The York School Student Blogs

The Classical Theatre Project’s plan was to connect with young audiences and prove that Shakespeare can be fun, accessible, and most importantly inspiring. After attending the play, my peers and I were not very inspired. There were several positives including, lighting and sound however they were outweighed by mediocre acting, directing and outfits.

Firstly, in general the acting was poor. It really stood out how the actor who played Duncan muttered his words. As mentioned, the lighting was very effective and captured the person that should be focused on.  The sound was very realistic, and on time however more often than not, it was hard to hear the actor’s voice behind the sound effects, and the effects were used too frequently.

The set was quite plain and barely changed throughout the course of the play, however there was a latter that after discussing with peers, I was able to come to a conclusion that it was to resemble the entrance to hell or heaven. Unfortunately, this distinction was unclear, and I believe they could have used this intriguing metaphor more effectively.

With the exception of the witches’ outfits, the getups were fairly poor. There was a Question and Answer session following the completion of the production and a member of the crowd asked the actors what inspired their costumes, to which they replied that the director was heavily impacted by the earthquake of Japan and wanted to portray the misery with their outfits. This could have been made into an interesting concept; however the director failed to execute. Some actors were wearing Levi’s jeans that I wear on a regular basis. Ultimately, the outfits failed to portray the sense of misery and the 11^th century.

From reading the play on paper, a part that struck me to be incredibly important in the progression of the plot was Lady Macbeth’s soliloquy in which she says “unsex me”. In this production, I was struck with the importance of this soliloquy. I felt a connection with the actor, and this helped me to further understand the underlying themes of the play.

Although there were a few positives including sound, lighting, and Lady Macbeth’s soliloquy, the production ultimately came short of communicating the main themes of the play effectively and clearly.

Lacrosse is a very interesting game. It was first played by the native people of Canada over dispute of land. The way the game used to work was that different tribes would play a game with each other from their separate villages. Whoever ended up winning the game would win the land as well. It is a game that runs deep within Canada’s culture and most Canadians don’t even realize that it is our national sport. A couple of years ago I went to a lacrosse game for my cousins birthday party. I was amazed at how these people played. The team for Toronto are called the Rock. They are the most ruthless, amazing team in the whole of the NLL (National Lacrosse League). To go along with that they are the only successful team in Toronto. They make the playoffs every year and have one the championship series a couple of times as well. Presently they are in the playoffs hopefully on their way to victory. Many people don’t even know how important lacrosse is to our culture and to the people of the city of Toronto. We finally have a good home professional team and it’s time for people to understand to cheer for this team. Because the NLL is a small league with only a couple of teams it is not very popular for people to watch Lacrosse compared to hockey. That is why people may not know about our great lacrosse team that plays jut around the corner. The tickets are relatively cheap and very entertaining to watch.

For my schools talent show, my friends and I all congregated and decided we wanted to be a part of an epic performance. So we chose to play the song The Final Countdown by the band Europe. The link posted above is the video of us playing at York’s got talent. We only had one practice before we performed the song live in front of the school. My favourite moment of our performance was when at the end how I was able to jump off the stage and do a power slide. It was a lot of fun and we actually came in first place. The top three performers were chosen to play at a concert in order to raise money for Camp  Oochigeas. This was very important because the final concert was at our school competing against two other private schools near us. I had a great time and we were even able to get a hold of confetti cannons. We were the end performance of the concert and after it was over I had the biggest smile on my face and we all hat a ton of fun performing. Not only did we enjoy playing with each other, but at the same time we were raising money for a worthy cause. It was definitely a great experience and I hope you all enjoy the video posted above!

The Classical Theatre Production’s version of Macbeth was exciting at first, but the feel you’d expect from a Shakespeare play was missing. Everything felt a bit confusing and random, and although there were successful parts, the majority of the play lacked believability, and authenticity.

The play began on a very exciting note, as a witch crawled forward on stage with the lights. This scene was supposed to create the “foul and fair” attitude that Shakespeare intended, but like most other scenes in the play, the message was quickly lost. The witches overdid the acting, and crawled around awkwardly on the stage making the audience feel confused, and uncomfortable.

Overall, I felt the play was uncoordinated. Everything was confusing as well as contradicting. For example, the play was supposed to be set in a post tsunami japan, and only one character wore anything resembling this. Other characters were instead dressed in fancy Levi jeans. In addition, some characters were dressed in complete black, with their faces hidden. This oddity only contributed to the audience’s confusion.

A main problem with the play was the lack of actors. There were only 7 actors to put on a complex Shakespeare play, something that just could not be done. Actors were forced to play many different characters, and I found myself constantly wondering which character an actor was trying to be. For example, the actor playing Duncan played the porter soon after Duncan’s death. For the first few minutes of the Porter’s speech, I thought the porter was Duncan’s ghost!

It seemed like the play had been rushed together, and that nothing had been discussed. Over the course of the play, the actor’s boredom began to mirror that of the audiences. When the actors were discussing the play afterward, the fact that an actor was growing his first beard received more applause then the play itself.

On the 18th of April 2012 the grade 9 through 11 drama classes went to see the play ‘War Horse’ at the Princess of Whales theatre. Overall the play was a success with some great scenes showing the futility of the war and others demonstrating the simple relationship between a boy and his horse. Two great scenes that demonstrate this are the scene where the Germans and the British free the horse and the scene where Albert tries to feed the horse.
The scene where the horse is trapped in the barbed wire and the Germans and British try to free him is one that is very important to the story and themes. This scene is primarily one of comedic relief as it shows the Germans and British saying the same things to each other in their respective languages yet they can’t understand each other. While it is funny it serves to remind the audience that the people in the trenches were not very different and that the purpose of the war was beyond their comprehension. The dialogue that they have demonstrates that if we were all to communicate with each other better our problems would be solved much faster. Another great part of the scene is that the troops come out of their trenches (stage left and stage right) and they meet in the middle to solve their problems together in centre stage.
The second important scene is the one where Albert tries to get the horse to eat. This scene is a great way of the play demonstrating the characteristics of the two characters trough devices such as music, blocking and props. The scene has Albert trying to feed the horse and it also shows certain aspects of their relationship such as Albert doing the bird sound and him saying that the horse will never be hurt even though he does.
In conclusion that is why the play was a success it was able to effectively portray its two main themes through a pair of great scenes.

Macbeth by William Shakespeare toys with the themes of desire, guilt and revenge, and includes some of the most famous literary speeches. The Classical Theater project had a very unique “post-tsunami apocalyptic” interpretation of Macbeth, and although there were some high points, there were many low points, and most of this was due to the director’s instruction.

Macbeth is set in the 11th century in Scotland. The first thing that was strange to me were the costumes. I expected the actors and actresses to be dressed according to the time period, in more medieval type-clothing,  however I was fairly surprised when most of the cast came out wearing Japanese-infused costumes, many resembling kimonos. I felt that this took away from the story of Macbeth. The plot of Macbeth is very influenced by the time period surrounding the story, and I felt that the Japanese infused costumes made the production seem less convincing. It was hard to imagine that the actors were in Scotland in the 1600s wearing kimonos.

Another issue, in my opinion, was the set. I don’t feel like the large stage at the Toronto Centre for the Arts was used to its full potential. There was a strange ladder-type thing in the centre of the stage, and a long, rectangular block which was used as a throne, table, bed and much more. I feel like the lack of creativity in props took away from the production, and made it less convincing. However, this is understandable because the Classical Theater Project was switching between Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet every day.

This aside, the act was mostly very confusing. Trhe witches at the beginning were excellent; their portrayal was very creeping, almost psychotic, and they were successful in scaring the majority of the audience. The actress who played Lady Macbeth was fairly persuading, her many speeches were powerful, and the famous “Out dammed spot!” scene was well done, and I was convinced that she was going insane. The actor playing Macbeth was exceptional as well; he was very convincing, and I truly felt his guilt after he murdered Duncan.  However, the actor playing Duncan attempted to be humorous at a few parts, and I don’t think it came across as humorous as he would have liked.

The lighting and sound effects were mostly well done, however some of the sound effects were quite startling, and at times were very repetitive. The lighting was good, however I think that the spotlight was used too frequently. I think the choreography could have been better. Every fight seemed a little bit too staged, and every fight scene seemed very similar.

Overall, it wasn’t a terrible production, however I think that the director should have stuck with the more traditional version of Macbeth, and the costumes should have reflected the time period more, and the set could have been more elaborate. If just a few changes were made, then this production could have easily been more convincing.

Thanks for reading!

Macbeth is often considered an unlucky play, and this performance was no exception. Performed at the North York Centre this play was incredibly boring, and was unable to captivate the audience. The biggest problem was the suspension of belief, I was never enthralled to the point where I wasn’t thinking about the view point of the actors, my home life, or how bored I was. The costumes, supposedly inspired by the Japanese tsunami, looked ridiculous and unabsorbed me; I couldn’t stop thinking about where the characters would find jeans, or sneakers. The lack of uniform clothing also surprised me, for instance the murderers each had different colored leather shoes and the different colors broke my attention because they were otherwise dressed the same, and the colors were very bright. The acting was very bad, and un-character-like, Duncan specifically was badly portrayed. Finally the last problem was that there weren’t enough actors and because of this many were reused often, this was very awkward as you could recognize the people again and made it very confusing, and hard to follow.

The world of music just got better… a lot better. I’ll back up a bit to elaborate on these thoughts. The Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival is an annual three-day event that occurs each year in Indio, California. Genres of all kinds can be identified at the festival: Hip-hop, Jazz, Rap, Rock n Roll, electronic and also various types of art pieces. The event usually happens the third last weekend of April and this year something quite interesting happened. A breakthrough in modern film technology found a motivating approach called “hologram concerts”. Past music phenomenon’s that died in the past have been resurrected by holograms and have dynamically “performed” on stage.

However, easily the most talked event was the concert performed by rap-hero Tupac Shakur. Personally, I have always loved 2Pac because he brought up a style of rapping that no one could ever match. His life growing up was tough and he expressed his feelings through his music, which ultimately revolutionized the art of rap forever. His performance at Coachella was truly sensational and inspiring, if you haven’t seen it go check out the video somewhere, it is amazing. The projected-image performance by Pac has actually sprung ideas of potential billion dollar ideas for many music industries because of how effective this style of music resurrection has already become.

Some other resurrection concerts that people have already gotten excited about include: Biggie “Notorious B.I.G” Smalls, Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley, The Beatles and many others. Some people actually found the performance by Tupac quite scary only because the footage was thought to be a very genuine looking “illusion”. The idea is truly a remarkable one and although some of the artists that have been featured in the plot might not have approved of this, as of now people are loving it and the music world could not be more amped up.

*** WARNING SPOILER ALERT ***
As a class we watched the play: “Romeo and Juliette”. It was a play written by Shakespeare in the 1594 or 1595. The main plot of the play was that “star crossed lovers” fell in love in a tragic story of how familial feuds. With a sad ending, when Romeo commits suicide because of his belief that his one true love, Juliette has died. She then commits suicide as well. This is a very rich play, there is a lot of symbolism and hidden messages though out the text. We watched the movie version of Romeo and Juliette and also we went to watch the play at a theater, we also took a look that the script/ written version. There are many aspects which were different between the three. I think that they play and the script/ written version are quite alike, I think that it would be easier to compare the play and the movie version.

The movie version is set in newer time, it is a modernized version. There were many scenes which were very different than in the text version. The acting was very different as would to be expected. Many of the characters were played differently, Mercrusio is played very differently. He is a more aggressive and is easier angered. Tibalt was also very different, being faster than I expected and being more ruthless. In my opinion the scenes and the props did not work very well with the words, I know that it would be hard to recreate the intended scene.

However, in the play version there were many “important” (in my opinion) scenes which were left out; many of these scenes would have added a lot to the play. One scene which detracted from the play was the end scene, the actor playing Juliette was not very good in the last scene, as she and the actor playing Romeo had not held themselves, causing there to be less dramatic tension.

In my opinion the play was better than the movie, for 1 reason, the mixed message, I found it hard to fathom how such props and language would be used in the same place. The movie was too much of a modernized version, therefore the play was better.

A few days ago, we saw the play adaptation of Romeo and Juliet, as we have recently begun studying the text. At the performance, there were only 8 people performing, so many had to double play roles, but in the end, I believe that this play might be better set for a higher budget, bigger performance for many reasons.

The performance had it’s ups and downs throughout its entirety. One good part about it was the amazing actor who played Paris. He doubled up as Tybalt but was outstanding in either role. In fact, I believe that all of the casting was done amazingly well. Also, in some moments, very few but some, the actors truly captured the life of a teenager and what they would be thinking of or what their opinion would have been, which made you feel like you were a bigger part of the show. However, the casting is about where the goodness in the performance ends. The actors often stumbled upon their lines in some of the most important moments in the play. Juliet stumbled upon lines 3 times, twice in the scene where she is about to take her own life. These problems could have been improved by more practice or by more actors being used, and less lines being handed out to each actor. These would both be solved by having a bigger production. Another issue that was encountered many times throughout the show was doubling up the actors on roles. This became a problem throughout the production in key scenes which involved many characters. One example is after Romeo and Juliet are pronounced dead, Montague and Friar Lawrence are supposed to be together at the same moment, but due to the fact that the same actor is supposed to play both of them, they had to cut out the Friar’s part in this scene. This also could have been solved with a bigger production, more actors, and a larger budget. A third problem with the production was that some of the actors were not convincing enough, in most of the show, obviously not the some that I mentioned before. For example, Romeo and Juliet did not seem like they were truly in love, and when the time for their death came around, many people in the theater were heard snickering, showing how in love they really seemed. This could have also been fixed with a bigger production and a more official stage and cast.

This past Wednesday, my grade and I went to a showing of Romeo and Juliet at the Toronto Centre for the arts. The play was alright, but I feel that a few things could have been improved in it.

Overall, I would say watching the play was a fantastic way to be engrossed in the Shakesperean setting and style. I’ve studied Romeo and Juliet before, and I’d always thought that watching a play was much perferable to reading the book, as it is easier to understand things from the context, and it’s just more fitting for the story. The last time I studied it we did not see a play or anything like that, but we saw a movie. It felt artificial, as it didn’t really show oneself Shakespeare’s joy and passion of writing plays

Let’s begin with the set. The set was pretty simple, and the play would have been more realistic and appealing had it been a nicer set. However, I will give the performance the benefit of the doubt, as they do different plays every day and they have to change sets constantly. One thing that I very much appreciated in the set was the use of walk-in small cabinets, with doors on the side. They weren’t much, but they were used to showcase when a person was entering a new setting, which would be tough otherwise.

The music was easily one of the best parts of the whole play. Rather than having prerecorded music being played, the music was played by the members of the cast. Oftentimes they would be on stage in plain view in the background, playing an acoustic guitar (although after research, I saw that the actual instrument that would be played instead of this was the Cittern. I’m sure it would’ve been hard to acquire, but it would have added a sense of authenticity), flute, clarinet, etc. This made the play all the better, because it kind of made the play more real, more vibrant. I enjoyed the music thoroughly.

The next part of the play is the script, or acting in general. I thought that the script was missing some crucial parts – for example, Juliet says some things before she kills herself, which were not said in the play. I thought the acting could go both ways – some actors, like Mercutio, did their role spot on. Others, like Juliet, could have done a little better (I recall at the end of the play, as Romeo is dying, he takes Juliet’s hand and holds it. The actress, while she was supposed to be “dead”, brings her hand back of its original position and then awakes abruptly a few seconds later. Of course, this is just one example, but there were many like it). Also, another thing that tended to happen was that when the actors had “exited” the scene, they would often just stand around and not go backstage. This often confused me, as I didn’t really know who was involved in the scene.

Overall, I have to say that this interpretation of Romeo and Juliet was sub par. I think that the play was too similar to the original story, and it didn’t bring anything new to the table. “Romeo + Juliet” (1996 movie) for example, completely modernized the play and I think that was a better interpretation. I think that if the director and cast molded something from the play a little differently, it would’ve worked better. The music could have been a good example of changing the play while still maintaining its Shakespearean roots, but there were too many other things that could’ve been improved upon. So alas, right now it is just a basic interpretation of Romeo and Juliet, like it had been done countless times.

On Wednesday my class and I went to go see Romeo and Juliet in a production. It was done by a cast of eight people. They did not have a big set or a lot of props to use. Most of what they wanted you to see and believe was happening in your imagination. It was an interesting performance because what they did during the play was very different from what I have seen before.

The Romeo and Juliet production that I saw had many different interpretations of the real script written by Shakespeare. They were not saying all of the lines that are in the real script which left out a lot of important lines. The production did a lot of things that I think ruined the play. The death of Romeo was not believable and most people actually laughed at his death. The production that they did of Romeo and Juliet was almost a comedy of the play. I think to make the play believable you need the actors to be intense and make the audience engaged with the performance. The actors were playing more than one character which I felt was confusing. Their interpretation of the time period was around the same time which was a good way to make the play more believable. Something that the actors and actresses did after their character left the scene was they stepped out of it. I felt that this was a different way to interpret the play. I think that when the characters leave the scene they should actually walk off the stage and not step out of the scene and stand by and watch the rest of the play continue.

Romeo and Juliet is an incredible play but this production of it was not up to my standards. This was my first time seeing a production of Romeo and Juliet and I am disappointed  in what I got to see. I feel that if you want to put on a production of Romeo and Juliet you need to be believable and convincing to get the audience engaged.

On April 17 2012, my grade 10 class took a day off school and saw a modern adaptation of the famous Shakespeare play “Macbeth” at the Toronto Center  for the Arts. While overall I did enjoy it, nothing was very memorable, and I felt it was a missed opportunity. At the end of the play, the cast confessed that the theme of the play revolved around the recent tsunami in Japan, which I found this to be very confusing. I feel that if the play had a more clear approach, it would have been more interesting to watch.

Many of the actors and actresses were satisfying, but none really brought me into the play. I especially thought that Duncan was underwhelming, and failed to live up to expectations. The character I most enjoyed was Banquo, who I felt said his lines very convincingly. Overall, I felt almost all of the characters were not able to represent or symbolize the theme (which they selected). The lighting was very good, and I particularly liked how the ladder in the center looked blood-red after Macbeth murders Duncan, displaying the theme of natures unrest at the murder. I also enjoyed how the lighting was made during the first scene with the three witches, and appeared like a thunderstorm. I also felt the sound used in the play was appropriate, but used a bit too frequently. The sound affects used during the first witches scene added to the eeriness of the witches. However, at other point in the play I felt they were unneeded. I also felt they could have used the space of the stage more effectively, and there were barely any props.

The play’s theme was very different from the script written by Shakespeare, who’s main theme revolved around the ambition of Macbeth. This was not clear at all during the play, and at points I was confused. I also found it very curious as to if Macbeth’s descent into madness was real or there were actual ghosts. Before the murder of Duncan, Macbeth appears to imagine a dagger in his mind, as there is no dagger seen on stage. However, during the feast scene, the ghost of Banquo actually appears on stage, possibly stating that he was not hallucinating. I also did not think the feud between Lady Macbeth  and Macbeth was convincing. Her famous line of “unsex me here” did not show enough anger to me, and during the time when Macbeth becomes the ambitious one, she did not show enough desire for Macbeth to relax. Overall I still did enjoy the play, as I am very easy to entertain. However, if a person went to this play hoping to see an accurate adaptation, they might leave disapointed.

- THE BLOG FATHER

We went to see a performance of Macbeth at the Toronto Center for the Arts.

It was a good trip for us to better understand Macbeth and to see an interpretation of it.

Their interpretation was that the witches were the last remaining people of a decimated population who were destroyed by the evils of the people, and the witches were trying to be good and warn the people about the evils of ambition.

It was a good educational experience but I found the performance boring. This made it difficult to stay focused at all times. Part of this was due to the play; the Shakespeare writing is difficult to understand.

This was a good educational experience but the actual performance was quite boring, so it was difficult to stay tuned in.

                     After watching the play Macbeth that was presented by York Center I had mixed opinions. I though the play it self was really bad because they cut a lot of characters from the play and not all of the themes of the book was presented in this play. The play was mostly focused on Macbeth, his relationship and sufferings. The interpretation of the play i thought was the worst part of the plays. Shakespeare write all of his play in 16th century in England and there are nothing about Japan in his plays. Most of the props in this play was related to japan. They had Japan weapons, they sit like people in a wold sit, even their clothe were kimono and obi, the way how they fight was also from Japan. That really stood out and caught the eye and it was really annoying.

                        The effects that they apply in this play was pretty good. There are some really good speakers in this studio and they use some good effects but sometimes they just use too much of them. Stabbing the guy with the dagger in his head over 10 times for me is too much. Light effect was awesome especially in the beginning, for a couple moments in the beginning I was thinking that I was watching movie “Ring”.

This rendition of one Shakespeare’s more famous plays was masterfully acted, with adequate portrayals of main characters and themes. One of the main characters, Lady Macbeth, was portrayed rather simply in my opinion, and would have been better portrayed as a more manipulative, strong woman type. In the play, she didn’t have a very complex personality that would have made her role all the more captivating. The use of the same cast members for different roles after the first half was confusing, especially to someone like me who has only read the first half of the book. The use of the actor who played King Duncan as the Porter was confusing. Changing certain lines really helped with the flow of the play, and some lines that were best spoken as thoughts were left out which gave some characters, such as Macbeth, a more mysterious personality. Overall, I believe that this was a great rendition of Macbeth.

The play Romeo and Juliet has been made into numerous movies and plays. Each time there was changes made. In some cases for instance the movie from 1996 with Leonardo DiCaprio is placed in a modern setting. While the play that was North York Center was taken place in the Shakespeare era. One thing that both these versions had in common was their dialogue. They both kept to the same words that Shakespeare wrote. Some lines may have been cut to save time but, both plays were all Shakespeare’s words. It was the same story, the same words but still these two interpretations were very different.

It was a little odd in the movie because it was a modern day setting but they were talking old English. After watching the movie for a bit, I got used to it.  The director used many innovative ideas to keep the text relevant to what was happening in the movie. For example in the movie they use guns instead of swords. On the guns it was written the name of the sword that was used in the original play. This helped because when they were fighting they could still say something about using a dagger and it would still be relevant because their gun would have dagger engraved on it. The acting was good and so was the sound and camera work. Some characters were switched around a little bit so they would fit more into the modern day setting. The prince that took place in the play ended up being a police officer named prince in the movie. All of these changes helped keep the text and scenery in unison.

The play at the North York Centre wasn’t so good. The acting wasn’t at its best and you couldn’t see a real connection between Romeo and Juliet. The audience was full of students and when Romeo died people started laughing. It didn’t help that Juliet’s dress didn’t fit her properly either. The actors acted as if they were in a round theatre on the stage and would pretend to step over something to get out. Then they would be watching on the edges of the stage. I didn’t like this and it made it seem more amateur.  The play wasn’t my favourite interpretion of Romeo and Juliet.

Overall I thought the movie was better then the play. The movie had better acting and was more believable. In time there have been many different interpretations of this play. Each one different then the other. People are still thinking of different ways to interpret this text and there will be many more interpretations in the future. Romeo and Juliet is timeless.

Today my grade and I went to watch Macbeth at the Toronto Centre for the performing arts. Originally written by Shakespeare, this production was put on by the Classical Theatre Project. It was a large theater which allowed the actors to have their voices amplified on the large stage.

This was a unique take on the play, one of the actors said that the director had been inspired by the recent nuclear disaster that had taken place in Japan. This was reflected by the clothing and overall feel to the play. It was set in an almost post-apocalyptic world, highlighted by the witches who were said to be people from the past.The play unusually had a smaller cast, forcing some actors to play more than one roles. My only critique of the play is that at times it was hard to distinguish the difference when an actor had more than one role. What it lacked in budget size, it made up for in the skill of the acting. My personal favourite was the fighting scenes, as they were realistic, passionate and involved impressive acrobatics.

Overall I really enjoyed Macbeth, the actors did a very good job, and the theater had a very nice atmosphere.

One of Shakespeare’s most popular plays, Macbeth, was brought to life in yet another adaptation by The Classical Theatre Project, and this production’s performance really was wreaked with toil and trouble! Macbeth’s tale is very fast paced and involves a lot of action for a Shakespearian play, but with the acting skill, staging of the play and the concept (especially) just about reversed any credibility it had.

A few of the actors did a good job with their parts, specifically Macbeth, which was a plus since he is the lead in the play. But most of the others were not as talented and didn’t deliver their lines well, making the play boring and repetitive. With a few, it was almost impossible to tell that they had switched roles! As well with the staging, the space was not used properly, meaning that either the stage was too empty. Most of the time the actors were clustered in one corner and did not move around much.

The vision which the director had as the play’s concept was interesting in a way but turned out to be a huge flop. Obviously turning Macbeth into a tale in a post-apocalyptic future where the world has been destroyed by a tsunami, and half the survivors wear Levi’s is going to be easily conveyed to the audience. This interpretation was not clear at all to me throughout the entire show, and I only became aware of the fact afterwards when the actors mentioned this. Speaking of the costumes, they were not very well done in the sense that they did not help me understand the concept of this adaptation, and confused as to why some of the actors were wearing kimonos and the others jeans.

The last two problems that I found with this performance were the sound effects used, more specifically the ‘music’, and the set. The music in some scenes stayed on in the background for much too long when silence behind the person talking would have been much more effective. Also the music was very repetitive, and at one point the same beat played for almost 20 minutes which I found was really distracting. The set design was not very clear and did not make effective use of the stage either. There was not much to the design besides the ladder like thing that was only used a couple times, though if used more often probably would have been better since it would have enforced the symbolism of it.

Besides all these changes though to the original idea of Macbeth, the interpretation did leave the text pretty much the same (thankfully!)

Shakespeare’s Macbeth is a play that speaks to the ambition and destruction that is engrained in human nature, and is short and action packed (at least, it is for Shakespeare). But The Classical Theatre Project’s production of Macbeth loses its appeal in the fog and filthy air that the witches speak about, and none too eloquently, in the opening scene.

The main problem with the production was while there wasn’t enough going on, there was also too much. With the concept, language, character dynamics, sound effects, set, and Shakespeare’s language, nothing ever managed to coexist harmoniously.

Let’s start with the production’s post-apocalyptic concept. Macbeth’s ambition wreaks havoc, and it seem to fit in a conflict and genocide filled world. However, director David Galpern’s choice to set the play in a world that has been destroyed by the 2011 Japan tsunami does not fit. The slicked back ponytails, geisha like robes, and “thrones” that consist of cushions to kneel on, felt out of place and gimmicky.

Moving on to all the supposed evil in this play. The three witches, the only characters from Macbeth that I had heard of before reading the play, were reminiscent of zombies suffering from a muscle twitch. Characters that are supposed to be of the earth, it was almost cruel to keep them in such a grey and nature-less world as they screamed out their lines in apparent pain. I thought it was an interesting choice for the witch’s to be slaves to fate in this production, rather than controlling it. It suggested that knowledge of the future is a burden that no one should have to place upon their shoulders, as it led to the death of several at Macbeth’s hand.

And while we’re on the topic of evil, let’s go to Lady Macbeth, one of theatres most well known femme-fatales. Her soliloquy in Act 1, in which she begs the evil spirits to fill her from “the crown to the toe topfull of direst cruelty” was delivered well, but begged for a pause from the constant drum beat in the background. Such a personal and revealing moment deserved silence.

The acting was hit and miss. Some characters, such as Macbeth, Macduff, and Malcom were believable, while others (such as King Duncan), were not. What bothered me most was the dynamic between Macbeth and his wife. When they are first seen together  they were pawing at each other like animals, but the farthest they got was some neck nuzzling. If this was the company’s effort at keeping things G-rated, I’m scared to know what they consider PG-13.

All in all, this productions greatest flaw was that with everything going on, the language, poetry, and significance of the story were lost in the fog and filthy air that can also be called the concept. And much like Macbeth’s vaulting ambition, that’s a pretty fatal flaw.

Today, as an extension of our Macbeth unit, our English class traveled to the Toronto Center of the Arts to see the play performed in the grand theater. Although I am not the biggest fan of the story line of the play,  I found that the play was done extraordinarily well. The witches were definitely the highlight of the play for me, as they truly captured the idea of three creepy abnormal human beings that are on the borderline of being considered a human being. If any of you have seen the grudge, then picture the creepy girl, just with white hair and a white dress.  The actors were really into the play, and you could tell that they were taking their character to the extreme in order to portray their role in the play as effectively as possible. The only thing that I agree should have been improved upon was the stage usage. I think that with the large stage that was provided to them at the Toronto Center for the Arts was not as efficiently used as it could have in many scenes. Often, two characters would be talking to each other in one corner of the stage, when they could have been pacing around the entire area. Overall, I would  give this play a 8.1/10, and would recommend it to everyone.

-Jonah Latsky

Today My grade and I saw Macbeth at the Toronto Center for the Arts. It took place from 10 am to about 12-12:15 pm. To be honest, I was kind of bored. We read most of the book in class so I kind of knew what was going to happen. Because I was sitting on the second floor in the back, it was hard for me to hear what some of the people were saying. Also, there were only like eight actors. Some of them had to switch roles throughout the play. It kind of bothered me because I didn’t know who some of the people were at some points in the play.

I liked how the actors used a lot of expression when they talked though. That really helped them to communicate with the audience. Also, the acting made it easier to understand what was happening in the play. During the book, it is sometimes hard to picture what is happening. I am not always good at reading Shakespeare. His words tend to confuse me a lot. The acting really helped me with that too.

Overall, the play was ok. Some parts were very entertaining while other parts made me want to sleep.

Thanks for reading,

-Max

This is my very first play review, and I must say… I wish I had a better play to do a review of. Chances are I’ll be reviewing Warhorse at some point, but for now, The Toronto Center for the Arts’ production of MacBeth!

I must say, their intention wasn’t clear in the slightest; supposedly it was supposed to be a post-apocalyptic world where medieval thanes and kings fight with machetes and bats? One where they use what they can find? Seems pretty weird to me. They could’ve been more clear with it.

Speaking of more clear, half the time I couldn’t understand what they were saying. They went for a more simple approach with less unnecessarily grandeur in dialogue and props, but without the visual aids it was very difficult to grasp the story. Had I not seen other performances of MacBeth, I would’ve had no clue what was going on.

The positives? MacDuff. Everything that guy did was awesome. He Mr. Acrobatic, dual-wielding machete man with a thirst for revenge after MacBeth has his family put to sword. He also had a beard. He exuded awesomeness from EVERY PORE IN HIS BODY. The only issue I had with him, and the other supporting characters, was that there was little to no focus put on any characters except for MacBeth and Lady MacBeth themselves.

This video is hilarious, it’s a prank gone terribly wrong. The user’s name is MikeDakotaHayden. There are many copies of this around the internet but this is the original.

On Wednesday April 4th A man reported that a suspicious car with no regards to traffic laws was speeding off at high speeds  by two people and driven off. The dispatcher sent out an RCMP high speed squad to chase down the 2006 Dodge Ram pickup truck. the chase led the car through a golf club and breaking down beside a Pacific Rail line. the RCMP contained the area and caught the two people fleeing the broken down pickup truck. The driver was charged with 10 counts of various offense under various criminal acts, he appeared in court on April 5th and will appear again on April 19th. The woman the man was driving with is also facing charges but they have not been released yet.

Source: http://www.canmoreleader.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3530793

Hey Hey Hey,

So, some time ago, my friend sold me a pair of Abec 11 Freeerides. For those who don’t know, they are a pair of longboard wheels. Mine are 72mm and 84a. Also, they are green.

There are several things that I love about them and there are some things that I don’t like. For 1, they are very slidey. They are able to break into a slide faster than other wheels that I have ridden. The reason that I love that so much is when you decide to slide and you aren’t going fast enough, the wheels do the work for you. sometimes you would have to go faster to break the wheels into a slide. With these, less speed is needed. Also, I love the colour of them. They are a lighter green. People can see them when you ride past them. Yes, it sounds kind of stupid but if a car was coming at night, the light colour of your wheels could be a life saver. Usually, this isn’t really the case though.

The one thing that I do not like about these wheels is that sometimes, they can get a little too slidey. When going fast down a hill, it is necessary that your wheels will grip you on turns when you want to stay in traction. Even though I haven’t gone extremely fast on them, but with these wheels, you could lose traction when you don’t want to.

Other than that, I like these wheels. I still need to get used to them a bit though. If I were to want to go down a hill fast, I would probably have to change them.

Thanks for reading

http://www.abec11.com/products/abec11

-Max

For someone who loves the Toronto Maple Leafs, its hard to see them miss the playoffs. AGAIN.

Ever since I first got on skates, ever since my Dad explained the rules of hockey to me, I have been an avid fan of hockey and everything surrounding it. My team always was and will be the Toronto Maple Leafs. Back in the younger grades, I breathed hockey. Matt Sundin, Darcy Tucker, Brian McCabe and all the old Leafs were my idols. I used to go through the paper every day to find pictures of my favorite Leaf players. I would tape them up in my room. I had a whole wall dedicated to the Leafs.

Eventually, I grew out of the idolization phase and got more into actually playing. I started playing on a competitive hockey team  and I got really into it. I was always into the NHL video games, and played them with my friends.

I loved hockey. To me, thats part of being a real Canadian. Loving the sport that is founded off of our main season; winter. After around 10 years of worshipping the Leafs, I started wondering about stuff like draft picks, salary caps, and stuff like that. By the end of the year 2009, I had pretty much figured out how people ran hockey teams. But all throughout that whole time, I had been wondering why the Leafs did so badly, every single year! The only time I truly remember being excited about watching them in the playoffs was in 2003-2004 season. But that’s because thats the only time I’ve ever seen them in the playoffs!

In the past 2 years, my support for the Leafs is slowly starting to die away. When the Leafs started off so well this season, everyone thought “This is the year!” Obviously, the Leafs are out again. Everyone keeps throwing this fact around, but its worth saying: The Leafs haven’t won a cup since 1967, making them hold the record of having the longest playoff drought in NHL history.

In the last half of this season, I didn’t even watch the Leafs play. I simply wasn’t interested. Its become too stressful to watch something that I have loved for so long simply lose over and OVER again and AGAIN! A few days ago, the Leafs played the Flyers and they lost 7-1. As my Dad said, they lost by a touchdown.

If the Leafs don’t start winning soon (i.e. next season), my love for hockey might actually die.

FYI I have set up a blog not associated with the school. Here is the link if you’re interested

http://callouswords.blogspot.ca/

Recently I have taken up skateboarding, something I never thought I would take up, but since beginning I have been really enjoying it. I was inspired by the music that I listen to; mainly American Punk Rock from the late 1990′s and early 2000′s. Many members of these bands were skateboarders, and the music is often associated with skateboarding and the whole culture. It seemed like a really fun way to spend my time and get some exercise, so when I found my brother’s skateboard in our garage I decided to give it a go.

I ended up spending most of my free time that week skating up and down the roads in our neighborhood, playing music from my phone, and enjoying the challenges that learning a new hobby presented. Without trying to sound too cringe worthy, or deep, it really felt like I was discovering something that represented who I am and what I enjoy in life. Obviously, learning how to skateboard can be frightening and tough. I have fallen over enough times already, and god knows what will happen when I try to jump of ramps and grind along rails!

Finally, I recently bought my first and own skateboarding from a local store on Queen Street West, and am thoroughly enjoying it so far.

Keep skating, my friends.