The Michigan Daily-Tuesday, July 24, 1979-Page 7 'Ecape'from m- indless vi"olenceftAv By ALISON DONAHUE As prisons are some of the more violent places in America, it seems fitting that Clint Eastwood (Hang 'Em High, Dirty Harry, The Enforcer, to name a few), would choose to make a movie in one. Yet unlike most of Eastwood's other films, which focus on his charac- ter's perpetration of many a violent and gory death, Escape from Alcatraz has aims more sophisticated than bloodlust. Director Don Siegel has crafted a film that is as well ordered and free of excess as the prison itself, yet much less grim. Here Eastwood's character has as much brains as brawn, and it is his ingenuity, as well as the script's meticulous attention to details of the escape plan, that makes the film intriguing. The movie is based on the true story of the only three men ever to escape from "The Rock." While the focus of the film is the method of escape, Siegel begins by giving us an acute feel for the prison environment. This serves two purposes; it makes us sympathetic to anyone who would want to escape, and it makes us ap- preciate how difficult it is to do so. ESCAPE'S use of color is one of its most effective elements in expressing the austerity of the inmates' surroundings. Lighting is always low, and drab in- stitutional colors predominate. Siegel's camera often stands at the entrance of the prison's main hallway, showing us a hollow gulf of space on either side of which are tiers of individual cells. The insides of these cells provide one of the few respites for the eye from all the bareness, as the prisoners are allowed to decorate their walls. We learn from the prison warden (splendidly played by Patrick McGoohan), that as far as prisons are con- cerned Alcatraz is the end of the line. It's the place where men are sent who tried to escape from other prisons, or did not behave correctly in them. As the warden puts it; "They put all the rotten eggs in one basket." His job is to see to it that "the stink does not go beyond Alcatraz." Since the prisoners are supposed to be so in- corrigible, the main function of Alcatraz is to separate them from each other. They live a regimented life un- der the constant supervision of the guards, and always with the threat of harsh punishment hanging over their heads. (Those who cause trouble are thrown into dark empty cells for varying lengths of time.) TO CRACK "The Rock," you've got to have an in- fallible escape plan and a lot of luck. Eastwood and his partners have both, as they conjure up a scheme that is as ingenious as it is believable. Since the most pleasurable aspect of the film for me was watching each new element of the escape plan take shape, I won't spoil it for others by divulging details; I will just say that any skeptical feelings I had about the plausi- bility of the plan were overshadowed by two truisms the film continually expresses. The first is that any man who is left sitting idly in a cell can put his mind to work and create something out of nothing. The second is that prison guards are not very bright. ESCAPE is well thought out, but its charac- terizations are a major flaw; the filmmakers try too hard to win our sympathy for the convicts (except one' who is typecast as "the bully"). We never learn why Eastwood or his partners were sent to Alcatraz, but most of the cons Eastwood befriends seem to have been sent there unjustly. A Southern black man is there because he killed two white men in self defense. Another prisoner does his time at "The Rock" because a guard at his former residence had it in for him. And so on. Then there is "Doc," the artist, who paints a por- trait of himself wearing a flower because "that's something inside me even they can't take away." How did all these nice guys end up in Alcatraz, home of the country's most hardened criminals? It seems that they were only put there to be punished by the big bad warden (he likes to crush flowers). It's a pity that Siegel felt he had to make the conflict between prisoners and warden such a clear cut battle of good vs. evil, for I think the film would have come closer to reality if its characters had been even a little less likeable. The film does such an effective job of showing us how undesirable prison life is that I doubt this change would have made the convicts unsym- pathetic characters in our eyes. For me, this flaw lessens the impact of any statement the film is trying to make about the reality of prison life. However, it in no way devalues the overall merit of the film. Escape from Alcatraz is solidly satisfying en- tertainment. Critic's notebook: Rep winners and losers By JOSHUA PECK With the Power Center dark until August 1, and the actors and directors of the Michigan Repertory Company free for the week to absorb the foul Art Fair air, I have eschewed idleness in favor of mulling over the Repertory fare and selecting my favorites and least-favorites of the current season. The four Rep. shows are Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing, Alice Childress' Wedding Band, Noel Coward's Hay Fever, and O'Neill's Ah, Wilderness. I have given honorable mention where honorable mention is due. BEST SHOW: Hay Fever. All elements have combined felicitously in this production of Coward's comedy of manners. Casting, acting, design, and sparkling direction put Fever well ahead of Ah, Wilderness, its closest competitor. WORST SHOW: Wedding Band. Mid- dling direction and an abominable script overpower the best efforts of star Janice Reid, making this one good for insomnia, but not for much else. BEST DIRECTOR: Kay Long for Hay Fever. Long has gone beyond the ordinary "Brrritish" stereotypes to pull delightfully unique charac- terizations out of virtually her whole company. WORST DIRECTOR: - Richard Burgwin for Much Ado About Nothing. Burgwin, the artistic director of the company and the only professor direc- ting, has scarcely made one proper decision. He makes a farce of the serious part of the plot while stifling the merriment of the farcical part (Dogberry and friends). He has made a script abundant with life and love nothing more than a melodramatic irritation. FOR THE acting awards, I have made a loose, and possibly inaccurate division between leading and suppor- ting roles, relying on characters' im- portance to the plot more than their time on stage. I have also, in- some cases, made my judgements on the basis of cumulative performaces over the season, rather than one particular role. BEST ACTRESS, LEADING ROLE(S): Janice Reid, for lovely, sen- sitive work in Much Ado, and for her heroic attempts to save Wedding Band. On top of technical acting skills that ex- cel those of her colleagues, Reid has bearing and beauty that make her all the better a Beatrice (Much Ado) or Julia (Wedding Band). Honorable mention to Kathy Badgerow for uproariously batty behavior as Judith Bliss in Hay Fever. Possibly the funniest performance of the whole Theatre Department season, Reopens August 1-5 POWER CENTER for more information -coal(313) 764-0450 certainly that of the summer. WORST ACTRESS, LEADING ROLE: Terryl Hallquist in Much Ado. Probably not her fault, as she is fine in Wilderness, marvelous in Hay Fever. Her characterization is flat here, most likely, because her director suffers from a chronic lack of concern. BEST ACTOR, LEADING ROLE: A toss-up. John Hallquist as David in Hay Fever, and Leo McNamara as Nat Miller in Ah, Wilderness. Hallquist masterfully portrays the indefatigable seducer in one of Fever's many amusing scenes, McNamara lends a just-perfect bittersweet taste to his harried Mr. Miller. Honorable mention to David Manis as McNamara's son in Wilderness, and to Rhonnie Washington and Richard Pickren as Benedick and Don Pedro respectively in Much Ado. WORST ACTOR, LEADING ROLE: Michael Morrissey as Claudio in Much Ado ineffectually drones his way through a pivotal role. See OVERVIEW, Page9 5th Avenue at Liberty St. 761-9700 Terly Fifth Forum Theater JANICE REID and Leo McNamara, Julia and Herman in 'Wedding Band,' are among the most talented of the Repertory's actors, but their best efforts still leave the show artificial and unmoving.