Music (that) Makes the People

Was trolling through my music collection on my iPod over the weekend. During the process I re-discovered a lot of songs that I haven't listened to for quite some time. That Sailormoon theme song; those good old Cantonpop songs that I still miraculously remember not just the tunes but also the lyrics. I was surprised that I was still able to play that sing-along thing to those songs. However at the same time I noticed that I haven't updated my music collection for quite a while.

I used to buy a lot of music. It has always been an important part of my life. I never was the person who stick to a particular kind of music. I listen and buy music according to the pleasure of my ears and my heart. As a classically trained person I always love classical music and have a sizeable collection. Growing up in Hong Kong without a doubt I got hooked on to Cantonpop. Some critics may classify most of them as sickly sweet candy tunes, which in my opinion is a sickly over-generalised view without understanding the music and it's culture. Then there are English pops. Some of them introduced by my radio days, some of them from the school's music club and some of them by accident. I also got into Japanese anime songs as these were stuff I grew up with. I even learnt Japanese because of that. With the "invasion" of Japanese drama I got into J-Pop, which for most of my friends I was a late bloomer. When I developed my interests in video games, I started listening to video games music too. To top all of these, there are also Latino music, French music and musical theatre. So with such wide spectrum of musical interest (or according to some people lack of specialisation) my music collection should be growing continuously. How did it happen that I am spending less and less of my disposable income on buying music?

With the advance of technology buying music had never been easier. Long gone are the days you need to go to the shops to get a CD. I still enjoy browsing on the shelves flipping through racks of CDS enjoying their packaging and covers. But then online shopping is now complimented with digital download purchase, which means I can virtually buy any music I like at a click of the mouse. So why isn't my music collection growing as it should?

I believe my love for music has not waned but probably as I grow older, I get a lot more picky on what to buy. This probably due to that fact that not all my disposable income is that "disposable" anymore. As I moved out of home, expenditures rises. Bills that were dealt with by parents are now my stuff. Utilities, food, car and now a mortgage they all inevitably shrunk my share of disposable income. So I have to rationalise my spending across all categories of things that I like - theatre, cinema, concerts, music, videos, video games, books etc. As a result I began to play safe in my purchases. Some of my adventurous attitude to music and cinema was eroded and leading me to restrict myself to all the safe purchases instead of just buying anything that seemed interesting. For me this is not healthy as it starts building fences around my interests, which is not great when you work in a creative industry. I believe you always need new catalysts to stimulate your creativity.

Radio used to be a main source for exposing me to new music but nowadays radio is so boring that I eventually just switched it off. One thing I sometimes cannot understand about radio in Australia is that a lot of time it is about the shock jocks not the music. Maybe the industry had moved forward and I was left behind.  The fact is on any day I prefer to listen to music broadcast than wasting my time listening to the babbling of some radio hosts who think they are funny and relevant to the society. Radio seemed to have lost its function of promoting music.

Some people may think this is a mid-life music crisis - you live to a point in life that most musical contents became irrelevant to you. You can no longer relate to those puppy and silly love songs the newer and younger artists are talking about. Yet you refuses to admit that you belong to an older generation of musicians. As a result you become the void generation on the dichotomy of music appreciation. I personally do not agree. I am still open to new music just that I do not know where to find them sometimes, or worse still do not have as much time to find them. Maybe my appreciation levels and standards are now more refined with all these years, good music is still good music. By that I do not mean music that complies with certain composition structure or marketing blitz, I mean music that pleases my ears. Once a colleague made a comment on me saying "I would never expect you to listen to this kind of music" and there was another friend who once said, "You could play such beautiful classical music why would you listen to any Madonna stuff?". For me if I like the music it is relevant to me. I don't need to build a framework around it.

So the question remains - how could I continue to expose myself to new music? Maybe I just need to find time and make the effort, as with all things you love, you need to work hard to keep the love going.

The Real Blah Blah of Blah Blah Blah

Woke up from my afternoon nap on a picture perfect Saturday afternoon outside. I dozed off while watching something on cable TV and it was still on when I woke up. I was pretty tired after a whole week of work and after all the housework and swimming in the morning. As I woke up the TV was showing one of the reunion shows for one of the “Real Housewives” shows. I personally never follow those shows, as they don’t really interest me. At the end of the day why would I want to watch shows about a bunch of ridiculously wealthy women whose face are faker than most Barbie dolls on the shelves? However, that reunion show I accidentally bumped into completely blew me off the water.

You might think is it that good? The answer is no. But it is more dramatic than any of the scripted dramas you can find on any channels. These women from the “Real Housewives of New Jersey” were so feisty that you think you are watching “Daniel inside the Lion Den”. All the accusations, arguments, scheming and betrayals put soaps like “Days of Our Lives” and “Bold and Beautiful” to shame. Certainly these rich New Jersey women were living days of their lives being bold and beautiful but the compound product was just dramas after dramas that choke you to death. While watching it I was wondering how could these women survive that much drama they stirred up within a few months of filming?

However, my accidental encounter of this show got me to think about something else: why are there so many of these shows about the bitchiness of women to each other? And why are there no such shows about the immaturity of men? Doing a bit of research on this topic, the “Real Housewives” series currently has the follow locales: New York City; Orange County; Atlanta; New Jersey; Beverley Hills; Miami; Vancouver; and the latest addition Melbourne. Please feel free to add any more that you know in case I missed out any locations. And on top of that, we have all the modeling shows like “ Next Top Model” and the latest “The Face ”. These so called reality modeling competitions have on different occasions claimed to spark the approval of inappropriate behaviours among these contestants (who are mostly young girls), specifically the bitchy bullying of other contestants. Surely the latest (?) season of American Top Model had included guys in the mix but from the advertising materials it seems it is going to be about the girls drooling all over those six pecks and what lies below it, and in order to achieve that cat fighting among each other (and why is it women’s fighting are cat fights when people named these women “bitches”?).

Surely there was one show about guys called “The A-List New York”. But cast of the show was a bunch of gay guys in New York, not your average straight blokes. So talk about stereotypes on gay guys being the bitchy bunch in the society. I do not know whether this actually improved the image of gay guys or it further cemented the stereotypes.

Maybe someone would argue that straight guys are just not interesting to watch. Maybe but then how would you know if you don’t have a show tested? Just throwing some ideas out there for some stereotypical “reality” shows – what about a show about a bunch of surfer dudes who do nothing most days but training their six packs, surf on the beach and picking up girls along the way? Them fighting over any female being walking into the bar or working at a bar would be good to watch. There could so much action when they throw punches at each other and got thrown out of the bar? What about a show about Rugby players in Australia? People would love to see them training shirtless all the time, hitting on girls or maybe even each other, not to mention getting drunk in the public and putting their contracts on the line. The stress and anxiety they caused on themselves but blaming on the society would be so cool to watch. If we can have “Housewives” shows about their litigations why not a Rugby player show about how many times they got sent to the courts to defend their career because of what they did outside the field? I would prefer to watch these on these shows instead on national news, which for me has no intrinsic social news value at all.

I mean at the end of the day if you have worked in the media long enough you would know that these so-called reality shows are portraying “edited realities” that do not necessarily be the “real thing”. However, what I found disturbing is that these shows seem to perpetuate certain social stereotypes while claiming to show people a “real” side of these participants. Maybe some of the participants do think it is a good opportunity to leverage their “Housewife” career or such, but is it doing the society any good? I doubt so. But then in a world about ratings and income, who cares about social good? At the end of the day, in this volatile industry, most of the time the good may not prevail.

I think I better shut up.

Oscar, Gender, Sexuality and Ethnicity

Another year of Oscar had come and gone. This year's Oscar managed to celebrate diversity across its major categories. "Gravity", a movie about a female astronaut stranded alone in space took out the Best Dierctor (Alfonso Cuaron) gong. "12 Year a Slave", a movie about an African American in New York being tricked and kidnapped into slavery in the South took home the Best Picture and Best Supporting Actress (Lupita Nyong'o). "Dallas Buyers Clubs", a movie about AIDS and those who tried to survive it scored the Best Actor (Matthew McConauhey) and Best Supporting Actor (Jared Leto) categories. "Blue Jasmine" successfully claimed the golden statue for Cate Blanchett in the Best Actress race.

At their acceptance speeches most of the winners made references to their movies. Jared Leto reminded us of all the people who suffered because of who they are and who they love. Lupita Nyong'o spoke of how her happiness was built on those who suffered for her in the past. Cate Blanchett stood up to movies with women as the main character can money because people do want to see them.

While Oscar is and has always been some distant dreams for me, this year I do appreciate the diversity in terms of nominations. If we look at the actresses who were nominated for the best actress category, four out of five were from women-centric movies. "Blue Jasmine" was so. "Philomena" was so. "August: Osage County" was so. And even "Gravity" was so. These female characters were no longer attachments to male leads but they were telling their own stories from their own angles. Some people think Cate Blanchett's speech was over-whining but was it so? Or are the criticisms to this speech just a reflection of some people's determination to maintain the easy common tokenism?

I can't speak for women in films because I am not one of them. However I do regularly hear my actress friends moaning over the restrictions imposed on them in terms of age and looks. Much too often female characters in movies were there as objects of interests for male leads. From time to time their importance were determined by their hotness index. More interestingly when a female character became the centre they usually have past their hot twenties and into their thirties or upward. The ladies in "The Hours" were so, Helen Mirren in "The Queen" was so, "Blue Jasmine" was so, "August: Osage County" was so, "Gravity" was so, Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side" was so, Julia Roberts in "Erin Brockovich" was so and the list goes on. Otherwise it involves actresses taking up roles that make them beyond recognition to score, such as Hilary Swank in "Boys Don't Cry", Hally Berry in "Monster Balls" and Charlise Theron in "Monsters". It seems that strong female characters that take charge of the plot cannot come from beautiful young actresses. Maybe because the film industry is still an industry about beauty so when beautiful actresses start to age it is the time to start to make them interesting to prolong their shelf life?

This interesting approach also at times applies to sexuality. Many a time actors and actresses were lauded for playing gay, bisexual and transgender characters. They will be praised for being brave and bold for taking up something so opposite to their real life preference. They will be scrutinised at press events as to how they managed to do that. Some of them were even rewarded with a golden statue. However for me they were just doing a job. You get a paycheck so you get it done. You know the terms for the job so you get it done according to the brief. I am not saying their works were not good but I find a bit double standard when openly gay actors do not get the same degree of accolades when they were playing straight characters. Weren't they doing something completely opposite to what they preferred in real life? In that case are their works being scrutinised and appreciated at the same level as their straight counterparts? That is the question I always have when straight actors were being rewarded for playing gay characters. I do appreciate what Jared Leto said at his acceptance speech but I do wonder whether that would change the uneven landscape for actors in terms of their sexuality.

This year "12 Year a Slave" made huge waves across the award season and put racial issues back on the radar again. There is no doubt African American actors have gained quite a bit of respect in recent years. I have huge respect for that in Hollywood. Even actors of other ethnicities are gaining momentum and their playground had become a lot fairer in terms of ethnic diversity in Hollywood. Actors of different ethnic groups are no long playing token stereotype characters in Hollywood. This did not come overnight but it is coming together. The success of films such as "The Help", "The Butler" and "12 Year a Slave" have proven non-Anglo-centric movies do have markets as long as they were done properly. In Australia, the success of movies such as "Rabbit Proof Fence", "Bran Nue Dae" and "The Sapphires" also proved so. However the change of the DVD cover artwork in the States still showed that there is still a degree of conservatism when it comes to relating diversity with sales. As for me my personal experience as an Asian actor in Australia says it all. Things are changing for the better but sometimes you do wonder whether the steps are too slow considering the cultural landscape and actor profiles of Australia had changed so much in the last two decades. Why are new productions like "Wonderland" is still all white considering one of the directors is actually an Asian woman?

This year's Oscar really got me thinking about the changes in Hollywood and the continued yearning for changes in a predominantly straight white male industry in the west. Things are getting better, but is better good enough? That is the question I have in my head.

Because I Am Just A Kindergarten Teacher!

Was catching up with my "How I Met Your Mother" watching the other day. I have never seen Season 8 so bought it the other day when it was on pretty good discount.

In one of the episodes it was revealed the Lily Aldrin (played by Alison Hannigan) stole an extremely expensive ashtray from an art collector simply because he said "you are just a kindergarten teacher" (so what do you know about art?). When her husband Marshall (played by Jason Seagel), who is an environmental lawyer applying to be a judge found out, he confronted her. During the heated argument Marshall asked Lily why was she so upset about the comment, she replied in tears, "Because I am just a kindergarten teacher!". She went on elaborating the disappointment about how she let her dreams of being an artist went because other priorities came up. She did not regret her choices but she regrets giving up her dreams and now the same dream will stay as a distance dream making her feeling unfulfilled for the rest of her life.

Her comment led me to think about my life and some of my friends' lives. A lot of us were brought up and being taught we can do anything when we grow up. We thought and wrote about our ideal jobs and professions when we were kids. If you are in a traditional Chinese family, you would be taught as long as you work hard dreams could become reality. Some of us even made it to the university or vocational training that we hoped for. But then how many of us did make a success from our ideals?

Becoming an actor is what I always wanted. I missed a chance because of family objection when I was young but I was lucky enough to have another chance after I grew up. During the process I get know a lot of other actors and artist friends. We all struggled to get a foothold in the industry but we continued to work hard. Eventually some gave up and went doing something else because life, or as some put, reality kicked in. A lot of time it is because of relationships and family that one must be responsible and be more selfless. This is exactly the case with Lily Aldrin, who gave up art to become a mother. She was happy most of the time until she got reminded about her unfulfilled dreams.

I felt extremely shaken when I watch that scene. While we all tried to be strong on the outside, inevitably there will be moments we feel fragile and exposed with our inadequacies in life. I cannot say that I am happy with where my acting career is going at the moment. But I am grateful I have a caring agent who managed to get occasional work for me so when tax time comes I can still say I am an actor. However I do have moments I thought "I am just something else". I can relate to Lily completely.

Life has ups and downs and so do career. However if you want to be in an art industry as a performer or artist, the chances are probably lows will be more than highs (by this I don't mean getting high on drugs...). However this is still a rewarding industry when your hard work paid off because this is an extremly subjective industry and a lot of time it is not "may the best actor win". Acting is not computer programming where you can run a beta to ensure its success. When I decided to become an actor I was well aware of this. Even teachers at the Theatre School reminded us of this when we graduated. As a result like most actors I have a day job to pay expenses while working hard and waiting for that break that may or may not come. I don't complain about it even at times of frustration because this is how the industry works. However this does not stop those "kindergarten teacher" moments from happening.

For me these moments usually happen when seemingly certain and stable situations became uncertain. When this happens I would think "I wish I were already a constantly working actor...but I am just a (fill in the blanks)" These could be depressing thoughts and sometimes dangerous if you are an artistic person who tend to follow your heart over your mind. However when we think deeper we know that we made certain decisions to become who we are now because we thought in the past this is best for us. For me understanding this helps me to minimise any unnecessary regrets. Is this the perfect recipe for everyone? Absolutely not. We were all trained and brought up in different ways and each of our situation would be different. But I do believe understanding yourself is the key to beat regrets in life.

It hurts to realise your dreams are bettered by reality but the dagger of life won't stab and twist as much if we have a strong defence for our heart - and this comes from self-understanding. That's how I see it.

Where Do We Go From Here?

As we live there is a pretty good chance we would contemplate what exactly we are living for and what do we want in life. As a fellow human being I have my fair share of those moments. I consider myself as a pretty "together" kind of person but with a brain that can govern unconscious emotions I am not immune to those unwanted thoughts and moments.

I said those are unwanted thoughts and moments because I don't like them. However being "unwanted" does not mean that they are unnecessary. Depending how you handle it this kind of thoughts and moments could turn out to be something extremely beneficial or could even turn your life around. I grew up learning that I am the only person responsible for my own happiness so naturally I have my own approach to deal with these moments.

A number of people asked me where do I usually find courage to make major decisions in life. I gave up what I established and moved to a different country to start from scratch. I decided to do something completely different to become an actor. I moved out of my old familiar profession to work in completely different fields. I decided to leave comfortable and safe permanent employment to contract works so I can have more time for personal and family matters. To some they are some kamikaze acts. For others the bravery is inspiring. For me it is something I need to do to understand my life and find my happiness.

I do not want to sound proud or arrogant because this is not what a humble life means. I just want my life to be meaningful to me and if I need to deal with all the crap that were thrown at me in these odd decades of years I need to do my best to make myself happy. I don't do drugs and do not believe in the illusion they brought so I have to keep it real. One thing though - no matter how dramatic the changes look to other people, most of the time they are planned and thought through. Risks were assessed to ensure that I could bear the consequences if things did not work out. This is because at the end of the day you cannot expect other people to come and rescue you. This is not me being proud but being pragmatic.

Life has its ups and downs and there is no way we can avoid them. But when we are in the down phase the question is not just "how could we get out of this?" but "how could I make myself happy again". This is because feeling down is more than a mere environmental impact but also an internal and emotional shift. Simply searching for an external objective change would not make you happier and if that objective change failed to satisfy you, you risk being drawn further inside the vortex of disappointment. That said I am not saying objective change will not bring happiness. What I am trying to point out is objective change has to come from your heart so you align the internal and external factors together. That makes it easier for one to get out of tight corners and situations in life.I am no expert in life and I do not intend to pretend to be one. But what I know is I want to be happy and I need to continue to sustain that because life is too short to stay unhappy. Listening to my heart, find out what I what, find out how to achieve it, assess the risk involve, plan my damage control and then go for it is my way to do it. It might not work for others but I do not believe in "there is nothing we can do" when it comes to our own lives. I believe there is always at least one option: to act to change or to just stay unhappy. Objective environments or constrains are objective because they can be changed. It depends on us to act responsibly to go to where we want ourselves to be. Nonetheless do always ask yourself "what would make me most happy at this stage of my life?" so a relevant goal is set for your actions because haphazard actions could lead to further hazards and disappointments. And this would possibly the last thing you want to see happening.

Life is an art itself and it is up to us to paint or sculpt it.

Gravity

A recent trip overseas allowed me to catch up on some movie watching. One of them is the acclaimed Gravity. I originally did not intend to see when I first saw the trailer. I was thinking “why would I want to watch someone drifting in space for 1.5 hour?” However, as the gravity gains momentum, I began to think whether I was too quick to judge a movie by its trailer. But then I never got a chance to see it in the cinema due to other reasons. So it was quite lucky that it was one of the selections on the in-flight entertainment.

By this time, I believe most people who were interested in the movie would have seen it. It is a movie about survival in space. No there are no aliens, just some good old people floating and drifting above Earth. I read some interviews with the director Alfonso Cuaron, and the actors Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. They were all talking about how the movie displayed a strong will of living can sometimes create miracles. This theme constantly runs through in Gravity. When it seems that all hope is lost, if you are willing to stay alive, that will could well be your lifesaver.

Gravity has generated another series of Oscar buzz for Sandra Bullock and I think she rightly deserves it. It is basically a one-woman show that gravitates you to this person’s survival tale. Usually I get really bored with this kind of movie as sometimes I do think producers, directors or screenwriters are stretching it too much and thus taxes its believability. However, this is not the case in Gravity. You do care more about the character and you will feel her disappointment when things did not work out as planned. Alfonso Cuaron has crafted a piece of work with the correct length that continues to capture your attention at every corner. I was unwilling to take my eyes off the screen and felt annoyed when I needed attend to my in flight catering (lucky you can pause the movie when the cabin crew displayed their hospitality). In the movie, there was virtually no help available to Sandra’s main character Ryan. Through this ordeal Ryan not only learnt about survival but also the meaning and reason of living. It is sometimes sad that it takes such an extreme situation for someone to understand the value of life. However, sometimes we do need this kind of epiphany to helps us truly appreciate life and overcome our obstacles to achieve true and simple happiness. Ryan’s ordeal was very real and emotional. Alfonso Cuaron said Gravity was partly a personal story as he was going through a rough patch in life at that time and thus poured his energy into this screenplay.

Without a doubt, Alfonso had brought out some of the best performances from Sandra Bullock. This is an extremely difficult production in a way that Sandra is being suspended in the air most of the time while trying to deliver her lines and keeping the performance real. In her interview Sandra said it was some of the most difficult things she did in a way that you have to ensure that every movement is right on the dot otherwise it is NG and doing it all over again. Furthermore most of time it is just a green screen with basic directions of where to look at and how far the target object was supposed to be. This is hard enough doing it normally not to mention being suspended in the air for several hours every day in a heavy astronaut costume. I think just for this, Sandra Bullock deserves winning an Oscar (though probably Cate Blanchett will win for her performance in Blue Jasmine).

George Clooney provided some great support in Gravity despite most of the attention was given to Sandra Bullock. His character is pivotal to Sandra’s character survival and he also provided good Clooney comic relief for an extremely intense journey. It might not be an Oscar nominating role like he had in the past, but it is equally important in the movie, and that is what matters.

In my opinion, Gravity is a well-paced, well-written and well-constructed masterpiece of the modern time. It might not have deadly aliens chasing you across a space station, or aliens invading your home turf in hordes. But the environment is as equally difficult to survive and that is what made it great – just simple story telling and technologies are just things to make this story happen. If you still haven’t seen it, I would highly recommend you to check it out when it is available on other legally published formats.

August: Osage County

Without a doubt “August: Osage County” by Tracy Letts is one of my favourite plays in recent years. The play is not just about bitchiness, but also about how everyone tried to survive at everyone’s expense. When it comes to the time that everyone needs to come to terms about their doings and misgivings, more colossal consequences unfold and discoveries will never be pleasant surprises.

So I was quite reserved when I heard that it is going to be adapted into a movie. I had seen plays that didn’t work when being adapted and “Rabbit Hole”, another of my favourite plays, was one of them. People were trying to convince me that it should be fine as Tracy Letts is doing the adaptation, but so was “Rabbit Hole”, which was adapted by the original playwright too. Nonetheless, I have expectations for “August: Osage County” as it has helmed by a cast of Meryl Streep and Julia Roberts. With that in mind, my concerns were eased a bit.

So here comes the movie. The verdict? In my opinion it was every bit as good as it was in the play. Surely it is a different cast but somehow the cast managed to translate an extraordinary piece of theatre experience onto the silver screen. Tracy made some tweaks around the original play to make it work with the screen, which I think were quite appropriate. I particularly like the fact that Tracy ended the screen version in the way that I originally thought it should be when I saw the play two years ago at the Wharf when the American production came over.

Meryl Streep playing the matriarch who lives her life at the expense of the happiness of every single person in the family was well and truly toxic. Her despicable ways of spitting out words with contempt with ease made the character truly alive and intolerable. How she uses her knowledge about the family as ammo and detonates land mines right at the exact moment to emotionally blackmail each and every one of them was just spectacularly played. Julia Roberts as the eldest daughter who though she escaped the calamity only to find herself clearing up both hers and the family’s issues was very well played. It is not the usual Julia Roberts you see. Personally I think it is one of the best works she did since Erin Brockovich. It seems that it needs a real strong and speaks her mind character for Julia to bring out her potentials. Facing Meryl Streep is not an easy game and without a doubt Julia Roberts upped her game significantly in “August: Osage County”.

“August: Osage County” is about the women in the household. Each female role was given some great moments to shine. Julianne Nicholson who played the daughter with the middle child syndrome was neatly portrayed. Her reservation about her life in order to protect herself and survive in this extremely aggressive and inquisitive family was a great contrast to Meryl’’s and Julia’s characters. Juliette Lewis playing the youngest daughter was comparatively weaker as the character does not really offer a lot of range comparing to the dynamic duo that her elder sisters provided. Margo Martindale as the outspoken and equally mean Mattie Fae was as expected a scene-stealer. However it was the scene between her and Chris Cooper, who played her husband Charlie that cemented the defining moment for both of these characters. This scene also set the stage for Mattie’s subsequent explosive confession. 

Apart from the main and major supporting characters, “August: Osage County” also commands a stellar cast of smaller roles. By this I mean smaller roles play by some well-known names in the industry. It is great to see Ewan McGregor has in recent years gone back to his roots and do some interesting drama based movies. Though his role as Julia’s husband was limited it was still entertaining to watch when he and Julia confronted each other’s demons. Abigail Breslin who played Julia and Ewan’s daughter Jean put a charm and at the same time attitude to this 14 year old “can’t wait to grow up and can do no wrong” character. I personally like Abigail as she tends to choose more interesting projects as compared to her child star counterparts. Also she added depth to the characters she played most of the time. Sam Shepard who opens the movie and set the stage of it performed a pivotal role with great precision. Although his opening monologue was significantly cut as compared to the original play, he still managed to capture the tone in just a few lines and set the mood for the rest of the movie.  As for Benedict Cumberbatch, I personally think that he was there for the rising star factor as his role was minimal in both the play and the movie.

“August: Osage County” is not everyone’s cup of tea. If you are not into heavily text based driven story, you would find it hard to swallow. It is unlike any of the standard American dramedy or comedy as physicality takes a back seat in this production. However, if you are into something that requires you to read (or listen) between lines to surprise yourself “August: Osage County” could certainly satisfy your appetite. As for me, I would trade two hours of my life for a great production as such in a heartbeat.