Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
History of theatre wikipedia , lookup
Improvisational theatre wikipedia , lookup
Antitheatricality wikipedia , lookup
Augsburger Puppenkiste wikipedia , lookup
Theatre of France wikipedia , lookup
English Renaissance theatre wikipedia , lookup
Medieval theatre wikipedia , lookup
Theater (structure) wikipedia , lookup
Theatre of the Oppressed wikipedia , lookup
THEATRE REVIEWS There's No Business like Show Business Assignment: Up to 2 bonus will be added to your final mark for this assignment. Attend a performance of ______________________________. Tic kets are available from _______________________________. Write an insightful theatre review of the performance. This review, which should be between 1 ½ to 2 pages long, is due no later than November 28. Please note that they will NOT be accepted after that date. Staple your ticket stub to the review. Many people write theatre (or even movie) reviews that just leave much to be desired. As someone that participates heavily in theatre, I am really scrutinous when it comes to the reviews that are written. If I'm going to spend money on tickets to a show, I want to know what to expect from the production as a whole, not what the summary is. Movies are different in this respect, as not a lot of plotlines are known for movies. Before you write a theatre performance review, you should familiarize yourself with the work you will be reviewing. Read or reread the play if necessary, and research the playwright and the play's historical context. This will give you a basis for the review. Once you are well-informed, attend the performance. Pay close attention and make a few mental notes to help you write the review. It also may be necessary to attend the performance more than once to write a good review. Be generous with compliments to standout performers. Whether the production venue is a high school drama department, a community playhouse or the Broadway stage, a good theater review highlights a show's strengths and weaknesses, extols the talents of its cast members and entices fellow theater lovers to buy tickets. Familiarity with plays, playwriting and production values is desirable for aspiring theater critics, coupled with excellent communication skills and attention to details, subtext and nuance. Instructions 1. Begin with a catchy statement to attract the reader's attention. This can be a quote from the play or a list of items from the play, for example. Identify the title of the play, the genre, the name of the production company and where the show is playing in the opening paragraph. Example: The summer season of the Easy Street Players has just kicked off with a sixweek run of "Muriel's Memoirs" at the newly renovated Crane Performing Arts Center. This contemporary drama directed by Maria Laris stars four accomplished actors whose faces will be familiar to patrons who follow Arcadia's theater scene. 2. Provide a brief synopsis of the play and a little bit of history about the playwright and the period in which the play was written, which also describes the setting, introduces the main characters and tells the audience what the core conflict is. Don’t summarize the plot. The purpose of this paragraph is to hook the readers' curiosity about what happens next but should never spoil their own enjoyment of the show by divulging all of the twists and surprises that await. I don't want to hear what happens in the script. I want to know how the actors act within the script! Include a reference to the playwright and other plays he or she has written. If there is anything interesting or unique about the inspiration behind the script, its performance history or why the director chose to produce it, mention that as well. Example: Ten percent of box office proceeds will be donated to the Tri-Cities Alzheimer's Foundation. 3. Review the performances. Did the actors approach the roles traditionally or in a new way? Were they believable? Talk about how the actors play the characters, not the characters That is so important! Give everyone credit. Justify your reasoning for not liking (or really liking) an actor's performance. Be sure to provide the actors' names and other information, such as some of their past performances. This is so important, and so many people leave it out. 4. Consider the set design, the costumes and how technical elements such as lighting, sound effects and music enhanced the production or detracted from it. Offer constructive remarks on what might have been done to make the show better. Example: “The amplification of recorded music sometimes made it hard to hear what the actors were saying. “ Be sure to name all of the designers. A lot of work went into designing the sets and lighting and everything else you see on stage besides the actors. Comment on it! I want to know what to expect in the production design and such. Sometimes, the set and props make the whole show! This is an area that needs a little more attention. Even if it's just one sentence, please say something about it. 5. Discuss the performance's direction. Give the director's name and discuss the director's approach. For example, did the director try a new approach, or was the staging more traditional? 6. Provide readers with information on the performance dates and times, where to purchase tickets and whether there are any elements of the show such as violence, sex or strong language that make it inappropriate for young children. Tell your readers whether you would recommend the play, and give reasons. Suggest ways in which the performance could be improved, and if the performance is great, tell why. Was the show worth any money at all? Perhaps your readers should just skip the production all together. Was the time you spent going to it worth it? Perhaps taking in a shorter play may be better. Tips & Warnings Whenever possible or practical, read a copy of the script prior to attending the play. Carry a notebook to jot down your thoughts during intermission and right after the show. Refer to the printed program for correct spellings of cast members' names. Be kind in your criticism, especially toward amateur performers such as students or community theater actors. Consider as well the constraints imposed by budgets and resources. Harshly comparing stage sets built by local volunteers to stage sets constructed by union crews for a Broadway musical is neither fair nor realistic. Be Honest. Just because your friend loved the show doesn't mean that you have to. If you didn't like it, say so. Justify your reasons. If you loved it, say so. Justify your reasons. It's that easy. Don't mislead people. If it's something that you enjoyed, but has an acquired taste (ie- Performance Art), please let people know. Include the times of performances, where the performances are being held and how long performances will run. Include other logistical information such as ticket prices and contact information for the theatre. Exploring Theatre, "The Audience: It’s Role and Imagination." Everyone Has An Audience By: Courtney McDonald I listened to a variety of film reviews by Ebert and Roeper, to observe what comments they had when critiquing films. Some such films were, I Heart Huckabees, and Being Julia. I also read a few theatre critiques on the net since it had been some time since I had read one. The reviews I read were on A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and Chicago. After reading and listening to these reviews I noticed many similarities and many differences between these two types of productions. The first thing that drew my attention when examining the similarities between play reviews and those of film, was that each author first gave a very brief plot synopsis. This is to create understanding with the reader, so they understand what the play/movie is about. The reviewers then began to name the actors forming the cast, and also who directed the production. In some they would also mention what other notable performances the actors had been involved in, and what other pieces the director may have done. In most cases, such as in the critiques, Midsummer Night’s Dream, Chicago and I Heart Huckabees, the reviewers state the genre of the production, also for clarification purposes for their audience. Once the productions had been introduced, the quality of the shows was discussed. They would focus on a few critical details that they would find either beneficial and admirable to the success of the production, or those details that would make it detrimental and contemptible. They support their opinions by finding precise details throughout the production. For example, When Ebert was describing the unrealistic weakness of the film Being Julia, he went into depth on one scene where the stage improvisation could not have happened naturally, and when the main actress had to do costume changes, there would physically not be enough time to do the elaborate changes she had to do. Since he noticed these faults, he labeled the movie “…unrealistic, empty, and an unconvincing Hollywood melodrama.”. Acting abilities are also thoroughly discussed in reviews. A production is mostly dependent on the actors and their capability of bringing the story to a point of keen interest. Character relationships, plot and action are all vital to a successful production. Reviewers take a fine interest in these elements for that matter. They consider characters acting off each other within the plot, which has to be kept moving by frequent spots of action. All of these elements are intertwined, and reviewers in both film and theatre tend to pay close attention to these when passing a judgment about the entire production. Another similarity is the discussion of the director’s take on the production. In other words, the director’s originality. Their ability to take the script and to create a phenomenal piece of art is examined very closely. Setting and scenery are habitually critiqued, because they are fundamental in the piece to establish authenticity. Also for realism’s sake, pace, costumes, characters and dialogue are viewed closely, to critique on these details. These four factors are all to create believability for the production so it will flow smoothly. Reviewers tend to comment on the fluidity and believability of the production. After analyzing the production, the reviewer writes one final statement or rating of the piece. It is to leave a lasting impression on their audience to persuade them to go see, or not to go see the production. These are all aspects that are critiqued in both theatre and film, for they all exist prominently in the latter and the former. Even though there are many similarities between reviews in theatre and reviews in film, there are many dissimilarities as well. At one point in Ebert’s discussion over the film I Heart Huckabees with Roeper, he mentioned that the first time he watched it, he did not understand what was happening, until he watched it again. When reviewing theatre, it would be quite difficult to watch a performance more than once before having to critique it. Since Ebert and Roeper have their films on instant reply, they can watch and re-watch the film as much as they need to before basing a decision on its quality. Basically, theatre critiques are based a bit more on first impressions. In theatre, a second performance can differ slightly from the first time it was played, and once again a third time, but in a film, all the artistic elements and acting performances are going to be the exact same for that particular film. I also believe that when critiquing a play, more attention is paid to lighting and music than it would be in a film. Take Chicago for example. The reviewer had paid much attention to the orchestra and what they were doing. In this particular production, the ‘music’, meaning, the band that the music was originating from, was physically visible, where, in a movie, it would not be. In a live performance, the music may not necessarily be consistent all of the time. A clarinet might squeak or the drums might be off tempo, but in contrast, film music would have been prerecorded to perfection before being added onto the film. Musicals aside, music in a film is more of a background sound, only mean to play a subtle role to enhance the plot. Theatrical music can be vital, especially since the performance is live and the music adds a special effect for the show. The show can literally hinge on the music. In theatre critiques, the reviewers are just more conscious of this. Along these same lines, stage presence and stage directions are also not surveyed in a film like they are in a play. In film, camera angles can change for different shots, when in reality, it might be physically impossible for an actor to move in a certain way in a certain amount of time. Film can definitely distort all sense of time in that way. Also, actors must be heard on stage, and if they are not a reviewer will critique their volume. In a film, they have microphones and talk in a more natural tone. Like theatre, film also has some aspects that are critiqued that aren’t in a play. Such as continuity. It would be difficult to fall out of continuity in a play, especially since the plot moves in quick succession. When filming, the same scenes might be shot on different days, so everything must remain continual. If a cigarette isn’t burning in one shot, when it was in the previous, a reviewer would notice that and would point that out in their critique. I listened to Ebert and Roeper’s review on the movie Ray, based on legendary musician Ray Charles. They gave this movie two thumbs up and based their rating on Jamie Fox’s “astonishingly rich” performance as Ray Charles. They went on to comment on his “outstanding acting”, and how he is “a gifted mimic”. They call him a gifted mimic because he was able to capture Ray’s ticks and speech patterns “terrifically”. They believed that he could be looking at an Oscar for Best Actor in the coming year for this performance. They also said that “…real life characters are portrayed…” and that it was not predictable because of this. Examples: STU Reviews : Where Fredericton follows theatre. References Hamlett, Christina. How to write a good theatre review. ,<http://www.ehow.com/how_21 88321_write-good-theatre-review.html> Sweeney, Erica. How to write a theatre performance review. <http://www.ehow.com/how_48 81268_write-theatre-performancereview.html> "Play by Play- Theater Essays and Reviews, 1993-2002"; Jonathan Kalb; 2004 "Arts Reviews- And How to Write Them"; Celia Brayfield; 2008 "No Turn Unstoned- The Worst Ever Theatrical Reviews"; Diana Rigg; 1991 [THEATREREVIEWS.docx]