The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
Friday, February 17, 2017 — 5
HBO’s “Crashing” shines
A cynical wit and star-studded cast make Pete Holmes’s show a hit
In recent years, HBO has
made a concerted effort to
expand its comedy offerings.
With
series
like
“Veep,”
“Ballers” and “Silicon Valley,”
the network has attempted
to establish itself as more
than just “Game of Thrones.”
Following
the
premiere
of
its
new
Judd
Apatow-
produced (“The
40-Year-Old
Virgin”) comedy
“Crashing,” HBO
should be able to
add another hit
to
its
growing
lineup.
Despite
its
familiar
premise,
“Crashing”
is
expertly cast and scored, and
contains an enjoyable brand of
dark, self-deprecating humor
that audiences can appreciate.
Created by rising comedic
star Pete Holmes (“The Pete
Holmes Show”), the series
centers on Holmes’ fictional
life as a middling comedian
struggling to navigate the
New York City comedy club
scene. After leaving his wife,
the hilarious Lauren Lapkus
(“Jurassic World”), Holmes
finds himself on the street,
where a chance encounter
with a washed-up Artie Lange
(“Howard Stern on Demand”)
results in his getting a new
mentor. Along with Lange, the
show
features
appearances
from a number of prominent
comedians,
including
the
perpetually-cynical T.J. Miller
(“Deadpool”)
and
anointed
“RoastMaster General” Jeff
Ross (“Comedy Central Roast
of Charlie Sheen”).
For “Crashing,” its success
is largely due to its talented
core of comedic veterans. Each
cast member occupies their
own comedic niche, and their
chemistry
together
shines
through
from
the
series’
initial
scenes.
Holmes
is
brilliant as a naïve, optimistic
comedian attempting to break
into an industry infamous for
its sardonic wit. Despite her
relatively minor part, Lapkus
distinguishes
herself
with
her
blunt,
biting
style
of
humor. Lange is
similarly
solid
within his role
as a burnt-out
comedian
who
never misses an
opportunity
to
mock his own situation. As
brief as his appearances are,
Miller excels at delivering
his
trademark
style
of
brash, juvenile humor. In a
particularly hilarious scene,
Miller becomes upset with
Lange and begins an all-out
verbal assault on his outfit,
telling him: “You look like you
work for a homeless person.
Are you interning on skid row?
What cargo are you carrying in
cargo pants? Are you carrying
nostalgia for the ’90s?”
Along
with
its
cast,
“Crashing” benefits from the
strength of its soundtrack.
Featuring
acclaimed
soul-
men Charles Bradley and Leon
Bridges, the show uses its score
to emphasize the melancholic
aspects of Holmes’s life — he’s
left his wife and continues to
struggle to establish himself
as a comedian. The songs are
chosen well to coincide with
more depressing scenes, but
they remain confined to the
series’s background to not
disrupt the show’s overall
lighthearted mood.
Outside of its soundtrack,
“Crashing” suffers from its
relatively
weak
storyline
and, at times, narrow type
of humor that is constantly
repeated. The show opens
with the rather trite plot line
of Holmes coming home early
one day to discover his wife’s
infidelity
firsthand,
before
immediately leaving her. This
narrative is not only overused
but
also
hastily
executed,
with the series glossing over
Holmes’
wife’s
affair
and
largely ignoring the storyline
after the show’s premiere
episode. “Crashing” is further
hurt by the fact that its writing
is unbalanced and, in several
instances, relies too heavily
upon the nature of Holmes’s
life as its sole style of humor.
The series elects to mold
many of its jokes around this
idea, and, while sometimes
funny,
these
gags
become
repetitive and leave audiences
questioning the extent of the
show’s comedic range.
Despite
its
occasionally
weak
writing,
the
series
remains
entertaining
and
produces a stream of laughs.
Viewers can’t help but enjoy
Holmes’s naiveté juxtaposed
with Lange’s no-holds-barred
approach
that
produces
a
show replete with quality
gags. In “Crashing,” Holmes
has succeeded in capitalizing
on the show’s star-studded
cast to develop a program that
has terrific dark humor, and
it’s pure fun to follow along.
“Crashing” will premiere on
HBO Sunday, Feb. 19.
HBO
CONNOR GRADY
Daily Arts Wrtier
‘Freude!’ — The politics of art
A week ago I finally got
around to doing something
which
I
probably
should
have done a few years ago.
Sitting somewhere up in the
left mezzanine (I’m not sure
precisely where — my ticket
has since become a bookmark
in
something
or
another),
knees askew and jutting out
uncomfortably into the seat-
back in front of me, I finally
saw a live performance of
Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9,
his “Ode to Joy,” as part of an
all-Beethoven program that
spanned
nearly
a
quarter-
century of the composer’s life.
Under the baton of Iván
Fischer,
last
Friday
Hill
Auditorium was host to the
Budapest Festival Orchestra,
one of the world’s leading
symphonic
concert
groups.
Before the performance began
—
indeed,
before
the orchestra was
even on the stage
—
the
longtime
president of UMS,
Ken Fischer (who
is retiring at the
end of this season,
after 30 years with
the
organization),
took
the
stage
to
introduce
the
musicians.
In
his
remarks,
Mr.
Fischer included the usual
comments about how pleased
UMS was to welcome the
orchestra, but the end of his
speech
included
a
rather
unique
tag:
The
orchestra
was thrilled to be here that
night, including every member
of the cello section. “If you
don’t know what I’m talking
about,” Fischer said, “ask your
neighbor, or take a look at the
New York Times.” And then we
heard Beethoven.
Well, to my surprise, I didn’t
know what he was talking
about, and I’m altogether too
shy to ask a neighbor about
anything. But it really didn’t
take an extraordinary degree
of
deductive
reasoning
to
hypothesize about the situation
— and after the concert a quick
Google
search
confirmed
what I had already suspected.
“An
Orchestra
Triumphs
Over Trump’s Travel Ban,”
the headline read. It seems
that our amateur president
hadn’t quite thought through
the nuances and complexities
of his “complete and total
shutdown” idea (to say nothing
of its legality or morality),
and in the chaotic hours and
days following the ban’s ham-
handed implementation, the
Budapest Festival Orchestra’s
US tour was jeopardized by the
fact that one of their cellists
was being told that he could
not enter the country because
of his dual Hungarian/Iraqi
citizenship.
Fischer
(Iván,
that is) lodged a complaint
with the State Department,
and a day later, following an
international
effort,
dual-
passport holders were deemed
to be exempt from the ban.
Let this be a lesson: Art is
not immune from politics.
Not that many people would
have seriously suggested the
opposite, but often it seems
that
art
serves
for
many
people as an escape from
the
increasingly-alarming
information
surrounding
national
and
international
affairs. In the last few weeks
I’ve certainly used it in such a
manner. And that’s fine, even
necessary — art can be an
emotional balm for artist and
recipient alike. But we also
can’t ignore the fact that art is a
political act. Perhaps it doesn’t
always mean to be, just as
sometimes it does, and maybe
not everyone notices
that
it’s
political.
But
ultimately,
like
almost
every
decision made, like
the
act
of
living
itself, art is one of
the infinite intricate
pieces of the vast
world machine we
describe through the
lens of politics. Art
reflects life and life
reflects art — and
right now especially, both are
pretty full of politics.
In light of this, it was fitting
that the centerpiece of the
Budapest Festival Orchestra’s
concert was Beethoven’s 9th
symphony, a work which was
meant as a paean of universal
brotherhood — a fact which was
not lost on Doyle Armbrust,
who wrote the remarkably
unconventional program notes
for the UMS concert. But by
this point — perhaps because
of its universal popularity,
or maybe because of its sheer
brilliance
—
Beethoven’s
symphony has sort of become
the go-to example of a political
composition. I wrote about it on
November 9th, my insomnia-
addled
mind
desperately
seeking
for
some
small
consolation or sliver of solace,
and the New Yorker’s ever-
eloquent Alex Ross discusses
it
in
his
characteristically
percipient
article
“Making
Art in a Time of Rage” on
February 8th (Ross also gave a
shout-out to Armbrust). All of
which makes sense: Beethoven
himself meant it as a statement,
and was a rather political
person. As a republican living
under the careful watch of
Metternich’s secret police in
autocratic Vienna, the failure
of the French Revolution and
the imposition of the arch-
conservative post-Napoleonic
order surely ranked among one
of his many sorrows in life.
But
Beethoven
certainly
isn’t the only composer to
deal with political topics. The
first opera I ever truly loved
was “Nixon in China,” the
1987 work that springboarded
the American composer John
Adams to prominence. Though
I had enjoyed various operas
I saw before, until “Nixon” I
had never loved one with the
same sort of unreserved, fierce
and unabashed abandon which
characterized
my
feelings
towards Adams’s composition.
And part of this love, I think,
stemmed from the fact that
“Nixon” dove directly into the
political, raising ethical and
moral questions in the context
of beautiful art, aided by Alice
Goodman’s stunning libretto.
Adam’s does this in other
works as well — his opera
“Doctor Atomic” deals with
the subject of nuclear war, and
the highly controversial opera
“The Death of Klinghoffer”
focuses on the 1985 hijacking
of
a
passenger
liner
by
Palestinian
terrorists.
This
last work especially waded
into the public fray of the
emotionally fraught politics
of
the
Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, and the opera has
been accused of antisemitism
(which
its
creators
deny)
and of being sympathetic to
terrorism
(what,
after
all,
does it mean if terrorists are
able to sing beautifully?). But
setting aside the specifics of
these examples, all of them
demonstrate
that
art
and
politics are often inextricable.
One cannot create art without
participating in the world, and
to some degree or another, this
means that art will turn out
to have political implications.
And often art can help us
better understand the political
world we experience. Though
Adams has recently stated in
an interview with KQED: “The
idea of a Trump opera doesn’t
interest (him) in the least,”
because “you don’t want to
spend time as an artist giving
your very best to a person who
is a sociopath.” The work he
has done on previous projects
can still provide insights into
the contemporary climate.
As I look around at the way
events are unfolding today, I’m
put in mind of a scene from
“Nixon.” In it, the president is
in discussion with Mao Zedong
and Premier Zhou Enlai when
the Premier addresses Mao.
“You’ve said that there’s a
certain well-known tree that
grows from nothing in a day,
lives only as a sapling, dies just
at its prime when good men
raise it as their idol.”
“Not the cross?” ventures
Nixon.
“The Liberty Tree,” comes
Mao’s reply. “It was a riddle,
not a test.”
But perhaps now the riddle
has become a test for us all.
DAYTON
HARE
CLASSICAL MUSIC COLUMN
TV REVIEW
“Crashing”
Series Premiere
HBO
Sundays at 10:30
P.M.
NYFW REVIEW
Ulla debuts first runway
Ulla Johnson is killing it. Last
Thursday, she debuted the Fall
2017 ready-to-wear collection for
her eponymous brand. This marks
her first ever runway show for New
York Fashion Week — a hallmark
of success for any designer, and
a particularly poignant one for
Johnson whose brand has been
growing since its inception in
2000.
A psychology major, Johnson
had not always envisioned a future
in fashion. However, traveling
alongside
her
archaeologist
parents instilled in her a love of
textiles. Shortly after graduating
college, she began her business,
much to the chagrin of her parents,
who tried to discourage her from
a future in fashion. Originally
self-financed, the brand gained
traction when Barneys picked up
the line.
“I think ultimately Barneys
(came to us because of the fact that
we feel more intimate, because
we’re not a gigantic brand that’s
in a big department store, because
people want something that is
not so insanely visible and just
feels like product,” Johnson told
Fashionista back in 2014. Even
as the brand snowballed, it was
important to Johnson that it grow
organically. By keeping the brand
at a size she could financially
support, Johnson never had to
relinquish her vision and was able
to maintain a high standard. This
ultimately fostered the brand’s
popularity and ushered in the
success it currently enjoys.
The collection shown Thursday
was massively successful; it can
be summed up as “Little House
on the Prairie” x knitwear x ’70s x
Valentine’s Day. Feminine, but not
cloyingly so. Cool, but not effortful.
Vintage-inspired, but not stale.
While Ulla Johnson has built her
brand on loose printed dresses, in
this collection her outerwear and
tailored pants shone brightest,
particularly her shearling jackets,
which were a reoccurring motif
in the collection, appearing in
several different colors, styles, and
lengths, the most impressive being
the one draped over the shoulders
of the inaugural look. Paired
with impeccably tailored cream
trousers, which were detailed
with two rows of gold buttons and
attached suspenders, the outfit
declared that the forthcoming
collection was not one to be
ignored. Overall, it was a forceful
debut, one which will foster a new
era of success for Johnson.
TESS TOBIN
Daily Arts Writer
MUSIC VIDEO REVIEW
When the new music
video for Michael Bublé’s “I
Believe in You” opens with
two kids shyly watching one
another from a distance, it
isn’t hard to try to predict
where the plot might go
from there. The narrative of
a young boy and girl grow-
ing up alongside one another
and falling in love isn’t new,
requiring the video to go
beyond the plotline in order to
be really appealing.
And, in many
respects, it did. The first
transition features the boy
jumping down from a tree and
landing as a teenager, which
sets up a pattern of smoothly
shot transitions that continues
for the rest of the video. He
and the girl are shown doing
innocuous childhood activi-
ties together — riding a bicy-
cle, doing homework — before
leaning in for what is presum-
ably their first kiss, which
then cuts to a shot of him car-
rying her over their threshold
in a wedding dress.
In every age period,
there is a gesture involving
flowers. The young boy gives
the girl a yellow flower in
their backyard; as teenagers,
he gives her a pink flower as
they are about to kiss; as new-
lyweds, she holds a similarly
pink flower over her head as
he carries her. By the end of
the video, several years have
passed, and the man and the
woman have grown old, their
mantle filled up with memo-
ries of their lives with their
children and grandchildren.
The now-elderly man gives
his wife a box, and she opens
it to find flowers, reminding
us of all of his gestures of love
toward her over the course of
their lives.
“I Believe in You” is
a lively song at times, and the
video echoes this, primarily
with the terrific dancing skills
of the actors. Derek Hough
of “Dancing With the Stars”
directed and choreographed
the video, and in his starring
role as the husband, he brings
a life and an energy to the
video that dramatically spikes
the emotional investment of
the viewer. He slides down
tables, jumps over the banister
of the house’s staircase, and
embraces his wife, and all of
these come across as effort-
less expressions of love. Com-
bined with the use of flushed,
spring-reminiscent colors and
the emphasis on flowers, it is
easy to see how this dancing
would appeal to people at a
time when a film like “La La
Land” is so popular.
The video ends with
a quick return to the main
characters smiling at one
another as kids, a cliché but
reasonable decision meant to
remind the audience of how
far they’ve come since the
beginning of the song. The boy
and the girl aren’t particularly
unique or memorable, nor is
the plotline at all inventive
or something we haven’t seen
before. But with the help of
some uplifting music and
Hough’s choreography skills,
the video for the most part
succeeds in packing the emo-
tional punch that it set out for.
— LAURA DZUBAY
“Believe”
Michael Bublé
Reprise Records