Janus Theatre's "School for Lies" is a witty and sparkling comedy

By Regina Belt Daniels 

What a delicious production! Expertly directed, creatively enacted, and smoothly stage managed, "The School for Lies” by David Ives continues Janus Theatre’s 27th season and is currently running at the Elgin Art Showcase through August 31. 

The talented ensemble of nine reveals the story of sassy widow Celimene who is plagued by a pending trial, three good for nothing shallow suitors (she is avoiding any love connection since her husband died), a gossipy frenemy on a mission to destroy her, a clumsy servant, and Frank, a stranger in black, irresistible, and a misanthrope. Based on Molière’s "The Misanthrope" this production is updated to 1976 Paris in Celimene’s drawing room. And it’s all done in rhyming couplets - a true auditory pleasure that provides much humor.

This cast is witty and cheeky and sparkling, (and not afraid) and maintains a stunning verbal display with Ives’ rhyming couplets for dialogue. It’s a 100-minute tribute to Moliere with themes of love, honesty, social hypocrisy, and romantic intrigue throughout. 

Julie Bayer as Celimene and Aaron Hoge as Frank in 
The School for Lies by David Ives. 

Director Sean Hargadon makes this production irresistible; he has cast well, staged creatively, and as artistic director of Janus Theatre, he continually strives to produce works that are classic and contemporary as also being fun and challenging. Truly a gift to the audience! Hargadon is joined by Tiffany Jasinski – her costumes are so accurate that they receive applause when a character enters. She utilizes the wide lapel suits, colorful shirts, glittery sequin disco dresses, (and prove some of the characters are looser than their morals.) And Choreographer Jennifer Reeves Wilson, with light/set design by Hargadon take me back to my disco days at the Poison Apple. R&B and rock music is also used on a wonderful record player. 

Stage manager Elizabeth Dawson is Hargadon’s right hand, ensuring his show’s vision is realized effectively and efficiently. Throughout the show’s 100 minutes, she keeps it running smoothly and this is definitely not an easy show.

The ensemble of nine is strong and truly not one can be singled out. Each actor has their moment to define their characters, perform some physical activity (by the way all are amazing dancers.) deliver rapid fire dialogue with those couplets and encompass vocal performances that are delightful. Central protagonists Frank played by Aaron Hoge and Celimene played by Julie Bayer (pictured) are outstanding and have an incredible chemistry with each other. Bayer doesn’t make her entrance until a half hour into the show. I believe her when she said she lost her heart when her husband was lost at sea "I wear my widows weed in my heart." Bayer is spunky, intelligent, fearless and strong in her character.

Frank enters with a humorous scene with Philinte who chastises him “there is a man being curious” and Frank pushes him back with “excuse me I’m being furious.“ Hoge plays Frank as a misanthropic despiser of insincerity who falls for Celimene while being the complete outspoken, mysterious, bad boy character. Hoge also has two wonderful scenes with Heidi Swarthout’s kind and sweet cousin Eliante that further the plot and Arsinoe, the villain of the piece. The tall Jennifer Reeves Wilson plays Arsinoe to perfection - “not the sort to gossip." who as Celimene’ s supposed best friend is ready to testify in court that Celimene is a “slut, floozy, tart, whore” - some friend!  

The three suitors are played expertly by Stephen Pickering as the wealthy upstanding lawyer

Clitander, ready to bribe any judge for Celimene; Matt Hellyer as the humorous Acaste, a monied, young, entitled authority, who calls himself “dumb and simple” and the hippie poet Oronte, played by Matt Johnson who steals scenes every time he comes through the curtains. 

Ben Slabik II is Philinte, a mischievous sort who truly is in love with Eliante. He creates all sorts of problems for the characters and Slabik is another sincerely incredible brilliant performer. 

Alexander Wisniewski (besides being an incredible disco dancer), has dual roles as valets Dubois and Basque. He also has an on growing joke with a tray of canapés. 

There is of course a happy ending. Opening night was sold out, but I’m sure the rest of the run will be as well. This was a new one for me –Janus Theatre’s production of “The School for Lies” is both an admirably clever, and fascinating production. It’s all in the timing- so get those tickets!

Tickets $25. Go to Janus Theatre. 

Regina Belt Daniels has been writing reviews for more than 11 years, most recently for the Shaw Local News Network. She has also held board positions for the Raue Center for the Arts, Woodstock Opera House Advisory Commission, Townsquare Players, and RCLPC Theater. She has directed, stage-managed or acted in more than 40 productions.

Film History #8 (The Future)

Moving forward as the world keeps advancing and the pace picks up more, innovation will continue to drive the making and distribution of film even farther.

Where the past was dominated by large studios like large factories, which gave way to independent-minded directors, and later, small independent films, the change from film stock to digital video makes it possible for anyone to make films nowadays.

 The Old

The New 

This democratization of filmmaking creates an environment where more is possible with less money. This creates more players in the arena. And with more online platforms to watch movies, it makes it more possible to reach an audience – even a small one.

In some ways, this can create a whole series of niche markets, where you don’t need a large audience, just enough to support what you’re doing.

While slow storytelling techniques are interesting and revealing, like in Les Rendez-vous d'Anna, a remarkable film that touches on some real human issues through the deliberate, plotless actions of one person as she navigates her life, the mass of viewers have been systematically trained over many years for quick cuts, surface level stories and slick visuals. That’s not to say, slow stories don’t have a following. They do. It is not of the blockbuster variety, but that’s okay in this modern filmmaking environment. So, there is one form that is working and ongoing within the world today Slow cinema - Wikipedia.

And innovation will lead to socially relevant films or even action films that contain elements relevant to our times, like The First Purge, which has a strong warning for our gun and media obsessed culture. It also is a terrifying story about how people will turn on each other with the proper incentives The First Purge - Wikipedia.

Masking itself in the action/horror genre with some generic politics tossed in, the movie hits a lot of the buttons that create visceral excitement for an audience while also making you wonder: Could this really happen? That’s one of the things that can happen when everything is available to be used. No censorship here and we wouldn’t want it, but the outcomes in the movie are scary in a very real sense.

The best way to sum up the changes is that walls have not only come down, but the entire edifice and structure of older filmmaking is going away. This leaves the path wide open to try anything.

And after studying for several weeks many different films and movements, you start to realize that for decades most audiences see is only a small portion of what is possible. Now, experimentation is fluid and rapid in technology and distribution. Also, the desire to please an audience that is well schooled in visual language on screens big and small is paramount. How can this be done? It’s almost like trying to feed a beast with a ferocious appetite.

In 20 years, one could guess most films will be watched at home on giant screens with full sounds systems to rival that of actual theaters. You’ll never need to leave your home. All that will be left to actual brick and mortar buildings will be the largest of screens of all, placing a premium on the movie going experience by offering a high-end experience. In some ways, the ways old theaters were cheap and accessible might go away.

There will be more genre bending franchises and stories will become more and more extreme to keep people watching. Of course, experimental film movements like slow cinema will exist, but again, the mass of people (where most of the money lives) won’t be interested in those kinds of films. The mass of audiences is like addicts who need their fix of quick-cuts, flashy visuals, and stories that say just enough without going deeper.

There also might be a callback to an earlier time, trying to make classic stories in a new way, or trying to replicate old techniques. This could happen where it concerns visual effects. Even with CGI, there is something inherently fake about special effects that calls attention to itself in movies. Perhaps working with more practical effects will come back.

One thing is certain, there will be more and more films available. This will thin the audiences out and the larger companies and brick and mortar buildings will struggle to survive. The content will be around, ready to watch on phones, computers, televisions, and big screens. We’ll be drowning in content. 

###

 

 

 

 

Film History #7 (Low Budget)

When it comes to “low art” films that are not considered masterpieces or even solidly professional products, they can offer something useful for the greater cinematic universe: risk.

When a filmmaker makes something on the “small” side and that word is in quotes because even cheap movies cost a lot of money. But when that happens and a director is operating under the radar instead of a large studio, they can take more chances with the material. Sometimes, many times, they have no choice but to take chances and find creative ways to make and finish a movie because the financing isn’t available.

But working this way with a certain amount of freedom is more liberating than tightly controlled film products with enormous budgets like in the Marvel cinematic universe.

One thing about watching the Alligator (1980) movie is that it shows what’s possible on a smaller scale. Granted, the story, characters, and situations are not unique, but the homegrown quality of the film has its charms, like the alligator itself, which is not seen for most of the film. This is like another much more famous film, Alien.

Vs

 

And when the alligator is seen, it is not a bad representation of the creature. The director is shrewd in how and when and how much to show of the reptile. This is strategic and keeps the viewer interested in what’s going to happen next – not because the effects are amazing, but rather, seeing how the director employs what he must use. There is a bit of a Mystery Science Theater quality to all of this.

The interest in the film is how well everyone can pull it off. It’s not the acting or the writing, so it has to be the creature and how they use it.

This brings us back to risk. It takes risks to do this. Why produce another rip-off of Jaws? Because there might be something in the effort and because it could make some money leading to other projects. According to Wikipedia, Alligator cost $1.7 million to make and took in $6.5 million Alligator (film) - Wikipedia. Not bad for a bad movie.

But here is where the idea of risk comes in. If you’re a prospective director or producer, you have a template that works before you, something you can experiment with and make successful. You can take chance on different material because you know it’s possible and manageable.

When you think about it this way, you begin to realize how foreign an idea it would have been back in the golden age of Hollywood when everything was such a huge production – even the B films. In the world of Alligator, while it’s still professional, it is not the same as those earlier films. It feels and looks like something different.

Another point about these “low art” films is how they get to the point. They bring tension, thrills, even if they are crude. They don’t fiddle around with questions like “Are you happy” in Chronicles of a Summer or present a relationship film like Faces, which is homegrown and low-tech, but also highly pretentious when you think about it. No, a film like Alligator knows what it is and delivers with all its crudeness, bad acting and rubber reptile.

Now, in Crawl (2019), it’s possible to see how far the craft of filmmaking has come since 1980. Still low budget by today’s standards, but one could argue much better executed than Alligator. And yet, another story that is not high art, but basically an action flick in a crawl space with CGI alligators.

The film works, but again, the characters do some implausible things, and the likelihood of survival is nil, but that’s not why we watch. We watch it because the movie is like a rollercoaster ride, and we are getting on for the thrills. Forget about reality, this movie is about fun, to see if they can make it out alive, and it costs much less than a Marvel movie.

But a cheaper film can also have a message like The Conjuring – this one in the horror genre – that tells a supernatural story, but also touches on America’s past with slavery.  

Again, this is where these less expensive films can take risks because there is less money at stake. If they deliver what the audience needs to be entertained, then they can make money, and more films can be made.

That might explain why 28 Days Later – a film about an epidemic – did so well. It was terrifying and also very real as anyone who just lived through the pandemic can attest.

It’s also worth noting that audiences desire results. Historically, making money keeps things going and that means finding ways to interest audiences and keep them coming back. When money is in short supply, one could argue, there is less time to be too cute or clever. You must reach the bottom line and that is entertaining people even if the effects are less than perfect.

A healthy film eco-system depends on big budget films, but also more independent movies as well. One can inform the other. What’s interesting is that a film like Crawl, if it was made in 1980, would be considered high-end entertainment.