show that I don't actively wish I could see again.

I don't rank improv shows. With no story structure, it is often hard to distinguish to improv shows from each other in my memory. Also, I do review these, but I can only do so within a few days of the performance while still being able to remember the memorable moments of the show. I love improv shows, but they're a whole different ball game to the rest of the theater department. I do, however, rank the fall musical, because it is a theatrical performance that anyone can audition for, even if it is technically part of the choir department.

I show up to every show that I possibly can for at least one performance, but sometimes this is not possible. In one instance in which this was not possible, I showed up to a dress rehearsal instead. While I was able to ignore the rough edges of the production, I negatively reviewed part of the show that was very positively received during the main performance. I reviewed what I saw, and I didn't particularly care for what I saw; perhaps I would have prefered it in the full performance.

I sometimes review choir shows. I don't attend every choir show with the diligence with which I attend theater shows, and I don't always review them. I do not rank the choir shows with the theater shows, and I don't know enough about the technicalities of singing to provide a more comprehensive review than simply whether or not I enjoyed the show.

Sometimes I post articles that are not reviews. I am open to requests for article ideas and have taken a few. The articles that are most relevant to the theater program, I post on the homepage. Those that are irrelevant and usually comedic, I post in my Weird Articles section. I believe enjoyment can be derived from these articles and encourage my readers to take a look at them, but they are usually only tangentially related to theater, if at all.

I have friends in the theater program. My association with the theater program and its members creates an obstacle to subjectivity, but without my friendship with those in the program and my love of theater in general, I doubt I would be motivated to do this.

This blog is intended for criticism and entertainment. Occasionally, I put in some behind-the-scenes trivia or use this information in my assessment. Don't take my reviews too seriously; they are not the final word on any show or performance. I'm not an expert in theater. I'm just a guy who loves watching the theater and writing. People seem to enjoy reading my articles; sometimes they disagree with what I have to say, but I am generally grateful for continued readership and support. Nitpicks can be blown out of proportion, and in spite of everything I enjoy most of the shows I watch.

That's how I run my blog.

Towards Zero Review

February 3, 2023

This article is, as requested, released closing night so that the theater kids will have some entertainment at their afterparty, especially when the only alternative is talking to theater kids. All in all, the concept of Zero Hour is really interesting. Though I'm getting a little tired of these continuity of reboots, it is interesting to see the Time Trapper in a more heroic role. The villain was a little lackluster, though, and frankly I don't think that...

I've just been informed by the council that the "Zero Hour" referenced in the show does not refer to the negatively received DC Comics story of the same name, and that they want me to review the play. Oh, alright.

The best part of Towards Zero is by far the performances. Grant Kozisek and Jenna Ross did very well on their limited material. Cannon Simpson and Baylee Countryman brought their A-game of course. While I initially didn't see their performances as noteworthy in my first viewing, a change of seating saw a change of mind. In the moment in which Audrey is being arrested, she falls to her knees and begins to sob, while Thomas tries to comfort her. It is the moment that felt most real and raw, conveying emotion like I have seen only a few times before onstage. Oh wait, they were cousins in the original book? Gross.

But, when I first came to the play tonight, I set out to determine which of two candidates would receive best performance. The first of these candidates was Allie Crawford, who stole the show when she showed up onstage. Her over-the-top character is contrasted nicely with Audrey's more reserved demeanor, a nice touch if you ask me. But to talk about my other candidate, we have to talk about the five words that fill me with dread: Yarnell made a directing choice.

Now, he didn't go crazy, but the thing with the green light was unnecessary and disruptive. It grew on me the more I watched, but in the sense that it became less annoying rather than actually enjoyable. It felt like Yarnell was walking onto stage and shouting, "And now, we will see the character's darker half! Mwahahaha!" Technically, it was a cool effect, that would have worked in a science fiction show, but not a murder mystery. The writing spoke for itself; if it was really a necessity, a slight change in lighting and acting without the gravitas would have done just fine.

In his director's note, Yarnell described this as an "acting challenge". I'd add to that that it was an "audience enjoyment challenge", but it was interesting to see how the actors adapted. Barak Snir, who otherwise gave a good performance for this show, overacted the areas of green light, adopting an exaggerated demeanor while portraying nonsensical facial expressions. The actor that I think adapted to this best was my other candidate for best performance going into closing night: Cy Conaway. Cy's performances in the green alone helped justify it as a plot device. The change was subtle, other than removing his camera: a slight change in posture and demeanor conveyed an immense change. He felt more confident, more menacing, and more layered by the performance he gave.

Like I said before, I went into closing night with my mind set on determining which of two candidates, Cy Conaway and Allie Crawford, would receive Best Performance. And yet, there is one actor who unexpectedly claimed the title: Reagan Hardwood as Mary. She played a character who had relatively little depth but conveyed so much more. Though her presence wasn't demanding of attention, she was still able to hint at layers of complexity beneath this character, convincing the audience that she had killed Lady Tressilian. In the script, she didn't really have much more motive than anyone else, and yet most found her the prime suspect right up until the reveal. So yeah, there you go, Reagan Hartwood is Best Performance, and I can finally go to sleep.

And until next time, remember, if the glove don't fit, you must acquit.

Fifth Wall: Your Mother Was a Lizard

January 28, 2023

What a way to kick off the school year. Whelp, they've done it again, showing off the currently very stacked Fifth Wall cast. This show had a lot of great moments, and it'd be hard to review all of them.

The repetitiveness of previous show was curbed here, with a new game and new ideas. They mixed up the cast, bringing new people to the forefront. Sure, they could've used some more Beck here and Snir there, but we've seen plenty from these actors in the past. Beastie Rap was a wise choice for an opening, a game that was strong enough to set the tone of the show while not upstaging any of the later games. The new game of Forgetful Storybook worked well, especially with the absence of the ever-entertaining Survivor. It's no secret that I'm not a huge fan of the game where you have to leave a specific letter out, and that game was mercifully missing from this show.

Jenna Ross, in her limited stage time, reminds us why she's on the team and leaves us wanting more. Grant "Pan Center" Kozisek is well-cast as the boss in "Late to Work", and I will never stop calling him that during these reviews until it sticks or no longer applies. Grant's great, but they always shove him into the center of that particular sketch, and the variety begins to fade once you've hit the double digits with these shows.

It's easy to wonder why they keep making Nick late for work when he's so bad at the game, especially the normal parts of the game. I, on the other hand, believes that that only adds to the entertainment value of the game, even if it also makes the game extend itself exceedingly.

Oh, and Sammy Robertson's glorious return as host was greatly appreciated, as every show sees her come back better than the last. While she shined in the Forgetful Fairy Tale Game, her performance, along with Bennett's, really spiced up the show.

Overall, this improv show is a glorious return for the theater department in 2023, showing off some of their better performers, including the weird stuffed fake human they had onstage and in the front row.

So, until next time, remember, I don't love her, she kicked me in the face!

A Very Fifth Wall Christmas Review

Dashing through the snow on a one horse open sleigh, thank our local improv group for another show today. The show featured several good performances this time, and despite the nature of the season this whole review won't rhyme. Sorry all my friends, I know it would be fun, but I've done a full paragraph and quite frankly I'm done.

Anyway, if there's one thing that this show did well, it was give every actor a chance to shine. Cannon Simpson and Grant "Pan Center" Kozisek are in charge for a reason, and Pan Left Pan Right is Grant's game, but there are some others that stood out. Though he's generally good, Ben Samuelson's improv skills were on display more in this show than I've seen in previous Fifth Wall shows. Though Barak Snir was a key player in last year's shows, this year we haven't seen a whole lot of him, so it's good that he had more to do in this improv show. Cy Conaway continues to prove himself an invaluable new addition to the cast, and Owen Unrein is just a little better every time. I'd never noticed before, but both Reagan Harwood and Jenna Ross are fantastic actors, with Reagan being able to switch rapidly between emotions and Jenna Ross playing Depression uncomfortably well.

But this is a critical blog; one thing that made this show unique was its smaller audience and cosier, more laid back feeling as a result, but this seems somewhat connected with the show's greatest detriment: its repetitiveness. At this stage in the game, I know what to expect from many of the actors. From Owen Unrein, you'll get an animal, an invasion of personal space, an innuendo here and there, or half of a comedic duo. Though I haven't seen much of Reagan Harwood, her characters during the performance were generally the lovable, insecure characters that were easily disappointed. Grant Kozisek has a bit of variety but seems intent on playing my maternal grandmother, a thin, cigarette-smoking, sassy old woman. And poor Cy Conaway got stuck playing the same character as last show but seemed to attempt to play her a little different.

Still, these actors gave their all. How do you spice it up? Well, with Unrein, I think his use in comedic duos could be made more interesting by giving him someone different to bounce off of. Sure, he and Henry bounce off of each other well, but pairing him with other actors could be a way to generate new and interesting dynamics. Grant can play pretty much any character, so cycling in some newer ideas would be a great way to keep one of your best actors viable. I admit that I haven't seen enough of Reagan Harwood to really have a grasp of her range, but it'd be interesting to see her in different types of roles. As for Cy Connaway, well, you never know what to expect from him, but he got stuck with a bad lot in terms of having to do Catwoman again, but perhaps basing the performance off of a different iteration of the character might have freshened things up; you could see him drawing from different elements of the character to try to throw in something unique during the show.

Sammy Robertson's presence was missed, though the penguin did a good job of filling in. The show brought to the forefront some of the best games while leaving behind some of the weaker games. Overall, this show did a good job of showcasing the entirety of its amazing cast. If this show is an indication of things to come for the remaining improv shows, then it's a good sign. Just please, please, please put up a poster next time, word of mouth only gets you so far.

Anyway, until next time, there were fifty-seven lights on that Christmas tree. I did count.

Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind Review

December 3, 2022

"You regret the things you don't do more than the things you do" — Some idiot who never agreed to crowd surf over a bunch of theater kids for a trading card

Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind was the latest 5th hour theater show at Blue Valley High School. The show justified its admittedly confusing name and offered a fully worthwhile experience to any theater-goer. It's hard to review a show like this with so many different sketches, but there are quite a few standouts. "How to War" was hilarious, hard-hitting, and upsetting to the freshman I was sitting next to. Sorry, Bailey. "Blind Date" was a blast, "A Fissure in the Fabric of Time" felt kind of cheat for more time, and Deja Vu was aided by some great improvisation skills on the part of its actors. "Manifest Destiny" was aided by the showmanship of a great host, even when his final volunteer left a lot to be desired.

The critic play was amusing, though no self-respecting critic would say that Barak Snir was the worst part of any performance. I mean, I hear his trading card is worth a lot. Speaking of which, the show highlighted some talent we hadn't seen much of previously; Jordan Shah, Myah Dobbins, and Myca Beck come to mind. Of course, we all knew Barak Snir could act. Ben Samuelson is a source of reliable talent. 

Before I get to my Best Performance pick, let's talk about adaptation. After reading a bit of the original script, I realized a couple of things. First of all, originally the script to "Every Time a Bell Rings, An Angel Gets to Salivate" included the line: "Ladies and Gentlemen, President Sarah Palin. However, the end of the script includes this delightfully insulting addendum: "Note:... If the idea of Sarah Palin as President does not remain horrifying in the future, another hideous option can be used."

But in all seriousness, the original play includes a thoroughly pretentious sentiment about his plays encompassing a wide array of genres and should not be considered sketches or skits, but I think that the show works better by shaving the show down to a mostly comedic experience. Also, only in this theater program would the plot point of the cast ordering a pizza live during the show be considered repetitive. Also, they made suitably appropriate challenges to the script when it came to "Manifest Destiny". Because the ones they removed would have involved the participants a) violating the school dress code, which is second only to treason, or b) kissing the performer. I don't know about you, but that's not exactly how I expected my first kiss to go. I mean, a theater trading card is worth significantly more than a dollar, but when all is said and done, I got off easily. Anyway, they handled the adaptations very well and made this play their own. Maybe I'll review all of the major changes later in a Weird Article, but for now, it's worth noting that the high school performance got its humor more off of absurdity and second-hand (or occasionally first-hand) embarrassment than the political allusions, crude humor, and cynical humiliation of the original, leading to a more positive and fun night for everyone. Still, there are some remnants of the raunchiness of the original play, like in Cyrano.

Now, I promised you a best performer, and really, it's as plain to me as that red dot on Japan's flag: Jackson Liekhus. He brought a certain amount of charisma (as well as strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, and comeliness) to the stage every time. Call it Stockholm syndrome, but Liekhus was the highlight of the show, and wins the spot.

Anyway, until next time, freshmen suck.

Mary Poppins Review

November 12, 2022

I know, I know, this review could've come out sooner, and I'm getting better at my weird random articles than actual theatrical criticism. But hey, let's do this.

I love the movie Mary Poppins, but this musical is less of an adaptation of the movie and more a story set in the Mary Poppins universe, like Mary Poppins Returns. Everyone brought their A-Game to this performance, and it was great, although I don't think it was quite the experience of Anastasia last year. Anyway, let's see what's Poppin', and talk about some particularly effective performances and contributions.

Throughout the show, the set design and music elevated everything to a higher level. Whoever did the sets did an excellent job. Additionally, the pit orchestra was on point both nights with excellent music to accompany the show.

Grant Kozisek played Neleus well enough and was utterly terrifying as Valentine. Throughout the years, Grant has had some truly stand-out performances, and while I don't think this one was anything exceptional for Kozisek, he still brought the charm and pizzaz to the role that he always does.

Von Hussler's portrayal by Barak Snir is, like most other portrayals by Snir, is masterful. While the whole cast talked and sung in British accents, it is worth noting that Snir not only played his character with a German accent but actually sung in the accent throughout the show. Okay, it might not seem significant, but it shows a dedication to the character even when it doesn't seem significant.

It's never easy to deny Trevor Lewis Best Performance, even if his character is nothing but a one-scene wonder. His character, Northwood, is played really well, really sincerely, by an immensely talented actor. I wish we could get Lewis in more shows, because the guy's an amazing actor.

I'm not sure my opinion of Maddie Kile's Miss Andrew. I know that the shrieky manner in which Kile played Andrew was intentional and similar to her prior portrayals, but it became a bit excessive during the performance, and a villain who should have come across as menacing and sinister felt more whiny than anything else. Maddie's ability to sing is not the issue; I think that this aspect of the show came in the execution of Miss Andrew's affected vocal mannerisms, a flaw which could have come from acting or direction. I call what I see, and I usually love villain songs.

Ailiah Ford played Jane Banks exquisitely, adding a lot to the show and living up to Karen Dotrice's portrayal in the film suitably. The kid's got a future, and, by the look of her short description, a pretty robust acting past.

Now we're starting to get to actors I seriously considered for Best Performance. The first was Brynn Friesen's Mary Poppins herself, who gave a practically perfect performance. Oh, and she's a good singer. And she remained dignified the whole time. Yeah, this was a good performance.

And then there's Ben Samuelson, whose performance as George Banks is entirely exceptional. Ben just works for the role and is able to play an angry, sincere, or jovial role when the situation calls for each.

Then, we get to someone who played the subtleties of the part down to the smallest detail: Baylee Countryman with her stellar performance as Winifred Banks, whose characterization is radically different in the play. This actually suits Countryman; while the other actors are living in the shadows of the actors who played the characters in the movie, Countryman is free to play this take on the character without the nostalgic performance to live up too.

Alright, you guys want my best performance, and I'll give it to you: Nolan Stewart's Michael Banks. Stewart is thoroughly entertaining, able to steal the show in every scene with a personality that makes his character instantly likable, even if you could see how some could get annoyed by him, which is, of course, part of the portrayal. Stewart steals the show in every scene, and he gave the best performance in the entire show, even if his part is toned down from the movie. It is a great regret of mine that I will likely never been able to see him perform again.

But, I know my readers will skin me alive if I don't at least pick a best high school performance, and for that, I'll have to go to Cannon Simpson. Dick Van Dyke's performance in the movie, of course, leaves massive shoes to fill, but said footwear might just fit a little tight on Simpson, who played a versatile and demanding character to his peak and worked well with the added characterization of the musical. He was the right cast and gave a thoroughly entertaining performance. (Stewart's still getting the title on the ranking)

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to buy some clay. And until next time, try not to think too hard about what that medicine actually is.

Fifth Wall: The Greatest Deal for Students Since Online PE Review

October 30, 2022

Okay, so maybe using the poster advertisements to designate the names of Fifth Wall shows isn't the best idea, but hey, what else am I gonna do? Go by the dates they're performed on? No, no, no, that would be far too uninteresting. Maybe I'm not a superfan and had to sit in the second row with Allie. But you know what, that's fine, because I, David J. Pumpkin, had to be convinced that this Fifth Wall Group was as good as last year's; and it wasn't. It was better.

With that in mind, let's take a look at our best performances. Henry Monahan is always a great talent to have onstage, and Owen Unrein is talented at invading people's personal space, if nothing else. (Not nothing else, he's also good at commanding a room.) Stammy Robertson and Bennett Calvert were great as MCs, with Stammy in particular being able to add to hilarious scenarios while Bennett is talented at facilitating different sketches. It was hilarious to see him want to end the freeze game scene at the end so many times but seeing such success with it that he kept holding it off. Cannon Simpson is, of course, a reliably versatile impravador, while Grant "Pan Center" Kozisek was as entertaining as ever; the reason he didn't steal the show this time was that the rest of the cast was at their peak. Barak Snir was, as always, present.

Anyway, let's talk good new performances. The breakout performances this year have to be Cy Conaway and Colton, umm, sorry, I don't know his last name, someone please tell me. Cy's talent has really shined with various games while Colton came onto the scene guns blazing and always stole the scene. Worth noting is that Nick Hays also brings a fun energy to each game that adds something extra to the show.

Jenna Ross is another talented performer who made the most of an admittedly small part in the show; sometimes that's just how the cookie crumbles.

Maybe I missed someone good, and I am really sorry if I did. Jumbled thoughts and a jumbled mind lead to a jumbled review. Anyway, let's get to the games.

Director's Cut and Oscar moment, despite sharing a premise, led to some good moments. Apparently Neptune is the Blue Valley West of planets? Who knew. Anyway, the random line game seemed fun enough, but it's mostly just a game of pure improv with occasional lines. I don't know who submitted "David J" (probably Andrew or Allie), but I was behind "It wasn't frozen but it was cold". (That line was kind of an inside joke. Essentially, Mr. Reeves asked Yarnell for a quote to require as a line of dialogue in his Broadcast 1's adventure movie project, to which Yarnell offered, "It wasn't on fire, but it was hot". In my project I use the line after being struck by a rolled up newspaper; long story.)

I've said before that the way that game where the actors have to avoid a specific letter kind of goes against the spontaneous spirit of improv. I still stand by it, but the talented actors onstage managed to make the game entertaining regardless. The Late to Work game and Pan Left, Pan Right are also good standbys that always get a laugh.

Also, I was just kidding earlier. Barak Snir was also really good in the show. While his most entertaining character was probably a slot machine, he can bring pretty much any energy to any role and make it seem like the role he was born to play.

Anyway, the show was a blast, and honestly this year's group is, in my personal opinion, superior to last year's group. And until next time, remember: You have won three... hundred... pennies.

Friday Night Live Review

Well, I've seen FNL on a Friday. I've seen it on a Thursday. And now, I've seen it on a Wednesday. This year's singular Friday Night Live was better than last year's, no question about it. There were a lot of good performances indicative of what we'll see this year and who to look out for in the theater program from this point forward, especially in terms of Sophomores and Juniors. (Spoiler alert: Hannah Gold, among others.) Note that what I'm reviewing is the dress rehearsal; while a little janky on the technical side, it kept me laughing. The thing was that this show was more consistently funny than the second FNL last year; while it didn't quite hit the high highs of that show, it certainly had fewer lows. But without further ado, let's rank the various sketches of this year's FNL. And stick around, because at the end, I'll be offering a few sketch suggestions for next year, as well as choosing a best writer. (That is my area of expertise.)

14. Discord Moderator Birthday by Ben Samuelson

Well, something had to come in last. Discord was good in a lot of places; the barking competition was the funniest part; Micah's initial bark was hilarious, and Grant's was able to succeed by invading personal space. Also Sony is a good movie studio and we shouldn't judge it by the Emoji movie. Just saying that. Anyway, I think it was a fun fever dream of a sketch that didn't make a ton of sense, which held it back. The premise was unclear and it was a relatively disappointing way to begin such a great show, even if it did highlight some of the top notch acting we'd be getting later on.

13. Chess in Real Life by Nick Hays

Chess in real life made sense, and parts of it were funny, especially surrounding the bishops; giving them Italian accents was an inspired choice. The nature of the world seems a bit contradictory; how is it a pawn basically acts like it's about to die and another pawn actually marries its king upon promotion when a bishop has other things to do outside of the game? Anyway, I would describe the sketch as dry; it had pacing issues, and while it did get a few laughs, they didn't really get doubled down on. And the ending gag kind of fell flat by dwelling on characters we'd barely seen interact for the entirety of the sketch, which is a shame given who acted them.

12. Coach Stock's Monologue

The highlight of Coach Stock's monologue was the personification of her infamous cart, Dolores. It was hilarious, although the joke got kind of old and the best double down on it was when Dolores said she had minions. Overall, the monologue could have had more variety. Also, I noticed in this section the picture of Cy and Henry; I think I actually might have took that one. You guys will have to let me know.

11. The Clubhouse by Barak Snir

Okay, I loved this one. Grant's Mickey voice was top-notch, and while the inclusion of Kronk and other parts of the show don't make sense, it's still always fun to see the Mouse play evil, especially when it fulfills the promise of a lawsuit made last year during Brother's Grimm Spectaculathon. Fun fact: I actually used a version of the Mouse much like this in my Dungeons & Dragons campaign over the summer, one that had Goofy as an enforcer and who sued the party for copyright violation. Actually, Barak's brother was in that campaign. Hey wait a minute...

(Disclaimer: I find it highly unlikely that Barak Snir drew elements from my D&D campaign based on what he heard from Sagie. The Mouse playing evil is a popular concept not limited to my own works, one that fits with previous sketches Barak has wrote. Also, Sagie joined the campaign after the main Mouse arc and only encountered the Mouse as a member of a villainous organization known as the Six. Speaking of which...)

10. SIX by Grant Kozisek

DANG! When I was reading through this list and saw that SIX was this far down, I could only look through my others and wonder how such a great sketch ranked so low. This show is THAT GOOD. Anyway, I have little in the way of criticism of SIX; it's a fun musical number about six school subjects, and I'm always a sucker for when songs go for really creative rhymes.

9. Weeknight Update

This is really hard for me, because Weeknight Update was kind of the main disappointment of the show. In the previous shows, this section was their highlight, with spot-on comedic timing and jokes. This one kind of felt like it didn't know what is wanted to be; they couldn't tell jokes that were too political, and when they did, it fell flat. They tried to make a few jokes about Dr. Golden, but they didn't really land. So why, might you ask, did this place above the near-perfect SIX and the hilarious Clubhouse? Well, the guests were freaking hilarious, which is unusual because they're usually the least interesting part of the SNL Weekend Update. Go figure. Anyway, the Extra Herrestrial advertisement from the Metaverse was really fun, but you know who really hit it out of the park: Henry Monahan's Dracula bit about Halloween. Every joke this lad told got a laugh, from killing Frosty in a song reminiscent of the Apples Song (ask Sammy) to ruining Christmas in ways the Grinch could only imagine to eating a child who tried to teach him a Fortnite dance. Though it is still disappointing that Joey Compton didn't play Dracula, I honestly think Henry did a lot with the role. However, there is a discrepancy in Breakfast Cereal Lore I need to clear up real quick. In Count Chocula Goes to Hollywood, a record that came with Monster Cereal boxes in 1979, Count Chocula says that "I look just like my great great uncle Drac from Transylvania" DRACULA IS CHOCULA'S GREAT GREAT UNCLE, NOT HIS HALF-BROTHER, HENRY, DO YOUR RESEARCH NEXT TIME!!! Next you'll be telling me that the Geico Gecko's real name is Doug.

8. Villain Vacation by Cannon Simpson

Alright, so this was another good one. Its cast of villains was well-picked, though Barack Snir's version of Pennywise sounded almost exactly like the Christopher Corey Smith version of the Joker. Anyway, riddle me this, Batman: if that was Vecna, why did he have both of his hands? Whatever, I get that it was the Stranger Things Vecna, and that fact saved me from a barrage of Critters (that fandom really scares me...), so I'll drop the point. Jackson Liekhus was well-cast as Thanos, and the scene where he kept gesturing death was hilarious, especially with the time travel jokes. And frankly, the victims of the characters coming back to kill those who wronged them was great (especially when Joker comforts Vecna by rubbing his head), I just wish they'd done something more with the Joker by bringing back someone he'd killed, especially when he was liable to get confused with Pennywise. Maybe Rachel? Or Jason Todd? Or Jared Leto's career?

7. CSI: Sesame Street by Cy Connoway

Okay Cy, I see you and your writing chops. This was honestly a really good sketch; how they incorporated so many Sesame Street characters and even used Rocco was great. You could feel Cookie Monster's stress, and Cy was really intimidating. Also, did I not say that Harrison gives off cop energy? Finally getting to see him as an officer of the law just proves my point. Anyway, the twist that the cops were dirty was great, and Sara Schumacher's getting cast as Oscar the Grouch was... a choice? I don't know if I liked it, she brought an intimidating presence to the role that I didn't think she had in her, but frankly the lack of an Oscar voice kind of weakened the role for her. And some alien is going to get really offended by her face paint one day.

6. Step 234 by Reagan Harwood

Okay, this was just plain fun. Obviously the highlight was Coach Stock dancing, which got big cheers considering her audience of five or so. But the rest of the story was kind of cute to, with a fun callback to Stacy's Mom at the end. Not much to say, just a fun, almost wholesome sketch with Coach Stock dancing and the line that this girl is too classy for the Gritty.

5. Backyardigans Murder Mystery by Madison Brown

Alright, so this was like a more successful version of Discord Moderator Birthday. It was an insane fever dream in the best way possible. Despite not having experience with the Backyardigans, I found them terrifying in all the right ways, to the point where I actually rooted for them to release their hostage. And also Myah Dobbins was really terrifying with that knife.

4. Ding Dong Dating by Grant Kozisek

Man, when Grant nails it, he really nails it. This is the hilarious sketch sees Grant as the (comedic) straight man and Hannah Gold as the wise girl/funny girl/comic relief, reminding us about what's so great about Grant's acting while highlighting Hannah's talent. Sure, I knew she could act from her limited role in Love of Three Oranges, but this sketch really showed off her talent. The concept was hilarious and fairly well explored. What really made this sketch is the ending gag. You know I love a callback, and this one gag kept me laughing until moments before the next sketch; I think it amused my friends how hard I was laughing. Biggest laugh of the night goes to Mr. Kozisek, congratulations, and we're only at number 4.

3. Stacy's Mom by Owen Unrein

This sketch is so dramatic and uncomfortable in the best possible way. Anyway, watching Cy perv out over Coach Stock was the weirdest thing that I didn't know I needed. Sammy's playing the role of the game show host worked really well, and her expressions were top-notch, especially once Stacy entered the picture. Also, Wayne didn't need to be 18, the age of consent in Kansas is 16. Maybe Stacy is right, Wayne is desperate. Hey, Cy must've been method acting!

2. Halloween Bake-Off by Jenna Ross

There's so dang much going on in this sketch, but it is handled do well. The host's daddy issues, Gordon Ramsey's abuses of his contestants, the freaky Da Vinki Twins (who I was unaware of before the performance but were hilarious anyway), John Cinna and his defense of Grandma Lizzie, the abuses Aunt Lizzie suffers, and the hilarity that was Milton. Milton's creepy touching of every character is just great. The only thing that didn't work was Kanye West; his inclusion in the sketch didn't really contribute much, and he could have just as easily been swapped out for pretty much anyone else. I really liked this one from the start, and frankly, Jenna did a great job with this. That said, one sketch is able to beat it.

1. Morbius by Henry Monahan

IT'S MORBIN' TIME, BOYS AND GIRLS! Okay, so this show just picked on Sony throughout. (Though they took a few jabs at Disney, too.) They make good stuff that isn't Spiderverse, go watch The Mitchells vs. the Machines. Anyway, the idea of a date with a vampire was always going to be great, but when combined with the meme that is Morbius, it is simply amazing. But the genius that was this sketch still couldn't leave it at that. No, the easy thing to do would have been to make Barb the reasonable one, the reactionary normal person. But Henry did something better here; he made her be into it, using the other couple as reactionaries (who admittedly get in a couple of good lines themselves). In this way, we're weirded out by Morbius's behavior, but it never quite comes across as creepy, and it never feels like Barb's in danger; they're just a couple of weird people who are into Morbing. And then at the end when they did Morb, it was hilarious, absolute comedy gold.

Suggestions for Next Year

I said I'd leave you with some of these, so I will. First, Plastic Surgeons: Lego Minifigures have to perform surgery. Next, anything with Insurance mascots. You can do the first scene of Insured with the Geico Gecko poisoning Jake From State Farm, or a commercial where every insurance mascot is trying to help the same guy with insurance, or whatever. Another possibility is Audition where people have to audition for a musical; the first person to try out would be really normal, but the next two would be increasingly demented. Also the director would have a terrible home life he would keep dwelling on. Finally, there's Jeff: No Way Home; Jeff is a guy who, at a party, made out with a toilet and goes to Dr. Strange to make him forget, as per the plot of Spider-Man: No Way Home. But when alternate universe versions of Jeff's demanding father, ex-girlfriend, and high school bully come through to torment Jeff still, he meets an alternate universe version of himself who is arrogantly successful and whom Jeff hates most of all.

Best Writer

Okay, Cy called it, I've got to go with Henry for this one. As a fellow vampire enjoyer, I give your sketch and Weeknight Update segment the Flavian Doucet seal of approval for vampirism. Continue living your Morbiest life, Henry.

Also sorry to Cy for the insult during the Stacy's Mom section; it was just too good to pass up. You get it. Hopefully. No hard feelings?

Anyway, until next time, remember, the Grouch is always watching.

My Letter to Yarnell

Sent October 16, 2022

Dear Mr. Yarnell,

      The appeal I make to you this evening is one that seems unlikely to see thorough consideration, due not to disregard but to unfeasibility. That said, I feel compelled to make it for two reasons. The first is that I stand not as an agent of self-interest alone but, as I see it at the very least, as a vocalization of popular sentiment. The second is that, however unlikely a cause is, he who does not try is guaranteed failure.

      Due to a harsh change in forecasted weather conditions this Tuesday, the 18th, rehearsal for marching band, previously scheduled for that night, has been moved to that Friday evening, in preparation for the Kansas Bandmasters Association competition at the University of Kansas. This is in direct conflict with the sole Friday Night Live this school year, as you are likely well aware. I would therefore appeal to you to change the date of the performance of this Friday Night Live to another night.

      I understand that this is no small thing, and I also understand that I probably only have a grasp on the smallest fraction of the variables at play in selecting the nights on which performances take place. However, the band practice that night is not an isolated occurrence limiting only some individuals from attendance; rather, it is a final feather to tip the intricately balanced scales in a different direction.

      First, there's the fact that that night will see a football game between Blue Valley High School and Blue Valley West. To place such an event on a night when Blue Valley High would go up against its biggest rival in the district was already going to restrict attendance at the performance. In addition to the necessary absences of the football team, its managers, and the cheerleaders, such a conflict would draw away a large audience from Friday Night Live. And even before the rescheduled band practice, this was the night before the most important marching band competition of the year; now, all students participating in marching band will be unable to witness Friday Night Live.

      Though the following may be of little concern, it is not irrelevant that hosting Friday Night Live during band practice may lead to each activity becoming an obstacle to the other, with the same hallway being frequented by both groups frantically on the night of a performance. While certainly not a reason on its own to reschedule, it is perhaps another entry to the quickly expanding catalog of points to be addressed in any consideration on this matter.

      Finally, I find myself compelled to make a more emotional appeal. To say I enjoy the theater would be a gross understatement. Watching friends up there, telling stories about people, and making me laugh, cry, and fear is the greatest feeling in the world. When I was made aware that fewer shows than last year would be performed this year, it was truly a disappointment, though I understood that there were good reasons for such a decision. Though acting was never my passion, I nonetheless found my place among those involved in the theater I both connected with and respected by starting a blog primarily about the shows this school puts on and the amazing people involved in them. By putting my thoughts on this art form and its execution at this school on public display, both those whose accomplishments I wrote of and I found validation and meaning.

      While I understand that the duties and obligations of my life alone cannot practically serve as cause to disrupt the monumentally important program you have assembled, I have come to the understanding that I am but an example of many others like myself who want to see this show as desperately as I. And so, trusting that my sentiment is not mine alone, I must assert that a show needs an audience. While the families of the performers will doubtlessly be accounted for, their friends who live as they do in the high school world they inhabit will be spoken for only by empty chairs. Is it not in this show, in particular, written by the students themselves, that it is important that their peers are able to attend? For whom else will appreciate the unique sense of humor and mixture of wholly Blue Valley High School ideas that makes Friday Night Live so great?

      Honor your students' accomplishments by allowing them to perform for their peers. If it is at all possible, move the show.

      Sincerely,

      David, J. Edwards

Friday Night Live Dress Rehearsal

October 18, 2022

Well, poo, there goes my streak. Friday Night Live has been scheduled for the same night as a band rehearsal and a football game, meaning virtually no students can come to the ONLY Friday Nigh Live this year. I was halfway considering skipping band to go, but knew Bessetti wouldn't like that, even though people have missed for similar events. Thankfully, theater kids, being the adaptable buggers they are, are allowing band kids (and anyone else who can't make it to the Friday performance) to watch tomorrow's (Wednesday 10/19) dress rehearsal. I plan on going, and a lot of other people are too, so consider this my contribution to getting the word out. It doesn't sound like they'll be charging admission, though I'll bring some cash for admission/donation/bribery just in case. Please go if you can't attend the main performance, support the theater kids by watching this play out. Maybe it'd be better if I helped keep this off the books performance a bit of a better secret because they're not charging admission, but hey, I know Yarnell's not reading this because it's more than 100 words and not a poorly written play script purchased from playscripts.com. Anyway, until next time, remember to install Fjord VPN. I think the promo code was Minoritetsladningsbærerdiffusjonskoeffisientmålingsapparatur. Or maybe it was Vaðlaheiðarvegavinnuverkfærageymsluskúraútidyralyklakippuhringur. I'll think of it. Until then, maybe you should just use Honey to find it for you. Honey is a free browser extension that automatically scans...

Fewer Shows and an Unhappy Critic

August 13, 2022

There is concerning news this year: There will be fewer theater shows than there were last year. There will be only one FNL, no more sophomore shows (those were Trap and Brothers Grimm Spectaculathon last year), only one main stage show (those were Curse of the Starving Class and Love of Three Oranges last year), and an additional show in the form of a Shakespeare play. To say I'm disappointed would be an understatement; I mean, why go to a full-on theater when you can get better seats for only $5 - 8 and get to see a quality of show that's often nearly as good and filled with actors you know? And then to find out that there will be fewer opportunities to see such a performance, and that those few opportunities will likely be made up of shows you won't enjoy as much— it's kind of disheartening.

Let's start with the FNL. Last year's second FNL was superior to the first, probably in some part due to the chance the original cast got to see what did and didn't work from the original. With only one FNL, writing will matter so much more. The team only has one shot to put on an entertaining FNL, after all. So... hopefully it's good. (Come to think of it, the first scene of Insured would make for a decent FNL skit... hint, hint.)

Anyway, we had a great sophomore class last year, and while it'll be fun to see what they accomplish as Juniors, I had high hopes for last year's freshmen to see if they'd shine. Sad.

Now we need to talk about the main stage, and this is the real disappointment. Love of Three Oranges was a ton of fun last year, and it sounds like this main stage is going to be a drama this year. If it has to be a drama, why can't it be an optimistic one with a little bit of comedy to move it along? I mean, a drama can have one or two funny moments for levity. Or better yet, do an epic. They haven't done epics in this school often (unless you count Anastasia), but epic stories can be a lot of fun.

And then there's the addition of the Shakespeare play. I mean, you can't win with Shakespeare plays in the modern day if they're performing them as faithfully as it sounds like they are. Assuming the acting and directing are top notch, there's no two ways about it: Shakespeare plays are written in a way that is hard for modern audiences to understand. If it's a tragedy, don't get too attached to the characters; my guess is it'd be either Romeo & Juliet, The Tragedy of Hamlet, or the Scottish play. The comedies are filled with more drag than Brothers Grimm Spectaculathon, which could result in overuse of the gag. While I hope we end up with a comedy, Shakespeare's tragedies are simply more well-known.

Oh, and there will be a Rep musical, and I hope it's good; Godspell wasn't fantastic, but it was enjoyable. That hasn't changed.

That leaves two remaining plays; if I had to guess, one will be a comedy and one a horror, though it's anyone's guess what sort of plays they would will be. Anyway, I'm not too worried about these; Dracula and Frannie Minkman's Exquisite Bat Mitzvah were really good.

One last thing before we go: make sure you leave a light on in the theater before you go. What you may know is that the ghost light is a tradition in the theater to ward off the ghosts that haunt various famous theaters; what you may not know is that Blue Valley High School has its own theatrical ghost. You see, the play, And Then There Were None (whose alternate titles you must never look up), ends with the final victim, Vera Claythorne, being hung. What you may not know is that when our school performed the play in 2017, the actress who played Vera, Paige Pritchard, disappeared after her hanging scene on the last night of the performance, never to be seen again. Well, except by those who are the last to leave the theater on show nights. So make sure to keep a light on in Blue Valley High theater, lest poor Miss Pritchard's ghost pay you a visit.

Fan Casting Insured Using Juniors in Theater

July 20, 2022

For a bit I considered putting this article in the secret weird articles section of this blog, but I realized that that was mainly for articles I thought were interesting but not worth putting on the homepage. Still, I though that the nature of this article warranted it being placed on the homepage. The plan is simple: fan cast my short crime thriller parody Insured, using Juniors in theater. This will be a mostly male cast. This ain't my fault, I'm dealing with an all-male crew of mascots, and nobody knows who Erin Esurance is anyway.

For those who don't know, Insured is a public domain parody of insurance commercials and mascots I wrote as a crime thriller that is available on this blog. In order of their appearances, I will be fan casting each character in this play. Here's the basic premise: after the legendary Name Your Price Tool is stolen from the Progressive vaults, every insurance mascot is after its power, and they will stop at nothing to get it.

The first character we meet is Jake From State Farm. He dies in the first scene but gets in a few jokes in that time. I'd cast Grant Kozisek, because I think he could exaggerate the hilarity of the role and steal the show, making use of the scene he gets onstage.

Also in the first scene is the Geico Gecko, the secondary antagonist of the play. For this role, I'd cast Henry Monahan Although his British accent doesn't really like the Gecko, I think he could pull it off. A sinister Geico Gecko always amused me, and I think if you have him in a lizard mask, he could make the man-sized Gecko convincing onstage.

The next scene has us meet the Detectives, our secondary protagonists. Detective 1 is older, more experienced, more serious. I'd choose Harrison Jones for this; he gives off serious cop vibes. The younger Detective 2 would be cast as Sammy Robertson; I think she could convey the various sides to the rookie comic relief/dirty cop/undercover cop only pretending to be a dirty cop.

The progressive representatives, Jaime and Flo and potentially others, pop up in this scene too, but their faces are mutilated. You could use any cast or even crew member for these roles, or even just dummies, because they're dead from the moment we meet them.

That brings us to Doug from Liberty Mutual, our primary protagonist, a part I'd give to Owen Unrien. Give him a fake mustache and he'll play the protagonist part to satisfaction. Not much to say about the role, other than don't mess with his emu.

The fourth scene introduces two new characters. The first is our primary antagonist, Mayhem from Allstate. This was the role I first considered Owen for, but I think that the role requires a chaotic energy that can only be obtained by one actor available to us: Cy Conaway. This man needs to play a suit-wearing Chaotic Evil villain more than anything else, and I think though he bares little resemblance Dean Winters, this may just be the role he was born to play.

Additionally, we hear the General's voice in this scene, though he only actually appears in scene 6. Andrew Sharber would be good for the role; I think he could pull off a gravelly voice and a small degree of resemblance to the General.

Also in this scene is Professor Burke. He's the guy from J.K. Simmons always plays in the Farmers commercials who always says "We know a thing or two because we've seen a things or two." Burke is a benevolent mentor figure in the show, and I'd give his relatively dramatic role to Jackson Liekhus. Sure, Liekhus doesn't look a thing like Simmons, but I think his acting makes him the best man for the job. You'd have to go full on with the costume and bald cap to make it really clear who this character is.

The only new character in the fifth scene is the Aflac duck, who is seen as a stuffed animal and voiced from offstage. Just give this to the actor who can do the "Aflac" sound the best.

None of the other three scenes have new characters, so that's it, that's my cast. I thought my readership might enjoy this article, mainly because I referenced about a third of them here.

What I Want to See From the 2022 - 2023 Season

July 18, 2022

Well, a new theater season fast approaches at our Blue Valley High School, which means its time to clear the homepage for a new set of reviews. Don't worry, though! I've added an Archive tab where you can find the 2021 - 2022 articles. This was mainly to clear the table of contents. Anyway, before we get into the season, here's what I want to see from this theater season, assuming it follows the typical trends of the previous year.

The Musical

The musical is a bit unique as it takes choir kids instead of theater kids. We have a lot of good choir talent left even after losing a pretty strong senior cast. That said, first we need our musical. Looking back, Dollins tends to pick musicals that tend to be more dramatic than comedic and typically aren't movie adaptations. Since 2016's Anything Goes, the average time between a musical hitting Broadway and being performed at our school was— holy smokes— 48 years! Excuse me while I dispose of any hope of seeing Barack Snir and Trevor Lewis play Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom respectively. So that means we're looking for a musical from 1975... as it turns out, there was a pretty major development on the musical scene that year: Chicago. Also The Wiz, but I don't see our school pulling that off. Anyway, I'm not going to fan cast this, but let's just say that a production of Chicago. Obviously give Trevor Lewis a bigger role, I've said that before. There are obviously some good seniors we have, as well as some rising juniors. I don't have much feedback on the musical; a musical is usually a good time.

The Comedies

Comedies are a time to experiment with the formula. Go for a fourth-wall-breaker like The Love of Three Oranges. Do a small-cast absurdity like Brothers Grimm Spectaculathon. Do... oh wait, those are the only comedies. Unless you count Godspell, which wasn't fantastic. But anyway, let's talk Frannie Minkman. That show was highly experimental but lacked a strong plot. I'd say use it to build on another concept. Like next time, do it but with zombies. (It's called Pierre Freedman's Sweet 16, maybe I can do an article on it sometime). And it's never too late to adapt Insured...

The Horrors

Both Trap and Dracula went for a unique approach and a twist that shook things up in terms of the audience and the stage. Dracula, of course, was great, while Trap was a bit of a laughing stock. Here's why I think this is. First, Dracula was a reliable, tried-and-true story. Sure, a few elements were changed, and it felt like every character wanted to get it on with every other character simultaneously, but mostly, it was the same classic story. Meanwhile, Trap was a relatively unknown play with a kind of weird mythology. I will say that it had one genuinely terrifying moment in a monologue delivered by Jackson Liekhus, which I feel I have to point out. Now, to be frank, the class that performed Trap, as much as I love it, was not as talented as the class that performed Dracula.  I'm sorry Ella, Owen, Jackson, Bennett, Harrison, Sammy, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Grant, Cy, and everybody else, but it's true. (Were Cy and Grant in there? I'm really spacing off, maybe you guys can remind me.) However, you did very well, and you are not the primary reason this production wasn't great. The one most crucial flaw is that the less confined, interactive elements, need to be used sparingly and only in tribute to the plot. The play within a play with Trap? Opens up a plot hole, since the feronics wouldn't need to feed again this time if they already had the last time, and also raises questions about why they'd be dumb enough to spell out their nature and weaknesses before taking their prey. The brides of Dracula in Dracula? Utterly repulsive and terrifying. (But in a good way.) The audience plant in in Trap? Predictable to those of us who read the program all before the show, kind of fake and funny to those who saw it in the program later. It doesn't feel real if you put it in the program. The audience plant in Dracula? A fairly minor plot beat that serves to enhance our terror of the vampires. You see what I mean? Experiment sparingly, and control as many variables as possible. And make everything weird by having your cast play kiss-marry-kill in character during rehearsal.

The Dramas

DO NOT EXPERIMENT WITH THE DRAMAS. Look at me, Yarnell, you immortal bearded egg. Repeat after me. DO. NOT. EXPERIMENT. WITH. THE. DRAMAS. You want to "get creative" with Curse of the Starving Class and build in an asylum angle that never pays off? Don't be surprised when I'm more invested in the 5th season of Young Sheldon. (Great show, by the way. It started as a by-the-numbers origin story, became a family comedy, and then went into an extremely compelling family drama.) Anyway, my advice for a show lineup is 3 comedies, 2 dramas, and 2 horror shows (not to be confused with Curse). Frannie Minkman couldn't really find a category, and I'd have your most abstract show occupy a comedy spot while subbing a more traditional show like Godspell out for a drama where it's most appropriate. Anyway, play the dramas straight, but try to find some with moments of comedy. While Cannon Simpson's character was fun to watch, Curse was generally all depressing with very little levity. Even if it's not comedy, levity is necessary, and in a more tragic story like that, you need to have a bit of levity, especially near the beginning. Tragedies make you feel the way they feel because things are good in the beginning, and for the first half of the play they make you think things might end up alright, getting you invested in the characters before tearing them down.

The Friday Night Lives

Yeah, no offense, but FNL needs some better writing. Here's an article with more from someone more knowledgeable on the topic than I; I recommend reading it if you plan on doing some FNL writing this semester. That's it, the format is tried and tested, make it happen. Good luck!

Conclusion

Last theater season pushed the boundaries of BVHS theater, with a newer musical, more experimental plays, and whatever the heck Frannie Minkman was. It brought back some good lessons to take into the next year of theater at our school. I've given my two cents, which really wouldn't matter all that much if I weren't a halfway decent writer with a blog, time on my hands, and friends in the theater. Actually, I'm perfectly situated in the social landscape of our school to be writing a blog life this. Anyway, we'll see what works and what doesn't this time around. Do me a favor, and be nice to crew this year, they deserve it. I'm excited for what this season brings!