What Is The Difference Between The Crucible Play And Movie

541 Words2 Pages

The Crucible by Arthur Miller has been transformed through many mediums. To name two, the film starring Daniel Day-Lewis and Winona Ryder, and the live play by the cast at the Evansville Civic Theatre. Both forms captured the theme and emotion expressed by the story, but the film conveyed the message in a more clear, concise manner.
In the film, things such as costuming, setting, and actors can make or break the quality of a production. In this case, it made the film display the era of the Salem Witch Trials. The sets of each scene brought to life the every day of the characters during this time period. Each house was furnished with likewise tables, chairs, and beds. The location the movie was shot in also looked truly like a lone and isolated place. This is extremely important, because without the setting matching the time period, it would be harder to convey when the story was taking place, or what the theme was.
Costuming was done brilliantly, with every cast member dressed accurately for Massachusetts in the 1600s. For the women, there were plain, conservative dresses with aprons, bonnets, and simple shoes. For men, dark pants, hats, and ivory shirts with black and brown jackets. For example, at any point in the film you will notice that each character is …show more content…

The cast did an amazing job of portraying their characters. Accents were polished and well added when they were needed, as well as dramatizing their lines to make a scene more lifelike and extreme. Obviously, these actors are well known for these skills, being that they are professionals. Winona Ryder’s character, Abigail, could have come off as flat, with little motives or reasons for her acts of attention seeking, but Ryder made her multi-dimensional. Daniel Day-Lewis’ character, John, may have seemed like a foolish man of disloyalty and hatred, but Day-Lewis filled him with raw emotion, and made him a character that the viewers could rally

Open Document