There are a couple of choice words I would use to describe the production I had had the “pleasure” to witness: confused, uncomfortable, yet humorous and enjoyable. On the night of the twenty-fourth of February on the campus of Lone Star Montgomery college, my mother and I viewed The Irene Ryan Scenes and Student Directed Plays with the full intent to observe and enjoy since I paid 12 bucks to get in. However, I was not prepared for what was presented in the show. First impressions are always the most important part of introductions. When I first walked into the room, it was a surprise to be sure. Although we’ve been told beforehand of the small showroom, it never really set in my brain how small it would be until I stepped into the room. …show more content…
The first couple of scenes – Lobby Hero and Green Day’s American Idiot scenes- made me feel super uncomfortable. Especially with the more intense yelling match with the second one. It felt like I was invading in a very personal, very private conversation that didn’t need nor want more eyes and ears to catch. The smaller stage just made it more intimate and personal that I cringed once they started spewing curses at each other. As they transferred from one scene to another, there was minimal change. They walked out on the stage with I assume work casual clothing for the first bit. Then the second scene, they removed their coats and they got into character. But, they did a good job in doing the transfer quickly and smoothly. It was also appreciated that once they removed their coats they paused for a couple of seconds and resumed the roles of the next pair of characters. They didn’t immediately go into the scene without giving us, the audience, a heads …show more content…
This scene was designed to be an office for auditions for roles for a play. I think they nailed it with the big poncho desk in the downstage left corner with the waiting room chairs and fake plants standing next to them in the background. As the scene played out, I felt sympathy towards Elizabeth with how the “director” was treating her. As I was feeling this, I was thinking about how you told us that they could be difficult to see if you have the right skills they’re looking for. So, I watched how Elizabeth did an amazing job at her tryout and walked out thinking she got the part. However, that my good feeling promptly left me as the “director” tore Elizabeth’s headshot, threw it away, and another woman struts in saying she was the actual director. Then Emma showed the woman Elizabeth’s auditioning card and copied Elizabeth’s tryout. I felt nothing except for pure, unadulterated hatred towards Emma. That was the most cutthroat and cruel thing I’ve ever seen in a performance. I wanted to rant so here I am. The students in this scene were good portraying their parts. Ms. Reeves played Elizabeth’s character wonderfully; skittish, shy, and anxious about her audition that she forgets her words. Her body language was also on par, with how she moved around cautiously until her story bit, where she upped the ante and went full-on actor mode. And Ms. Roberts
It was much different than anything I have been too. The two main narrators made this circus Olay act, even more entertaining by being humorous. A great deal of times these two narrators made almost the whole crows grin and chuckle. For my family and me, we could not stop smirking or laughing the entire time. What else brought uniqueness to this performance is that they got people from the crowd involved in a couple instances.
So this was not my first time at the University’s theater. I arrived early in hopes of finding a good seat, and saw a number of tables set up across the stage. In addition
The production ‘Chores´ had a fantastic impact on the audience. It successfully covered all elements of drama into the production
There was no lights out to change the sets. The cast, wearing their hospital costumes, changed the sets by rolling in the props. This action of changing sets was not disturbing at all. Also, the props used were actual hospital equipment. Set and the props as a whole made me feel like I was in a
There were also scenes including partial nudity, sex and drugs. The directors choice to visually display some of the more graphic content of this play instead of merely alluding to it, gave the piece a raw and relatable feel. The audience was able to put themselves in the characters shoes and truly empathize with their
She did have a lot of excitement in her voice but it was at the point that it was too peppy and cheery that it resulted in everyone getting annoyed. The actor performing as Montag did not seem to have much expression on his face and acted very staged unlike being flowy and smooth. The older actors like Beatty and Faber were very good at making the scenes and conversations look natural throughout the entire play. Everyone knew their lines but the way they were presented to the
This play does just that. It looks deeper than just an entertaining night at the theatre it encourages conversation and debate. It forces people to discuss the uncomfortable topics and increases understanding of unfamiliar situations. I watched the audience cringe and become uncomfortable, I saw the characters bring us together and tear us apart, but most of all I felt a connection, an understanding with my fellow audience members when we all walked out together still saddens by the events that had taken place. If your are looking for an intriguing night filled with a roller coaster of emotion that leads to a deeper understand of your fellow humans than this is the show for
From in front, the stupid lines and grotesque situations would have made him squirm with annoyance, but because he saw the perspiring stagehands and the wires that held up the tawdry summerhouse with its tangle of paper flowers, he accepted everything and was anxious for it to succeed. He found still another way to excuse her. He believed that while she often recognized the falseness of an attitude, she persisted in it because she didn't know how to be simpler or more honest. She was an actress who
Two plays that unexpectedly affected my life were Ken Ludwig’s Midsummer Jersey, a spin-off of Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream and the reality television show Jersey Shore. The other play, Seussical the Musical Jr. by Lynn Ahrens and Stephen Flaherty, is a show that combines Dr. Seuss’s most famous works into one play, focusing on Horton the Elephant and the Who’s of Whoville. The reason these shows affected my life, is because they gave me a confidence kick, and allowed me to break free from my timid shell.
While both stage and screen portrayals were highly acclaimed there are some similarities as well as some marked differences in each interpretation. On the surface, the first difference noted between the stage and screen versions are the sets. The stage version describes the setting of the play, the Younger family living room, as a
The stage design gives the impression of the characters being in two separate rooms, the positioning of blocks and pillars helps again to demonstrate this. This intricate attention to detail enables the performance to be compared so similarly to the movie adaptation of Shakespeare’s classic, although the ‘big screen’ enables more room for a fast change in setting and shots, Rourke does a phenomenal job trying to create this illusion which works so brilliantly. The night before the wedding or you could refer to it as the ‘stag and hen do’ was an unexpected twist that the audience definitely did not see coming. Again, the revolving stage was used to represent the divide between the women and the men and to compensate for the lack of space that the stage could carry.
The direction and acting of the play show that the success of any production relies heavily on the director and the actors. The director should work closely with the actors to create believable and nuanced performances and to ensure that the pacing and tone of the play are consistent. The actors should be able to convincingly portray teenage girls and bring their unique personalities and struggles to life on stage. For example, the actors should focus on creating naturalistic dialogue that overlaps and reflects the way that real people
Before intermission, the set was only slightly distracting, with the basic clutter from Andrew moving being labeled with bright tags that drew attention away from the actors. Champagne was used in a fight before intermission, but was not cleaned up, causing every step after to be followed by a loud sticking sound that diminished the effect of emotional acting. Confusingly enough, Gary, who was supposed to be a male , was acted by a woman, and Lillian, who was supposed to be a female , was acted by a man. Grant Hollowell, who acted as Lillian, made a strong effort to act as a female. While trying to fit into the character, he over accentuated the feminine voice making it hard to understand what was being said at times when what Lillian was saying would've been essential to the plot.
The characters in the play are described in stage directions or in the dialogues. Sometimes reading long stage directions may become tedious and boring. But you can imagine how they would look or their tone of voice. In the film, you watch the scenario, characters’ body language and how they look (like their costumes), and you can imagine how the character
Before a play begins, I see people sitting in hard metal chairs. Seeing the people fills me with nervousness and excitement. Every person looks different than the last. I see different faces, different clothes, and different expectations on what they are about to see. The sound of quiet talking fills the air, traveling about the room, causing each person to speak just a little louder so he will be heard.