ColumbinusThis was 3 of 3 from last weekend.
Let's just say
The Laramie Project, it ain't.
Before I get all into it, some "you should knows" - which aren't exactly disclaimers, because I don't think of them as excuses. These are just a few facts to give you some context for my experience. On April 20, 1999 I was spending my second day on the couch and home sick from my day job. Being the early riser that I am, I turned on CNN as the school shootings were happening and remained riveted to the television for the entire day, er...okay, I admit, the entire week.
Earlier that year, I saw JoAnne Akalitis'
The Iphigenia Cycle and became obsessed with Euripides and
The House of Atreus. These two obsessions combined into a fascination with teenage killers. I ended up writing a three play cycle linking America's fascination with Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold (and Kip Kinkel and Mitchell Johnson and the nearly one hundred others) with the cycles of violence and vengence in the Euripides plays. It wasn't my most successful experiment, but it did get me into Yale Drama.
The point is: I know a whole lot about Columbine and beyond (and before) and have some very strong opinions about the events.
Unfortunately, the creators of Columbinus do not.
The first act of the piece was filled with the fetishization of high school angst as portrayed in contemporary films/TV. I'm talking Buffy without the intelligence, metaphor, and vampires. There's actually a scene where
The Verve's
"Bittersweet Symphony" is playing while pregnant girl has morning sickness, gay boy is putting on mascara, burnout girl is cutting herself, and jock boy is furiously doing push ups. Yes, it's as simplistic and Hollywood as it sounds.
The second act is then done as a sort of
Living Newspaper re-enactment of April 18 - 20, 2999 and then one year, three years, and six years after the shootings. This half I actually liked, but I think I only felt that way because the first half was SO BAD.
That's it. That's the show. What's missing? Oh, right: an opinion. We're seven years away from it all. The Living Newspaper thing would have worked maybe a year or two after the events themselves, but now it's a numbingly uninsightful approach. I mean,
Bowling for Columbine came out in 2002 - a mere three years after the tragedy - and Mr. Moore had a very strong and compelling slant on Columbine, America, and the culture of fear and mistrust Americans perpetuate. Instead of searching for a possible "why," Columbinus instead ends by asking "why?" It's a lame and non-commital way of taking advantage of all the sensationalism, without having to take a risk and posit an opinion that might be controversial or alienating.
So, while I respect the attempt, I was fairly disappointed by the execution. Thank god there was a lot of unneccessary and gratuitous nudity.