The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
Wednesday, December 2, 2015 — 5A
TV NOTEBOOK
By CHRISTIAN KENNEDY
Daily Arts Writer
Over Thanksgiving break I did
what most college students home
for the holidays do: avoid family
squabbles, drink and eat a tad too
much and binge watch the televi-
sion I missed out on in college. My
long-weekend bender included
making my family start “Grace
&
Frankie,”
rewatching
old
“Scandal” episodes as my sister
watched for the first time, binging
the entire first season of “Jessica
Jones” and finally watching the
most recent episode of “Empire.”
On “Empire,” the cliff-hanger
before the fall finale depicted
Jamal Lyon (a gay R&B singer)
laying a smooch on Alicia Keys
(sploosh). Jamal’s exploration had
me thinking about my own sexu-
ality and its representation on
mainstream television: Where are
all the bisexuals?
Television has made enormous
strides toward depicting gay and
lesbian characters in program-
ming. Between David and Keith
on “Six Feet Under,” Connor and
Oliver on “How To Get Away
With Murder,” the ensemble of
“The L Word” and many more,
gay characters have found them-
selves increasingly morphed into
in-depth principal characters and
no longer the recurring neigh-
bor. Nonetheless, one letter in
LGBTQ hasn’t found itself as for-
tunate, which is to be expected
in the slowly adapting TV world.
I mean, how in the hell is Viola
Davis the first African-American
woman to win the Emmy for
leading actress in a drama series?
As she said herself, “You simply
can’t win an Emmy for roles that
aren’t there.” I sat and watched her
speech with tears in my eyes, as
did millions of others for the same
reason: progress.
Of course, that doesn’t mean
that the representation of minori-
ties on television is perfect, nor
that of gay characters. Davis
portrays the increasingly com-
plex defense attorney on “How
To Get Away With Murder” who
recently kissed a woman during
primetime, one season after her
husband’s murder. Is Annalise
Keating bisexual? We don’t know.
The plight of bisexuals on televi-
sion isn’t due to a lack of charac-
ters who enjoy sex with men and
women — it’s a problem of seman-
tics. “Bisexual”: It’s a word fla-
grantly missing from the contents
of my DVR and Netflix queue.
A prime example, which has
been brought up before, is Piper
Chapman on “Orange Is The New
Black.” A show that has been a
trailblazer for gender, racial and
trans exploration and depiction
somehow skated over its main
character’s sexuality. Not once
is the husband-having, Laura
Prepon-banging
protagonist
described as “bisexual.” Clearly,
I’m not here to decide Chapman’s
sexuality — that’s up to her and
her alone — but a storyline that
centers on a woman’s enjoyment
of relations with her husband
and girlfriend is a clear segue to
exploring a sexuality that faces
much scrutiny, even inside the
LGBTQ community. Why is such
a progressive show shying away
from bisexuality?
As most students do with
research, I started at Wikipe-
dia. And it’s clear from the list of
media portrayals of bisexuality
that we have a problem. Maura
Isles from the TNT crime-drama
“Rizzoli & Isles” included with a
description stating, “she has never
been with a Frenchwoman, imply-
ing she’s been with other women.”
Is this what bisexuality has been
reduced to? Isles is 100 percent
free to do whatever she damn well
likes with whomever. However,
does this simple absence of infor-
mation declare her a bisexual?
Bisexuality, from my experi-
ence, has been most criticized
for lack of structure within
the term. Does Jamal kissing a
woman once after a season of
being gay make him bisexual?
Does Annalise’s kiss define her
sexuality? Does Maura’s decla-
ration that she has never been
with a French woman prove she
plays for both teams? Not at all.
It proves that now, more than
ever, sexual exploration is prom-
inent in the media landscape,
and for that exact reason, it’s
shocking to see the dismissal of
one-fifth of LGBTQ.
Sexual exploration deserves a
place on television. Sexuality is
undoubtedly fluid, and anyone
may enjoy what they’d like as
long as it’s between consenting
adults. But bisexuality yearns for
a more definitive role in today’s
culture — certainly more so than
being an underlying concept
behind characters’ exploration. I
don’t want a gay man who kisses
one woman. Or a woman with a
husband who has had relations
with one woman. I want bisexual
— a character who exemplifies
what the word means. It’s not
someone who just loves sleeping
with everyone. It’s not someone
who’s confused. It’s someone
who actively chooses the label,
instead of having it thrust upon
them by writers’ subtleties.
And it’s not an either-or situa-
tion. I sat with tears as Viola Davis
accepted her Emmy. A smile was
plastered across my face when
Jamal Lyon came out, and I adore
Piper’s storyline. The representa-
tion and success of these charac-
ters and their respective shows
exemplify the public’s readiness
for honest, representative televi-
sion. I want to be represented.
‘Saints & Strangers’
a grim period drama
By SAM ROSENBERG
Daily Arts Writer
There’s
nothing
that
says
Thanksgiving like watching a
dramatic reenactment of the date
that
inspired
the
holiday.
If you know a
thing or two
about
Ameri-
can
history,
the
story
of
Thanksgiving
isn’t exactly one
of
celebration
and
gratitude.
In
fact,
the
pilgrims
who
sailed the Mayflower faced rough
living conditions and conflict
with the Native Americans before
and after the first Thanksgiving
harvest. National Geographic’s
two-part miniseries, “Saints &
Strangers,” provides the audience
with a bleak retelling of these
events. Because it uses a period
drama formula, “Saints & Strang-
ers” isn’t particularly refreshing
or insightful. However, the mini-
series captures the gritty realism
of the battle for survival between
the natives and pilgrims. Even
though the show draws from text-
book facts and gravitas in order
to sensationalize Thanksgiving’s
origins, the story is strengthened
by dark visuals, fine acting and a
chilling score.
Set in 1620, the first episode
follows devout Englishman Wil-
liam Bradford (Vincent Kart-
heiser, “Mad Men”) and his
harrowing journey on the May-
flower to the New World. Along
with Bradford and his hapless
wife
Dorothy
(Anna
Camp,
“True Blood”), the Plymouth
pilgrims seek refuge in America
from religious persecution in
Europe. Once they reach a soon-
to-be Cape Cod, Bradford and
the rest of his crew (Ron Liv-
ingston, “Office Space”; Ray Ste-
venson, “Thor”; Michael Jibson,
“Les Misérables”) start building
a community, only to run into
trouble with the Wampanoag
tribe, led by the dubious Mas-
sasoit (Raoul Trujillo, “Sicar-
io”) and his emissary Squanto
(Kalani Queypo, “Slow West”).
The second part, set a year later,
delves deeper into the grow-
ing tensions between the tribe
and the pilgrims, with hostil-
ity increasing on both sides.
Despite several faults within the
storytelling, “Saints & Strang-
ers” succeeds in other aspects.
While both parts of “Saints
& Strangers” are lengthy, the
sequences in each are briskly
paced (the ride on the May-
flower only lasts for 22 minutes
of the first part). Kartheiser’s
impeccable
performance
as
Bradford stands out among the
rest of the cast, embodying a
real-life figure coming to terms
with loss, death, faith and sur-
vival in 17th century America.
The same goes for Queypo’s
fierce portrayal as Squanto, who
also struggles to maintain sta-
bility in his life when his land
and people are colonized. Both
characters carry the plot along,
as they fight for themselves
and their fellow kinsmen while
seeking to mediate a peaceful
coexistence with one another. In
order to accentuate the gloomy
aesthetics of “Saints & Strang-
ers,” composers Hans Zimmer
(“Inception”) and Lorne Balfe
(“Terminator: Genisys”) infuse
an intense score with somber
strings and ominous drums. Yet
even with all of its redeeming
qualities, “Saints & Strangers” is
missing an edge that could dis-
tinguish itself from other his-
torical dramas.
Whether or not the events
depicted in “Saints & Strangers”
are inaccurate or offensive, the
story is made to feel very one-
sided. The two monikers in the
miniseries’ title indicate a type
of prejudicial separation, with
the Native Americans being
marked as the “strangers” and
the pilgrims as the “saints.”
Granted, the writers of the
miniseries probably took some
dramatic liberties in order to
make the story more gripping
for television. But instead of
humanizing both perspectives
of the natives and pilgrims, the
miniseries plays by strictly his-
torical means. The natives are
portrayed as cunning, vengeful
“savages,” whereas the pilgrims
come off valiant and righteous.
It seems as though the pilgrims
aren’t given as harsh of a treat-
ment as the natives, despite
laying their foundation onto an
already occupied land and tak-
ing away resources from the
natives. Perhaps white privilege
doesn’t just exist in the realm of
“Saints & Strangers,” but within
the writing of it as well.
Given its historical relevance
though, “Saints & Strangers”
does a mostly adequate job of
reproducing the characters and
events during the first Thanks-
giving. But even with its dramat-
ic take on an iconic American
event, the miniseries could have
a more compelling twist had the
natives been depicted in a more
sensitive light. If you’re a history
buff, “Saints & Strangers” can
be captivating to watch. But if
you’re not, then it may read like
any normal high school history
textbook brought to life.
TV REVIEW
We’re ready for more
bisexuality on TV
of Music, Theatre & Dance, said in
an interview with The Michigan
Daily.
The emphasis on autumnal
yellow lighting and sensory details
create a virtual domain more
beautiful than reality itself.
While
watching
a
scene
between Woodnut, a participant of
the Hideaway, and Iris, the child he
desires, I saw both how disturbing
their relationship was, as well as
how happy they were. Woodnut
wants the pleasure and beauty
of a real relationship, though
this desire doesn’t disregard the
immorality of his indulgence.
“We’re trying to make the play
more humane. It’s about human
relationships,”
Rouverol
said.
“We see what this vicarious world
allows these people to become.”
The Nether is seen as a life
outside of consequence, and the
play considers whether or not that
world can truly exist.
“In certain ways, The Nether
gives you an opportunity to
live a life that you couldn’t live
otherwise and have an identity
that you couldn’t have otherwise,”
Rouverol said.
So could “The Nether” be
viewed as a cautionary tale
towards the effects of our digital
world today? Rouverol thinks not.
“I think it’s actually shockingly
and
disturbingly
unbiased,”
Rouverol said. “I don’t think the
world of ‘The Nether’ is that far
away, and in certain ways, we’re
already there.”
As liberating as the digital
world
may
seem,
Woodnut
simply concludes, “Nothing here
is truly free.”
With a cast of five, each
character provides a different
angle toward this virtual reality.
Rouverol credits her experience
as an acting student toward her
new role as a director and how
it’s contributed to shaping this
work. She has been able to see the
play as a larger picture and shape
all aspects of production both on
and off the stage.
“Sometimes when you’re in
it, you can’t see the effect that
your role is playing on the
whole picture,” Rouverol said.
“I feel really lucky to be able to
do this.”
NETHER
From Page 1
THE ONLY TRUE KNOWLEDGE
IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE SELF
ARE YOU EVEN A PERSON?
To make your voice be heard,
apply to Daily Arts, e-mail
ARTS@MICHIGANDAILY.COM.
‘Good Dinosaur’
only for children
Pixar’s plot can’t
match stunning
animation
By LAUREN WOOD
Daily Arts Writer
What if the asteroid that
brought about the extinction of
all dinosaurs never hit Earth?
How
would
these
crea-
tures
evolve
over
millions
of years, and
how
would
humans
fit
into this equa-
tion?
These
are
questions
Pixar works to
answer with its
newest feature
“The Good Dinosaur,” a senti-
mental flick about family, brav-
ery and survival. More than
other successful Pixar movies
though, “The Good Dinosaur”
seems directed solely toward
children, with a simple story
that might leave older viewers
searching for something great-
er. In other words, if you’re
looking for a movie to cry over,
this is it. But, if you’re ready
for some of the more elaborate,
well-developed
storytelling
Pixar has become known for
with films like “Up,” “Finding
Nemo” and “Inside Out,” then
the film’s predictable, optimis-
tic resolution may fall flat.
The story reflects an old
Western epic, opening with a
picturesque family farm owned
by a pair of dinosaurs along
with their three children, Buck,
Libby and Arlo. The small and
gangly runt of the litter, Arlo
can never quite find his footing
within the group but is continu-
ally reassured by his father that
he will one day be great. How-
ever, after Arlo fails at his task
of catching the “critter” that
continually steals their food,
his father goes in search of it
himself and is killed in a flash
flood. As the family struggles
to keep the farm running, Arlo
is swept away in the river and
finds himself miles from home
with an epic journey ahead
of him. Befriending the small
“critter,” the prehistoric human
called Spot who got him into
this trouble, the duo works
their way back toward the fam-
ily farm, encountering mali-
cious pterodactyls, a family of
rancher T-rexes and a host of
other adventures along the way.
Though the plot is varied
and fast-paced enough to keep
viewers interested, it’s the lack
of a complicated main character
that keeps this film from falling
beside other Pixar super suc-
cesses. Comparing this to the
animation powerhouse’s array
of quest stories, the secondary
characters that Arlo and Spot
meet throughout their adven-
tures parallel “Nemo” ’s band of
recovering fish-eater sharks or
“Up” ’s crazed, dog-collecting
pilot. But it’s the unpredictable
and somewhat flawed main
characters, like “Up” ’s soft-
hearted but crotchety Carl or
“Nemo” ’s nervous and neurotic
Marlin, that add a much-need-
ed third layer to those films.
Though “The Good Dinosaur”
pulls an unconventional move
in reversing the master/pet role,
making the dinosaur the master
and the human the pet, the feral
child Spot and good-hearted
Arlo prove to be somewhat one-
dimensional as characters, and
they struggle to hold the audi-
ence’s interest.
The film succeeds in its
animation though, laying the
cartoon-like characters over
hyper-realistic
naturescapes.
It’s nearly impossible to tell
when looking at scenes of the
river flowing through the forest
or the mountain peaks emerg-
ing from the clouds, that we’re
looking at computer-generated
scenes. Placing the goofy-look-
ing characters within this real-
ism makes the film relatable
in a way that going completely
one direction or the other
wouldn’t. Overly realistic dino-
saurs wouldn’t inspire the same
kind of sympathy the cartoons
do, but an animated landscape
would give the story no sense of
importance and Arlo’s struggle
no real validity.
Thinking about the title after
seeing the movie, it seems like
nothing I’ve said here is espe-
cially revelatory. Arlo, in any
way you can describe him, is
exactly what the film makes
says he will be: he’s “good.”
And though that doesn’t make
for the most complex story, the
film is nonetheless enjoyable,
with a solid, predictable char-
acter leading viewers through
a string of strange and excit-
ing adventures. If anything, the
film proves that the Western is
not a stagnant genre of the past,
but a story of discovering one-
self. The fight against nature is
a timeless quest regardless of
the context it’s crafted in.
B+
The Good
Dinosaur
Walt Disney
Studios
Rave and
Quality 16
WALT DISNEY STUDIOS
“One day, Simba, all of this will be yours.”
Sexual
exploration
deserves a place
on television.
B
Saints &
Strangers
Two-part
miniseries
National
Geographic
FILM REVIEW