Unit 3: Romey & J (Blog 6)

ROUGH DRAFT - 

No, I did not prepare sufficiently for the rough draft performance because I did not have my lines memorized and the staging was very scattered and people did not know their exits and the attitude from the characters were missing because there was no fluidity and I wasn't able to appropriately play my character appropriately.

There were elements in the our performance that was absolutely horrible and needed lots of work. First of all we needed to work on memorizing all our line especially my lines because I needed the script the whole time and that held me back from portraying the role of Sampson's smart aleck/sarcastic role in the scene. We needed for the thumb-biting to be more confident and look more offensive, and Irti wasn't able to pull it off so if we weren't able to do it properly we were advised to cut that out. Irti also needed a sash/crown/cape that signified him as the prince in the end he also needs more authority. Irti also had to work on making the maidenheads and the female being the weaker vessels part work with the joke and I had to deliver my lines more aggressively and push him off and he had to be aggressive about pushing me to the wall.  The questions between Abrahm (Sarang) and Sampson (Irti) need to be more sarcastic and Tybalt (Willie) needed to be more bitter and the stage combat hand to more 'staged' because it sounded like they were breaking the wooden swords. And most of all me and Irti a.k.a. Gregory (me) and Sampson needed more actions and not give our backs to the audience. We need to fix the attitude so that the emotion and circumstance of the scene is understood. I think the audience wouldn't have been able to understand because we needed the extra attitude and emotion with lots of 'testosterone' induced sarcasm  for enmity in the scene for the audience to understand what we were trying to get across.

To improve our performance for the final draft we improved our staging and communicated with each other about who was standing where. and we also put in that I exit when the combatting starts and come back on to do my part for citizens and then exit again. We also researched our parts in the No Fear sparknotes and added the appropriate emotion and attitude so the audience understood and Irti did his thumb bite more aggressively while I delivered my lines with sarcasm and aggression towards Irti, we carried out our part like a conversation. Willie was more aggressive and bitter with Tybalt and Sarang worked on his character and made it more snarkier. And the most redeeming part was that we all memorized our line except for some mishaps and Irti needing ques. 

FINAL DRAFT- 

Yes, the final draft was much better than the rough draft because we memorized our lines and we also went over the No Fear script so that we knew what emotion we had to get across to the audience with a much better understanding. We also improved all aspects that made the audience waiting like lack of action and gestures in the beginning and the portrayal of the level of testosterone.

First of all we memorized all our lines and then we went back to the No Fear script to find out the meaning of our lines in modern english so we knew what emotion to get across for the audience to understand and set a mood for the scene and improvise on our attitudes of our characters. We also used more action in the opening bit with a bit more sarcasm and aggression and improved on the maidenheads bit which had to said with pride and also he thumb-biting bit, Irti finally figured out who to bite his thumb at and how to do it more offensively. Willie, Sarang and Irti made the quarreling bit flow more fluidly because we all learned our lines and then they improved their combatting and Irti learned his lines for the Prince and was able to deliver them with authority. We also improved our staging the mos because we finally advised each other and discussed my exit and the entrance and we remembered to not give our backs to the audience.

Since we all understood our lines better in the Final draft performance we were able to improvise our attitudes and emotions in delivering the lines so the audience would understand better. We didn't really have a audience except for Ms. Kimi but I think that if we did than the audience would've been able to grasp the intention of the dialogues. I think that we were able to portray the circumstance of the scene much better than the first time that we attempted to but it still needs improvement. We were able to portray elements of the scene very good and we still need a lot of work on other scenes.

FINAL REFLECTION: 

After attempting to perform a scene from R&J, I've come to realization that actors in the Shakespearean theatre had lines in a different style of language which had to portrayed with emotion in order for the audience to get the gist of the scene and the mood of the scene. I also learned that if scenes from R&J don't flow properly they lose the quality or the 'magic' of the entire concept, so the character personalities were different as well. The actors that performed these plays must've had a hard time learning the lines and emotions had to portrayed perfectly, which actors nowadays have it easier on them because they don't have to perfect the emotion behind the lines for the audience to understand.

I learned that I have to memorize all my lines and most of all understand all my lines so that I know what emotions to deliver with the lines for the audience to understand and I always have to in action on stage or show some expressions so that I don't seem boring and the scene flows on fluidly. I also have to do more rehearsals when I'm doing difficult performances like R&J and anything else that I might find difficult. I also have to remember to stand diagonal so the audience see me from every angle and I'm not giving my back to the audience unintentionally.

Unit 3: Romey & J (Blog 5) (Annotated script)

Annotation includes the modern meaning and action/emotion that needs to be portrayed. (Click on picture o see better)

Unit 3: Romey & J (Blog 4)

If I were to choose a scene to perform from Romeo and Juliet, I would choose the fight scene after Mercutio's death when Romeo and Tybalt fight. The thing I love about this scene are the lines and the climax of the whole thing. When Romeo says something along the lines of "Mercutio's soul is waiting for one of our souls to follow him, it's either you or me, or the both of us" (well, I wrote it in modern English), I personally think that's one of Shakespeare's most awesome piece of writing, and although I'm not that quite fond of Romeo and Juliet, that scene is still awesome. I think this duel scene is influential and awesomely written, it would be even more awesome if it were dramatized.

Assuming, I'm the said director of this scene, I have to think about the staging, props, lighting, roles of characters, how the lines are said and also about some on-stage duel. I would set this scene in a more alternate format than what it shows in the exact movie representations, I want to thunk like Baz Luhrmann and set the scene differently. I think the scene would be more dramatic if it were to have happened in the marketplace, so I would set it there, but after the sun went down. The scene would start off with Romeo over Mercutio's body, and quite in shock and sadness, while Tybalt turns away to walk away and mark his victory, all of a sudden Romeo get's up and snatches Tybalt by the collar and deliver his lines about avenging Mercutio's death. Then Tybalt shoves him to deliver and then Romeo delivers his lines (that awesome verse) and the duel starts and ends with Romeo kneeling feet away from Tybalt's dead body in shock. I will include the original lines, and the following. But I want to avoid all male actors even though the scene includes all men.

Being that I'm the director, I would know how I want to Romeo's particular lines to be like, so I would make myself Romeo, regardless of the fact that I'm a girl. I think I need a serious actor to play the part of Tybalt, so I guess I would choose Minnies because she can be very serious in my opinion and I think the scene is supposed to look stiff and menacing and I think Minnie's good at being cute but she can seem very mean if she acts like it and that's what I need, stiff mean-ness.

Unit 3: Romey & J - Reduced Shakespeare Company

In class, we watched the following clips from the Reduced Shakespeare Company's production "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare":

What elements are being used in this particular performance? (Be specific, use examples and evidence to support your choices)

• Some elements that I've noticed, that were being used is the use of male actors, and a bit of cue acting. 'Cue acting' was very popular during Shakespeare's time because actors were given their lines right before the play sometimes and/or didn't have time to rehearse so someone would whisper the lines to them from behind the curtains. They also used rhythm, repetition, rhyme, alliteration, and assonance in their dialogues even in the parts where it was modified or improvised. They also used some onomatopoeia like the original plays to emphasize sound effects. Onomatopoeia was used in Shakespearean times to emphasize sound effects, since they didn't have that many. ("The Theatre in Shakespeare's Time."The Theatre in Shakespeare's Time. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 May 2014. <http://alexryan8x.tripod.com/theatre.htm)

What changes have they made and why? (again, be specific and use examples)

• They improvised a lot of the things and they were able to do it in under 15 minutes when the play is originally 2 hours long. They also skipped out a lot of the script, like the part where Tybalt comes in, Tybalt barely says anything but it finishes with the ending snippet when he is killed. They have also added some funny parts like the groping/kicking that would have been considered almost vulgar in the Shakespearean times. They also mixed in some modern jokes, modern lines and thing into the play, like at the end. And they had a minstrel/narrator who introduced the scenes and relayed the lines for cue acting.

Do you think this performance would be successful in Shakespeare's time? Why or why not?

• I think this performance would be booed in Shakespeare's time because Juliet wasn't a prepubescent boy with a high-pitched voice. They also had groping and comedic things that would've been booed or considered vulgar in th Shakespeare's times. The audience wouldn't be amused by the joking in a tragic story like Romeo and Juliet. They were also exaggerating a lot that was more suitable to Commedia but it wouldn't have been acceptable in the Elizabethan era that came along. So they would probably get hit with rotten vegetables/fruits by the groundlings.

Unit 3: Romey & J - Baz Luhrmann

• Knowing what you know about Shakespearean theatre now, what do you you think about the Luhrmann interpretation?

I think that the Luhrmann interpretation was a lot more graphic (not in a bad way) than the original play in a lot of obvious levels and since it was done in a movie, the Luhrmann had cut out some parts so it was difficult for the audience to grasp onto some scenes because of the shortness. I thought there was a lot of things going on in each scene, even though they were short so it was hard to keep up with Luhrmann's version at times. I thought that Luhrmann's modern day interpretation to adapt it to a familiar modern setting was very creative, I especially thought that the little details from Shakespeare's plays that were added on the skyscrapers and shops in modern,  pop-iconic Verona in the film was very good and creative. In the film the actor's expressions were more life-like but dramatic whereas the original play required the characters to exaggerate their emotions even more, so I personally prefer the Luhrmann version in terms of the actors' expressions and their more natural delivery of their dialogues. 

•  What specific "Shakespearean" elements can you identify from your research?

The most distinct and obvious Shakespearean element was were the dialogues because they referred directly to the original script. They also used Shakespearean quotes from other tragedies he wrote on the shops or billboards in modern Verona in Luhrmann's film. Since this was a movie, there were sound effects (including songs), lights and also weather variation whereas the original play didn't have many lights and sound effects. There were many expensive props like cars and such in the movie, which were a lot more than the original play.

• Do you like the artistic concept he has chosen for the piece? 

The artistic concept of Luhrmann's version was very creative and I personally thought it was very impressive. I thought the concept of a modern Verona including all the classic Shakespearean intentions of drama was very good because they were able to convey the story almost exactly like Shakespeare with a different setting. I think that the character's costumes were very expressive of their nature and the use of the weapons and props was great too. I actually quite liked Luhrmann's artistic concept because of the witty moments in the film. But the dialogues were unintelligible sometimes because they were grunted or shouted, but I still liked some of the delivery, it was kind of a hodgepodge, but a successful hodgepodge I guess. 

• Do you agree with the characterization, conventions, and design elements you have seen?

Yes, I do agree with all three. I think the characterization and design elements were the best part of the film because the character's had realistic and convincing expressions so that emphasized each one personality even more. The little Shakespearean details like the quotes on billboards were one of the little design elements that I like I also like the setting with the beach and the modern theme of the infamous party where Romeo and Juliet meet. The convention was good but I think it could've been better with the famous and great actors like DiCaprio and Claire Danes but sometimes I felt that they weren't able to grasp their lines in the original character's intentions.

• Which side of the argument do you think Shakespeare would have agreed with? Do you think he would have supported or criticized Luhrmann's attempt to revolutionize his work?

I think that Shakespeare would have criticized most of the things about Luhrmann's work because he cut out some bits from the script which made the movie into a whirlpool of details that weren't easily noticeable unless watched 2 times. And I also think that Shakespeare wouldn't have been impressed with the swimming pool scene because that was crucial scene where it was supposed to be pure and tender but like the NY Times reviewers mentioned:  "[Luhrmann] turned Juliet's balcony into a Manhattan fire escape for ''West Side Story,'' this film draws on watery settings so that its lovers can quite literally take the plunge,". It also missed some crucial classic details of purity in the movie with the (although impressive) costumes and open profanity, provocation in some bits.

At the time of the movie's release it was very controversial--critics polarized and either loved or hated the piece (see here: http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9C0CE7D91139F932A35752C1A960958260 and here: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/romeo-and-juliet-1996

 http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/romeo-and-juliet-1996

UNIT 3: SHAKESPEAREAN THEATRE - ROMEO & JULIET

-historical context 

Commedia dell'arte was originated in Italy, while the Shakespearean theatre was originally from England. As the Renaissance ended and slipped into the Elizabethan era (Shakespeare's times) so a lot of the same features from commedia influenced Shakespeare's theatre. Shakespeare's plays were based on scripted serious stories, whereas commedia was based off of a general plot with the stock characters and very improvised with no language script since they used "gromalot". It was hard to recognize the main character in commedia because of all the stock characters and each one's colorful personality, but in Shakespeare's plays the play was based on a story about 1-2 characters that would mentioned at the beginning of every play in a prologue. Commedia was also more comedic with their exaggeration and most of Shakespeare's plays were tragic with a snippet of comedy but characters weren't exaggerating, they were rather dramatic. (

Larque, Thomas. "Shakespeare and His Critics - Index." Shakespeare and His Critics - Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. <http://shakespearean.org.uk/>.)

-audiences 

Commedia dell'arte was performed for all the commoners and peasants, on the streets, in big houses or areas and it travelled throughout Europe and Italy. Whereas Shakespearean theatre stayed at its house, The Globe in England; although they would occasionally perform at the Palace or for any wealthy, powerful person as requests. (

Larque, Thomas. "Shakespeare and His Critics - Index." Shakespeare and His Critics - Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. <http://shakespearean.org.uk/>.)

-script/text 

Shakespeare had made up 5000 words and phrases while writing  his plays and used English to write his scripts since the plays were based in England. Commedia was more global since they travelled through the continent so they're script was gibberish so it was based solely on actions. (

Larque, Thomas. "Shakespeare and His Critics - Index." Shakespeare and His Critics - Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. <http://shakespearean.org.uk/>.)

-performers/performance styles 

Commedia was allowed to have vulgarity and paid female performers whereas Shakespearean plays did not allow female performers and joked about vulgar things in implication or hints because of religious influence on England at the time. So it was a downgrading thing for female performers. Shakespearean plays had critical audiences in the groundlings that had great interaction with performers but they would throw rotten vegetables or fruits if they didn't like the play. Commedia pulled up members of the audience to stage to improvise them into the performance and command and direct their actions.(

Larque, Thomas. "Shakespeare and His Critics - Index." Shakespeare and His Critics - Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. <http://shakespearean.org.uk/>.)

-rehearsal process 

Commedia dell'arte was improvised and didn't seem to have any main characters among all their stock characters but they went about it with a certain hierarchy. Commedia plays would often portray unexpected deaths and such things throughout without the characters even knowing, so the whole thing was generally improvised. Shakespearean plays were rehearsed using a actual script inside The Globe during broad daylight, like commedia.(

Larque, Thomas. "Shakespeare and His Critics - Index." Shakespeare and His Critics - Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. <http://shakespearean.org.uk/>.)

-performance space

Shakespeare's crew was housed at The Globe in England, which was like a ceiling-less theatre with "groudlings" seats and had more expensive seats on the levels around the top of the theatre. And as aforementioned, commedia was travelling all the time so they didn't have a predominant house, they just predominantly performed in Italy more. Since either of these groups couldn't afford enough candles to put on performance at night, both performed at daytime, even if it rained!(

Larque, Thomas. "Shakespeare and His Critics - Index." Shakespeare and His Critics - Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. <http://shakespearean.org.uk/>.)

-production elements (lights, sound, costumes, etc.)

Since it was done in broad daylight there weren't anymore lights except for those for both. Shakespearean plays had props and they also had proper costumes for each character. At The Globe the stage had a place underneath which was referred to as hell where actors could disappear through a trapdoor. Commedia was done on streets and was based on mime since they didn't have props most of the time and actors would wear masks to represent their characters and made sound effects using their mouths along with gibberish.

("Commedia Dell'arte (Italian Theatre)." Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 18 April. 2014. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/127742/commedia-dellarte>.)

A tour of The Globe

Unit 2: Commedia dell'Arte Final Performance Task Final Draft Evaluation

Using the performance rubric, reflect on your performance and discuss the following: (Crit C)

What were the strengths of your performance? 

• We had improved a lot from our rough draft performance so we were more exaggerated and expressive and we also showed a lot of energy and enthusiasm towards it. We used a lot levels and made use of the space. We also used props that added humor (which was a strength) to it. We also added a little bit more of audience interaction. We decided to use Gromalot to make it more expressive, therefore for the understanding of the scene for the audience was much better. We incorporated a lot physical elements into m character, which was difficult to re-enact because my character was Pantalone. We also improved our miming and also incorporated more mimes and actions through improvisation to make our performance longer and make the scene and plot clearer.

If you were to score your performance, what would you score be? 

• I think that I would score my performance I would get a 4 in context of the rubric we were given. I think that we were able to portray the exaggerated personalities of the Commedia characters that we acted as and we were also able to create a mostly clear scene, which means that the audience had understood where we were going with our performance. We improvised and incorporated audience interaction into the performance. We also incorporated sound effects during our miming of the door and used a minimal amount of Gromalot but was still clear as to what we tried to communicate through our exaggerated actions. We also had a clear and fun partner relationship that was amusing to the audience and our scene was clear, overall! Our performance was also reasonably timed!

Overall, do you think you did your best in this performance? 

• I think I did my best in terms of the physical movement and use of space and props because I was able to get across what each of those things were to the audience. I also think that I was able to portray Pantalone's personality well throughout the performance, but I feel it could've been better. I think that some of the elements of the performance were my best, like the antics between Harlequino and Pantalone, I thought that my exaggerated actions were the best part. 

What could you have done to improve your performance if you had the opportunity to perform it again? 

• I think that I should've used more Gromalot throughout the performance and exaggerated my facial expression a bit more so that I could've gotten my point across to the audience instead of using the crown as a prop. I also could've added more sound effects from my part and some more audience interactions to take the performance up to a 5 on the rubric.

Arshad and Taseen: The group I thought did as well as us

• I think Arshad and Taseen did a great job and they were level with our achievement in their performance. They used a lot of humorous elements and they're mimed interactions were great. Arshad's exaggerated expressions were especially great because he was able to portray his character, Brighella very well with his body. They also had good audience interaction and good use of Gromalot. I think that needed to mime more clearly because they lost the audience at some points in their performance. Taseen used good approaches to portraying his character and the both of them had a great partner/character relationship. I think I would give them a 4 out 5 in context of the rubric we were given because they mostly completed and portrayed all the elements needed for the performance, much like us. 

Prabhanu and Afraz: The group I thought did not do as well as us

• I think that Prabhanu and Afraz's performance needed a lot work because it didn't have the correct use of Gromalot because you could literally hear Prabhanu speaking english but in a deeper tone. I also thought that they didn't use exaggerated expressions and didn't use their character's typical body language so sometimes the scene looked very messy and they had audience interaction but it was very unclear as to what they wanted the audience member to do. I think that Afraz needs to look into Zanni a little more because he was flapping his arms and hopping around and looking everywhere, but he was smiling the whole time as well. I think that Prabhanu (Magnifico) should make Zanni do some other things other than throw food at him all the time and be hostile and make him provel, I would give them a 2 on the rubric because they were able to accommodate all the key elements like movements, use of space and clarity of scene sometimes but they're character personalities and character relationship needs a lot of work