Riley's Review of "Much ado about Nothing"

For my play review I watched the Royal Shakespeare Company's performance of "Much Ado About Nothing, " directed by Jeremy Herrin. I confess this was my first exposure to this specific play - having neither read it nor seen it before. But I was not disappointed...the performance was exquisite. 

It was interesting to watch a performance that toyed with two forms: live performance and film. By bridging these two forms, the performance was able to enhance to the unique benefits of each. The lack of props and setting transfixed the viewers focus on the dialogue and the expression of the actors – this was helped by the use of the camera which primarily shot the scene from the waist up. The camera provided a rich perspective to the play because it controlled the viewers focus. The camera would follow the speaker as he or she walked around the stage – making the stage appear larger. Furthermore, the camera would zoom in on actors faces when they were giving a soliloquy and would zoom out on the whole stage when there was a shared group reaction or response to a situation. The use of the camera allowed the at-home viewers to see facial expressions up close whereas physical attendees did not have that opportunity. In essence, the camera allowed the viewer to enjoy the play in a fashion that highlighted the key elements of the plot and dialogue—whereas physical attendees would be limited by their location. The at home viewer was able to watch from the stage and the crowd – enjoying a plethora of perspectives and angles. However, this did limit the audience’s exposure to staging.

Apart from the interesting contrast of form, the acting itself was exemplary. This unadorned simplistic performance bereft of unnecessary props and backdrops focused solely on the richness of the play’s (at times) nonsensical dialogue. Nevertheless, the intricate costume designs helped cultivate the complexity of each character and complimented the strength of the actor’s performance. The sole focus of the play was on character and not their various interactions rather than on external aesthetics or grandiose design.  Occasionally the actors would acknowledge the audience and give them a knowing and exasperated look – cultivating a sense of solidarity and participation among the viewers. The multicultural cast subverted traditional expectations of Shakespearean drama – while nevertheless reaffirming its timeless applicability. The play was carried by the performance of Charles Edwards (Benedick) and Eve Best (Beatrice) who’s witty banter and melodrama was exaggerated by the use of the camera which zoomed in on scenes of tension and conflict and out on scenes of lightness and comic relief. 

P.s. For all the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air fans out there, the butler plays the king! 

Continue Reading...

Brett's Review of Macbeth

I watched the Globe Theatre’s 2013 rendition of Macbeth.

As the play opened, I was very intrigued with the three witches. They don’t show their faces while chatting, and the lighting doesn’t make it under the hood of their cloaks, making their faces look like black, empty pits. Not only is this slightly terrifying, but it also makes it a surprise when they take off their hoods to talk to Macbeth. Suddenly, the three witches have faces to accompany their voices. The witches continued to be extremely strange as they are very physically interactive with Macbeth and each other. As they prophesy to him, they cling to his arms, legs, and torso in a somewhat frightful way. However, they are not so with Banquo, and do not come close to her. Once the witches leave Macbeth, they are also physically close with each other and cling together in a group as they exit the stage. I found this extremely interesting because I have never seen this behavior in a rendition of Macbeth, and it made the witches seem like one large creature, rather than three separate entities.

As mentioned above, Banquo is a female in this version of the play. Although she is played by a strong actress, I prefer a male actor because of the parallels between Macbeth and Banquo. With Banquo as a female, I was more prone to draw conclusions based on traits that are seen as more feminine or masculine. I was also intrigued by Banquo’s relationship with her daughter, because the mother-daughter relationship is very, very different from a father-son relationship. These gender differences also came into play with the role of Duncan, which was played by a female. Queen Duncan did not seem as strong of a character as I generally imagine, because the actress playing her looked sickly and petite compared to the other actors. Queen Duncan’s children, a male Donalbain and a female version of Malcolm, represent both mother-daughter relationships and mother-son relationships.

Another somewhat distracting addition to this play is the painting on many characters’ faces.  The interesting designs are slightly strange and look almost like ornamental makeup. Some were different colors, and maybe I don’t know the play well enough, but I couldn’t figure out if certain colors were grouped together for certain reasons, or if it was randomized.

Continue Reading...

Kevin's Performance Review of "Macbeth"

I originally intended to attend King Lear in Salt Lake City, but after Professor Burton mercifully provided a much more convenient and less expensive alternative--viewing one of the Globe Theater's on-demand filmed performances--I decided to watch Macbeth, as I have previously read this work with a partner earlier in the semester.

In the comfort of the Harold B. Lee Library, I was able to sample a morsel of the famed Globe Theater's magic. While I'm certain it cannot compare to actually being in England, it was an enjoyable  experience nonetheless. Here are a few of my observations and attempts at analyzing this impressive performance:

1.) Character/performer analysis - The actor who starred as Macbeth played his role with great passion. He portrayed a mighty man racked with guilt for his heinous transgressions. He was literally sweating profusely at times, a large vein protruding from the side of his head, eyes red and bloodshot; in a heart-wrenching moment, after Lady Macbeth's death is announced, he weeps out of his love for her. Two more examples: he kissed his wife intensely after committing to their plans, but he nearly strangled her when the pressure mounts later on in the play (Lady Macbeth, in the following scene, has bruises all over her arms, neck, and face--quite alarming!). Everything he did was emotional, whether it me in movement, speech, or expression.

2.) Stage movement and effects - One of my favorite liberties the performers took was interacting with the crowd. My English 292 professor, Dr, Peter Leman, once related to us an experience he had while viewing a play at the Globe Theater (in fact, he got to lean on the stage while he watched!), specifically pointing out how excited he was when the cast members singled out members of the crowd when reciting lines or ran between them during action scenes. I looked for that, and I found that this cast, too, included the audience in the performance. They would point at individuals and run around on the ground area. One of the cool things about seeing it filmed was I got to see the delight it brought to the audience members faces when these interactions occurred. 

I liked how, in a dialouge-heavy play, the made sure to move the actors around the stage to keep up a feeling of progression. During one neatly designed scene, they had actors up in the balcony areas all around the circular theater shouting their lines. The effect it created made the whole stage seem to expand and be much bigger than it really is. The fight scenes weren't Jason Bourne-level by any stretch, but they were well-choreographed. 

The "special effect" I liked the most was the musical elements they brought into the story. They had drums to build intensity, violins to soothe, and knocking noises that effectively did its job of bugging the heck out of the listeners. I went back and viewed the script, and many of the musical insertions--including the Catholic chants and hymns during the coronation ceremony--were all experimental adaptations.

3.) Interpretation of script - The play was way funnier than I anticipated. After all, Macbeth is categorized as a tragedy. Even in serious moments, the actors would be rather humorous in their depictions of what was happening. I wonder if that was common in Shakespeare's time as well or if they just stuck to the script. 

In the script, it never has two characters talking simultaneously. However, they did during the performance. I was following along on my Kindle app while the play streamed, and I was fascinated to see how they broke up the dialouge--speeding up and slowing down--adding meaning. Because I was following along, I realized they did a scene out of order (they did Act 3 Scene 6 before Scene 5). I guess they thought it made more sense to do it this way because it wasn't out of necessity--it was right after intermission. 

This is supposed to be a "brief" analysis, so I better wrap things up. I liked it (although it got long in the middle with all the back and forth between Macduff and Malcolm), and I'd love to someday see one live in London.

Continue Reading...

Abby's Review of London Theater's Hamlet

As has already been addressed, London Theater's production of Shakespeare's Hamlet was absolutely incredible. I'm wanting to focus my review on the scene directly before Ophelia's death. I was initially confused of the significance of her camera and the photographs, as it contributed to the ambiguity of the time setting of the play, but I felt that it helped to imply that Ophelia's death was indeed a suicide.

She enters the room after Laertes' return, pulling a large trunk off to the side. She then passes out flowers to everyone. She has everyone congregate around the trunk, plays a note on the piano, and then sings. Her despair for her father's death is obviously apparent in her shaking voice and pitchy tone, and the rest of the characters bow their heads as if in prayer.

To me, this scene appeared to be a makeshift funeral for Polonius. Hamlet had hidden the body, and so a true funeral service was impossible. The characters' universal bowing of heads showed that they were all in understanding of the meaning and significance of the event. Then everyone disperses and Ophelia walks out the door into the light. The pictures come to be significant when Gertrude opens the trunk to reveal all of the photographs that Ophelia had collected. If Ophelia's camera and photographs were significantly indicative of her character, a funeral for her photographs indicates a funeral for Ophelia. This is why Gertrude was so shocked after revealing the photographs, and then runs after Ophelia.

Where controversy exists over whether or not Ophelia truly committed suicide or drowned by accident in the garden, this scene illustrates an argument that Ophelia had intentions to kill herself.

Continue Reading...

Mary's Review of a Hamlet Production

Personally, I was not a fan of National Theater Live production of Hamlet.  But then again, I probably shouldn't have sat through a three hour play while recovering from what was probably the flu.

My primary impression was that it was a bit more dark and mellow dramatic than the play was in my head. Hamlet is a dark play, but the additions of music, strange noises, low lighting, and dark painted walls, all made it less real to me.  The darkness continuous throughout the play and offered little contrast to play against.  It was also very elaborate and I'm not sure if this is was done in a good way.  The scenery had odd things placed about, including the random doll house, that had uncertain meaning.  Everything was very decorated, sometimes without clear purpose.  I was reminded of a discussion in class about being wary of effects that are distracting.  I think they definitely succeeded in creating the brooding mood they wanted to create with their mostly dull colors and lighting, even if I didn't really like how it was done or how clearly orchestrated it was.  

Speech-wise, some of their lines and speeches were far to emphasized and didn't flow very naturally or else didn't create enough of a contrast.  How can you feel the emotion of a powerful moment when every line is expressed in passion anyway?  Their movement to these lines too was often unnatural, such as sliding around the floor.  As many have mentioned, I also had difficulty with the lack of historical cohesion in the setting.  I wished that they would pick a single time period rather than jump about.  There is a lot to be said though about the clothe changes that Hamlet goes through.  At a kind of climax of the play, he is wearing an interesting mix with the king coat, soldier pants, and David Bowie shirt.  I actually like this outfit, strangely enough, because it did a good job of portraying his confusion, especially as he played so many different roles in trying to get revenge.  It also seemed to me to portray a little of the excitement that he seems to feel in this part of the play.

On the other hand, the actors did really well (barring Ophelia).   Gertrude and Claudius were great and fairly believable.  Even though I wouldn't have imagined him as Hamlet, Benedict Cumberbatch did an amazing job.  I remembered why he'd been my favorite actor for a long time. Polonious was my favorite.  He was actually funny and lovable.  He spoke his lines in just the right manner, unlike others, and used just the right pauses to make them hilarious.  I was sad when he died. It was nice to see a live production so that I could get a sense of how things might have happened since Shakespeare gives us very little detail of time and setting.  I would recommend that people do watch performances of his plays.

Continue Reading...

Sarah's Performance Review

I thoroughly enjoyed this production of Hamlet, I would see it again in a heartbeat.

Things I enjoyed:

• The music they played in between scenes- It intensified the effects of the ending scene, and built anticipation for the next. 
• The soliloquies- instead of having the actor be the only one on screen they just darkened everyone else, and slowed down time.  This had the excellent effect of really seeing into the characters mind. 
• Benedict Cumberbatch as Hamlet- who doesn't love Benedict Cumberbatch? He did a fantastic job. 
• The slowing down of time when Hamlet kills Laertes- this served to intensify and sadden the moment.
• The special effects- in particular the effect just before the intermission when what looks like black ash blows into the court. It was a deeply affecting symbol of the "something rotten in the state of Denmark." The camera shots also helped a lot with this because they blocked out anything that wasn't included in the special effect, making it the sole focus of attention. 

Things I enjoyed less:

• The costuming- for the most part it was well done, but there were times that the costumes were confusing and distracted me from what was actually happening onstage.    
• Ophelia- as mentioned by other classmates Ophelia's descent into madness could have been better portrayed.     

Continue Reading...