![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dinner and a show
Apr. 2nd, 2012 02:37 pmI wasn't sure about giving David Hockney any money given that he'll only spend it on smoking hissen to death, but I enjoyed his show. I like big, bright, Expressionistic landscapes about the seasons, so there was never really any doubt that I would dig it. One RA comment was that his painting again and again the same scene at different times of the day and year was like Monet and his haystack obsessive-compulsion, but I saw more of Van Gogh in Hockney's actual style.
There were also films whereby viewers could see Hockney's camcorder films of the actual landscape featured in the paintings, which were endearing in a Patrick Keiller-esque way, finishing with a little tap dance by some of the artist's fellow tobacco lovers. I did wonder if some of the seasonal stuff was a little cliched however. Spring is always milky sunshine, winter is snow. Summer is bright and autumn has that lovely slanting light you get in October. No rain, or grey or blank days where there isn't really any weather. Also, the RA made much of the fact that his latest work is done on an iPad. But why mention the iPad? It doesn't matter if he drew on an Android tablet or a laptop or PC or his phone, surely the actual point is that the work is computer generated; I would be more interested to know which program he used.
The gallery was very very full; I blamed OAPs with too much time and pensioner discount on their hands and those visiting from the provinces. My parents fulfilled both those criteria; they were taking me on a day out up west: art, dinner and a show (The Ladykillers). I enjoyed both films (indeed, I think I prefer the Coen Bros version) and although the script verged from the original, the shape of the play was still the same. One thing I don't like about the theatre is that you can see everything that's going on, films can do so much more in pretending to be real. Even on shonky soaps, the pub looks like a pub, but at the theatre, you have to imagine that it is a pub. But here the staging was rather splendid, a whole Victorian house was on stage, including the toilet, there were stunts and sleight of hand trickery that I wasn't quick enough to get, panto-style topical references ("we're all in this together!") as well as French farcical elements of people running around opening one door and exiting out of another and twittering Monty Python-esque old ladies, some of whom were men. If I have a criticism, I'd say Peter Capaldi, playing the Professor, over-acted somewhat; he even started mugging to the audience at one point when there was a knowing laugh about selling art to the middle classes ("They love it!").
There were also films whereby viewers could see Hockney's camcorder films of the actual landscape featured in the paintings, which were endearing in a Patrick Keiller-esque way, finishing with a little tap dance by some of the artist's fellow tobacco lovers. I did wonder if some of the seasonal stuff was a little cliched however. Spring is always milky sunshine, winter is snow. Summer is bright and autumn has that lovely slanting light you get in October. No rain, or grey or blank days where there isn't really any weather. Also, the RA made much of the fact that his latest work is done on an iPad. But why mention the iPad? It doesn't matter if he drew on an Android tablet or a laptop or PC or his phone, surely the actual point is that the work is computer generated; I would be more interested to know which program he used.
The gallery was very very full; I blamed OAPs with too much time and pensioner discount on their hands and those visiting from the provinces. My parents fulfilled both those criteria; they were taking me on a day out up west: art, dinner and a show (The Ladykillers). I enjoyed both films (indeed, I think I prefer the Coen Bros version) and although the script verged from the original, the shape of the play was still the same. One thing I don't like about the theatre is that you can see everything that's going on, films can do so much more in pretending to be real. Even on shonky soaps, the pub looks like a pub, but at the theatre, you have to imagine that it is a pub. But here the staging was rather splendid, a whole Victorian house was on stage, including the toilet, there were stunts and sleight of hand trickery that I wasn't quick enough to get, panto-style topical references ("we're all in this together!") as well as French farcical elements of people running around opening one door and exiting out of another and twittering Monty Python-esque old ladies, some of whom were men. If I have a criticism, I'd say Peter Capaldi, playing the Professor, over-acted somewhat; he even started mugging to the audience at one point when there was a knowing laugh about selling art to the middle classes ("They love it!").
