Alanys Chavez
Come One, Come All to The Drowsy Chaperone
The play that I saw was The Drowsy Chaperone, directed by Michael Wise. My overall impression of this play was that it was exceptionally amusing! The set was quite simple, a small chair to the left of the stage with a record player, records, a lamp desk and an old phone. There were backdrop structures that could be moved to create different scenes, simple and functional. I expected this play to have a very simple plot, as this is what my professor had said it would be. I had no prior knowledge to what the plot was about. Upon seeing the play, I felt like the Drowsy Chaperone was not simple. Although funny I feel like it had a lot to say with simple characters. I enjoyed this play but I didn’t get quite a few of the jokes that referenced actors or people from a prior time period. The people around me laughed so I assume the jokes were witty. In The Drowsy Chaperone, I appreciated the acting, how the play was directed and structured, and the costumes.
This play starts off with a
…show more content…
few words from a man in a chair, Brandon Brown. He has a charming personality. He claims that he wants to show us his favorite musical and sets it to play in his record player. The record plays and the show begins. The musical is about two lovers who are going to get married. Janet Van De Graaff played by Caitlin Artrip, one of the fiancés, has a career in show business and is leaving her job to be married. This has caused an upset in her manager’s life; he is losing his best star. There are two pastry chefs who are undercover gangsters who threaten Mr. Fieldzig, played by Mario Ragazzone, through an array of jokes that include many food puns. The other characters are helping the two lovers get ready for the wedding. I think the central theme of the play is “love”. More specifically I think the theme is centered on the idea of love and how there is a human desire to be loved. Many characters were not looking for a loved one but at the end of the play, almost everyone was married. There are quite a few small conflicts in this play but all are resolved quickly by forgiveness and apology. One of them is where Janet wants to see how much her fiancé loves her, so she tricks him into kissing her but as another girl. She is very upset about the scandal even though her fiancé, Robert, played by Austin Edward Parrish, didn’t by definition, cheat on her. They end up in a quarrel but all is resolved. The Drowsy Chaperone was entertaining and funny. This play mostly made me smile and wonder in confusion for a small part, whenever I didn’t get a joke. I think the language was very clever in this play. The pastry puns were hilarious and were one of my favorite parts of the show. I believe the actors made this show a hit.
The bold personality of Adolfo, played by Joey Rodriguez, was excellent. The ditziness of Kitty played by Torrie Hughes was on the spot. My favorite character was the drowsy chaperone, played by Aylin White. She was so charismatic! Although she had a very small part in the entirety of the play, her scenes were my favorite. Not to mention her voice is amazing, especially in, “We Stumble Along”. The relationship between the gangsters, played by Cameron Lang and Calvin Chervinko, and their ability to work together made the food pun scenes flawless. I thought that the best man, George, played by Patrick Leaton, looked nervous in the “Cold Feets” musical number and I couldn’t tell if that was part of the scene or whether he was trying really hard to not mess up. One character I did not understand was Trix, played by Marybeth Torres. She did a great job, I just didn’t like her character
overall. Another success in this play was the directing and structure. I loved the idea of having a narrator showing us his favorite musical and hearing his personal stories/comments to go along with it. I thought it was very innovative to have the characters be paused, fast forwarded, or rewound. The fast forward spit scene was hilarious. And so was the scene where the record got stuck and the actors were dancing and singing over and over again. It gave the play an extra oomph. Although I loved these parts, one part I did not like was where the wrong record was put to play. I thought it was excessive and more distracting then an enhancement to the production. In addition, I didn’t like how the play ended. It was very abrupt and quite unrealistic. I don’t know if the playwright or the director decided to end it with the Trix flying in to save the day but I thought it made no sense and like the person got tired of writing so they just decided to end it right then and there, with a phony finish. I loved the costumes in this play. I feel like there was a message being sent because there was a very clear distinction between flashy, sparkly, clothing that was directed towards promiscuity and to a future time period compared to the more plain and matte type of clothing that was directed to the present. My favorite costumes were the ladies maid costumes in the beginning, simple and pristine, and the ladies monkey costumes. They were pleasing to the eye. Overall I thought this was a great play. The musical numbers turned out quite well and I liked the mash up at the end, it brought everything together. I would see this play again as I feel like the spectator would enjoy something new every time they saw it.
Overall, I enjoyed this play. Even with the dull ending, I found it to be entertaining and a good use of my time. The cast was great and they made good use of a decent
Some actors in this movie do a good job of portraying their character. However, a few take away from the overall experience, such as Tony Ross and Claudia McNeil. Tony Ross, who is an actor known for Pancho Villa, plays Stacey Logan. Claudia McNeil was an actress known for her role in Raisen in the Sun, and she portrays Big Ma. Both of these
Overall, the actors chosen to play each role were well picked. All of them portrayed the role they were supposed to very well. In particular, I think the best two were Ruby Archuleta and Ladd Devine. Ruby is a strong character in general, with obvious weaknesses, like her stubbornness in what may not have been the best times to be stubborn, making her well rounded. Ladd Devine is a good ‘villain’.
Theater is acting, and each actor that was involved in this production was fantastic. Page Ogle who played Dolly did a very good job being a sweet talking, yet manipulative woman in the 1890s. I would have critiqued her on just one thing, slow down!
Their acting chops were very impressive whether it was comedic, emotional, or just stunning overall. Yet, on the other hand, some minor characters weren’t as well heard as others. I feel as the play could be better if some of the minor characters had projected their voice more, allowing their character to be known. However, although some voices were much stronger than others, all actors were full of talent, capable of dealing with script’s requirements, and did a good job
Not all plays are character-driven, in fact a great many are not. So if the characters are not what keep the audience intrigued, well then what does? There are many possible answers to this question. Paper Wheat uses the history of a group of people, a specific message commenting on a time period, spectacle elements such as song and dance, and the genre of comedy to keep its audience both engaged and entertained.
All characters in the movie were played well by the actors in my opinion. They
As far as acting, the performers were able to convey the feelings they needed to. However, some characters such as Ol' Cap'n played by Dick Lambert and Luttibelle played by April Curry, seemed more committed and engaging in their roles than others. A crucial factor in April Curry portraying her role so well was her vocal talent far exceeded that of any of the other major performers. She had an amazing voice that I was dazzled by from curtain up to down and left me craving for more. This almost compensated for my disappointment when it came to the ensemble singing to the soundtrack. Many performers were dependent on the cd and were not confident as to when to begin or stop singing, which dampered many moments of the performers. Another element of acting that I enjoyed was the exaggerated use of cooning throughout the duration of the performance that brought characters to life, and enabled certain moments to seem real.
In this case the participants were not quite as seasoned as those mentioned above. The play itself was quite clever and entertaining. Varying degrees of acting and vocal ability made for a very diverse cast. Meshing an 1879 play with Millennium type humor is no small feat. The scenes were concise; costumes were extrem...
Ernest Hemingway once explained, "A writer's problem does not change. He himself changes and the world he lives in changes but his problem remains the same. It is always how to write truly and having found what is true, to project it in such a way that it becomes a part of the experience of the person who reads it." The attitude and "projection" with which the author creates a story is the tone. A difficult aspect of writing to master, tone is one that transitions a piece of writing from satisfactory to exemplary. In The Hammon and the Beans, Americo Paredes incorporates tone in a manner that allows the reader to understand the two-sided situation because the characters are living happy yet troublesome lives. Through including contradictory statements, irony, and comedy in the story, Paredes displays his ability to utilize tone in order to construct a complex work with pure grace.
?A Servant To Two Masters? is the play that I studied. The structure is simplistic but also dynamic. It is quite an unusual play this may be something to do with coming under the genre of Comedia Del Art this is a form of theatre. Groups of actors would travel and perform their improvised plays. Their plays would usually be non-scripted and be very much like a pantomime. If plays were ever written then they would be written after they were performed. Comedia Del Arte was and still is enjoyed by many people. Lower class citizens could enjoy the simplistic storylines, as the upper class would admire the comedy within the play.
Besides the fact that I didn't like this play, the actors did do a pretty good job with their acting and memorization of their lines. Couple times Marisol hesitated with her lines but it wasn't too bad. I like the accents they were using. It wasn't to hard to understand what they were saying, but once again there were those times when their accents did effect a little on their pronunciations and my understanding on what they were saying. Overall, I don't think they were too believable with their characters. They didn't reach me.
Besides the firefighters/chorus, each character has a very clear and distinctive role in the play and had a different drive/obstacle for their respective goal. The wrestler wanted to first be able to stay in the attic, then not to get kicked out, then to further pursue to goals of the arsonist without getting caught or given over to the police. The actor did a good job on preforming tactics that would allow him to successfully make the actions seem realistic and dramatic. Something that I really liked is how the wrestler would act demanding yet pleading almost simultaneously. I feel like the characters played off of each other very well. An example would be when the husband was entering the attic and discovers that there are gasoline barrels there. Billy did a good job at playing off of the husbands anxious and frustrated nature by agreeing with the husband. If Iwas casted into the play, I would want to be the police officer. Even though this is a small role, I enjoyed how cherry the officer was and I enjoyed the scene of him in it. I would not want to play the wife of the person who died, because I disliked how static and restrictive her character was. I enjoy playing with emotions when I act, and her character not allow me to do
Now that I think about it, it seems strange that the majority of our class found no humor in this play. When one thinks of why this may be, it is simple. We do not laugh when we read this play because we have not changed. Since the time of this play, we have inched very little away from prejudice and belittling people because they are what we feel is different, therefore making them strange.
The play defies easy definition and various critics have labeled it variously as absurdist, existentialist, comical, burlesque, metaphorical or grim. The playwright on the other hand maintained that all through the creation of his work he strove to bring in the comic element and any tragedy that seems part of the play, may have crept in inadvertently and whenever it has been staged as a serious play, audience reaction to it has been cold.