Birdman soars!

Went to see Birdman at the Oriental Theater last night. The house was packed. The word is out: Birdman is worth watching. And it was! Not only did I enjoy its mixture of real and surreal, psychological and emotional, but it was textured with such complexity that I felt like seeing it again right away.

The story revolves around an aging actor once famous for playing the eponymous comic book character in blockbuster movies but now trying to make a comeback in theater on broadway. Tortured by doubt, feelings of inadequacy, the desire to succeed and a dysfunctional personal history, he finds himself also besieged by the rigors of the theatrical production. He is surrounded by characters--other actors, stage manager, family members, theater critics and the general public--who can be supportive but often are volatile, sometimes abusive.

My favorite movie ratings site, Rottentomatoes.com, indicates that the critics like it somewhat more (94%) than audiences (87%), though still a respectable rating. The difference is understandable. If you went to it expecting more of the action hero comic character that lurks behind all that the real, fragile human actor does, then you might be disappointed.

The acting is superb. Keaton is outstanding in the lead role. Ed Norton deserves a nomination for best supporting actor, playing an overbearing, self-absorbed celebrity genius actor who drops into the cast at the last moment. The story is based on the literary work of Raymond Carver, whose influence goes beyond providing a vehicle for the theatrical production in the middle of the movie. The tensions and twists characteristic of Carver's short stories are present in the movie from beginning to end.

I don't think it will spoil anything to suggest that one gets the feeling that a Broadway theatrical production is a study in controlled chaos. This fine movie is about pushing the edge between the control and the chaos. I recommend it.

Art according to John Gossage

Review Santa Fe closed in overtime at about 1 pm. this afternoon. The final event was a panel discussion that included photographer John Gossage as featured artist.

Gossage, who eschews social media and proudly proclaims he doesn't have a website, made a number of pithy remarks that I jotted down and herewith share:

On art: its primary reason for being is to be viewed repeatedly.

On being an artist: keep your own counsel; do the work because it's what you love to do.

Corollary to above: get a day job to support your work so you are not indebted to anyone. (Although he proudly admitted that he'd never held a job in his life and was a high school drop out.)

On artistic integrity: if on first view the reaction of a viewer of your work is "huh?" then you've succeeded; pictures should not "empty out their information on first viewing."

On his own process: "I don't work in projects; I work with an ongoing sensibility."

Gossage went a bit against the prevailing notions, as he readily admitted, if not being downright iconoclastic - especially regarding his antipathy to social media. I need to let some of these ideas percolate a bit longer before I decide whether or not I agree with them. (Although I definitely like the first one about art deserving repeated viewing.)

To conclude on a more personal note, I believe I've been working with an ongoing sensibility myself. Here is an image I made in Albuquerque, before heading up here to Santa Fe.

Fire Danger Very High Today!