Critique of Actors in Charles Griffith's Little Shop of Horrors

Yes, this character was very successful with his vocal choices. The range of his vocal tone within each scene added depth to his character. For example, when he confronts Jackie about their relationship, he softens his voice to show his pain, but also strengthens it to illustrate that his pain also comes from a place of anger.

As for the continued lying and being deceitful to exploit others is the characters main role in the entire movie. He strives for the perfect family and will stop at nothing to have that. He lies to recently divorced mother of three and flatters her until he cons his way into her life and family. The family has no clue about his mental disorder until he shows aggressive discipline to one of the youngest children. The character doesn’t keep a job long once the boss starts asking him for personal information that he cannot provide. As for him acting charming and witty he sweet talks everyone into thinking he is the perfect guy.

While watching Little Shop of Horrors you can tell that it has comedic elements, but it also is somewhat dark and disturbing to watch Seymour’s guilt and grief consume him. It is clearly a dark comedy. This is made clear through many different aspects of the writing. The show deals with murder, death, and world domination, but the characters are always sure to throw in a funny line or stop for a quick song. Though I enjoyed being part of this production, I don’t think it has a universal appeal by any means. During one of the shows, a young girl was watching Seymour feed fake body parts to the plant at the end of act

This year Waverly High School's Music Program, under the direction of Ms. Wilson, put on an outstanding performance of this year's musical, Little Shop of Horrors.

The Crucible, by Arthur Miller was a very well written play. It made you feel like you were really there. I did have some trouble at times understanding what they said because of the grammar that they used back then was so different, but that again just made it feel like it was in its time period. There were so many times that I felt a connection to the characters and didn't want to see them hung or accused of witchcraft. I felt bad for the girls that were controlled by Abby. I felt as if they were under Abby’s witchcraft, and just didn't want to say anything. It was like they were doing what they did because of Abby not because of those accused of witchcraft. There were a few times that I got confused with the book on who was speaking. You

The character of Miles Standish did not feel like a sentimental character. While he did show emotion, he wasn't exactly virtuous with his either. For instance, in part 2, "Love and Friendship," when he is beginning to talk about Priscilla, one of the first things he says is "Tis not good for a man to be alone, say the Scriptures." He's referencing the Bible, and from this point on, seems to not be in love with Priscilla, but rather in love with the idea of her being his romantic partner. If he were really thinking clearly, he'd try to find a way to directly contact her, rather than being a "blunt old Captain, a man not of words, but of action." I think his

Seymour lost who he was. His wife Murial was denying it, but everyone around knew what was going on, especially with the signs earlier on in the book. I believe it was only when he talked to the little girl Sybil that it brought some humanity back to him. You see his playful nature when he replies to Sybil’s claim that she saw a bananafish, “ ‘My God, no!’ said the young man. ‘Did he have any bananas in his mouth?’ " (Salinger). Naturally, fish don’t carry bananas in their mouth, but that little bit of playfulness showed that Seymor still had some normalcy in

The play “A Doll's House” by Henrik Ibsen was written in 1879. Joseph Losey and Patrick garland in 1973 used the play to adopt a movie version of the play going by the same name. The cast in the movies depicted the characters in the play as described by Henrik Ibsen. This essay will analyze the similarities and the differences between the play by Henrik Ibsen and the films adopted from the play by Joseph Losey and Patrick garland.

Hagerty’s production of “Our Town”, written by playwright Thornton Wilder, directed by Trevor Southworth, told the story of Grover’s Corners. Throughout the story, the actors and actresses were on a set that mainly consisted of chairs and tables. This contained few props, and due to this, at times, it was difficult to tell what some of the characters were doing. If they were to use more props, it would have been easier to pay attention to the story instead of having to decipher what each character was doing, or where each house started/ended. They did make up for some of this by the narrator briefly stating what was going on.

The original Little Shop of Horrors Book and lyrics was written by Howard Shaman and Music composed by Alan Menken. The horror comedy musical was based on a movie directed by Roger Corman. However, the student of St. Petersburg College Theater and director/ set design was by Scott Cooper. Scott Cooper and his crew did a good job transforming the stage to a downtown set call Skid Row. Therefore, the set had some social and cultural context as the homeless and young student was hanging out on the steps of buildings. This was an indication of the play writer using Comedy of Manners and Comedy of Character when the owner of the flower shop Urchins was chasing them from in front his store. The playwright was ridiculing individuals of this types and their social behaviors.

The people in the movie were well presented and well characterized. However, Charles Van Doren seemed very fake even at the beginning of the movie. I am unsure whether the actor is to blame or if they did it on purpose to show the strain that Charles Van Doren was feeling by being a Van Doren. Herb was well presented as well as the lawyer, Dick. By adding the involvement of Dick's and Herb's wives as well as their personal lives added personality

Lots of books usually start with everyday life's story. However, The Amityville Horror by Jay Anson starts with the murdered case happened to the house. In this book, Reverend John Nicola comes up with two claims that there is no enough evidence to proof the story is true, and the house is haunted by ghost or demon. With the SEARCH strategy, there was not enough evidence to prove these claims. It means the author would be able to lie to make this

In the beginning, it seemed as if they were trying a little too hard. Ezra Knight to me was a better actor than Lee Hendricks because Ezra Knight fit his character more than Lee Hendricks did. From the limp in his walk to the rage in his voice, Ezra Knight became his character which definitely contributed to my belief of the performance because he resembled a sorry, resentful man. Lee Hendricks, however, at times he was unbelievable. At other times, he was somewhat believable. I feel like sometimes he struggled with facial expressions which is something I tend to struggle with as well. I feel that if the men were more passionate about football, the acting would have been better. I could not tell that Ezra Knight was passionate about what he was talking about because he has partaken in plenty of on and off Broadway performances as well as cinematic projects. If there were two men, who maybe were retired, talking about football the dialogue would have been a thousand times more spirited because they’d know what they were talking about. All in all, the acting in this play was acceptable and

At the end of the day Seymour was just human, not much different than to person to right or left to us. Yes of course he has probably seen more than the average person; while I do believe that was a contributor to his demise. I think that his emotions really got the best of him, one can only take so much before his or she is bound to rebel.

The biggest and most important aspect of this film is the use of subjectivity. Subjectivity gives the illusion that the viewer is the character, the viewer sees what John sees. For example, when Charles is introduced in the film you notice that John is confused to have a roommate at Princeton and we only really see Charles when John is stressed or by himself. This is odd behavior because when John goes out with his friends to the bar, Charles isn’t there. Then we don’t hear anything about Charles when John leaves Princeton. Then later on when asked about Charles and why he hasn’t be around John has all these excuses hat Charles is out of town or busy. He seems like a real person to the viewer because the viewer is inside Johns mind so if John