Stage Vs Screen Essay : Stage Versus Screen

Michael Hoffman’s 1999 film version of Shakespeare's midsummer night’s dream was able to modify the audience experience of the play. Michael Hoffman had successfully turned the play into a film and was able to show a visible expression of the characters to the audience. He had also made some changes, like the settings and made his version modernized. Though the film was based on the Shakespeare’s play, the audience’s experience is still different.

I’ve adored theatre for as long as I can remember. From writing plays throughout elementary school, to being involved in Drama Club in middle school, to performing in community theatre in high school, and to visiting the theatre as often as I could from the very beginning, theatre has always been a part of my life. Every aspect of it engages me: the directors working to bring their vision of the show’s scenes, choreography, or music to life, the actors transforming into different characters through their expression of dialogue, song, or dance, the costumers and set-builders transporting the audience into the setting and time period with their artistry, the backstage tech and crew working quickly and precisely to keep the show flowing to curtain call, and the orchestra bringing the show to life through music. There is nothing like the experience of live theatre, both as a member of the audience and as a member of the cast and crew.

Above all, I wouldn’t be where I am today without theatre. Without the chance to perform throughout my life, I would be disconnected from the wide array of communities and histories that’s been imbedded in my daily routine. Unfortunately, it’s speculated that the theatre is a dying art form, because of the expanding popularities of movies (“Is”), but I think that it’ll remain a well renowned part of expressing imagination and interpreting history as years pass; it only takes cooperation with school faculty and young students that go above and beyond to change their

“Audiences today want a real experience in their live performance, because they can get great script based entertainment at home, through various new media sources. Traditional theatre, which appeals on a mental, and hopefully also emotional level, has not been enough to compete with other media, and audiences have been declining. Physical theatre, by contrast appeals to the audience on a physical and emotional level, providing a much more immediate experience than traditional theatre” ~ (Artmedia Publishing in Zen Zen Zo’s “The Tempest” Teacher’s Notes)

We then talked about the essence of how this grand type of story could be effectively performed in a small wooden theater. We talked about the bond between the author, actors, and audience that exists in the theater. We also talked about the text of the prologue in which the chorus simply asks the audience to use their imaginations by requesting that they suspend disbelief. In this the Chorus essentially pleads with the audience to view the representations presented to them as what they are intended more than what they are. For this to be effective the triple bond comes into play, the writing, acting and audience participation are all required to properly appreciate the story as it was intended.

Theatre has been a prevalent form of entertainment for centuries. As time has progressed, the meaning behind theater has shifted to adapt with society appropriately. Different genres of theater have been emerging all throughout history and continue to emerge even today. There are so many different genres of theatre that any individual can relate to it. One can easily recall the major genres of theatre: drama, comedy, musicals. However, it is the sub-divisions within these major genres that evoke unique performances and experiences.

A musical film is a genre of movie where songs sung by characters are added into the storyline, occasionally complemented by choreography. The musical numbers in these films do not always develop the plot and characters, but they do give the films a more exciting quality. The primary difference between musical theatre and film musicals is the use of extravagant scenery that would be extraordinarily unreasonable for a stage performance. While making movies, the individuals involved have the luxury of being able to shoot multiple takes and have the time to move backgrounds around or change their entire location. Stage performances, on the other hand, must have scenery that can be easily and efficiently moved on and offstage when it is needed. In order to be able to thoroughly comprehend this relatively recent- in the grand scheme of things- form of entertainment, one should understand the history behind these musical films, be aware of some of the “big names” that are well-known, and recognize major titles that revolutionized musical film forever (Scaruffi, P., 2005).

“Theatre makes us think about power and the way our society works and it does this with a clear purpose, to make a change.”

In some aspects great musicals and orchestral scores can add to the experience of a theatrical play, but films have adapted these aspects as well and have proven to be a more successful form of entertainment. Theatre productions have become secondhand in comparison, though still viewed as a high class of an entertainment, it is not nearly as successful to reaching a widespread audience as the film industry has accomplished. The resulting film adaptations that have theatre-like qualities often fail completely due to their inability to capture the attention of contemporary audience members, essentially creating a stagnant film. In this paper, I am specifically narrowing my focus and discussing tragedy film adaptations in comparison to themselves and theatre. But first, I will give an overall briefing of the history of film and theatre. Then I will discuss their relationship and what elements create successful entertainment within films and how theatre-like adaptations have a crippling effect to a film’s success rate. Finally I will have an in-depth discussion on these elements within the films: Waiting for Godot, Hamlet, and Moulin Rouge!, and the success rate of each.

There is no theatre without an audience. The audience is as much a part of the playmaking experience as the artists—so how do we incorporate them more actively into what we do? We must work with them – and I’ve learned, in so doing,

In the words of Gay McAuley, “for an activity to be regarded as a performance, it must involve the live presence of the performers and those witnessing it…” (McAuley, 2009, cited in Schechner, 2013, pp.38). This statement recognises the importance of both the actor and the audience for something to truly function as a performance. In addition, Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones highlights the significance of the theatrical space and how it can influence an audience stating that “on entering a theatre of any kind, a spectator walks into a specific space, one that is designed to produce a certain reaction or series of responses” (Llewellyn-Jones, 2002, pp.3). The relationship between actor, audience and theatrical space is no less important today than it was at the time of theatre during the Spanish Golden Age and the creation of Commedia dell’arte in Italy. Despite being very close geographically with theatre thriving for both in the same era, sources that explore the social, cultural and historical context of these countries and the theatre styles will bring to light the similarities and differences. This essay will analyse the staging, the behaviour of the audience as well as the challenges the actors faced, and how this directly influenced the relationship between actor, audience and theatrical space.

The above example illustrates not only how the theatrical performance affects the audience, but also how the audience influences its dynamics, development and the characters within it. The actors feel a certain level of acceptance from the viewer, who demands a certain way of depicting the character. Theatre is not just entertainment, itís something much more than that ñ itís education. Theatre should always represent things, rather than

The movie I chose to examine was The Phantom of the Opera. I have seen the live musical once in New York, but for some odd reason I have never seen the movie version before. Watching it again for this paper, in a whole new format, is as if I’m experiencing it for the first time again. While perhaps I should have picked a musical I have yet to seen before (regardless that it was the live production), I simply could not resist watching perhaps my favorite musical (closely tied with Wicked) and applying my new active listening skills to catch what I have so sorely been missing before. I have had such a strong admiration for this musical and Andrew Lloyd Weber as a whole—the man is a genius—but my previous reverence pales in comparison to what I feel now. The Phantom of the Opera is an all-consuming masterpiece that has dominated and bewitched not just Broadway, but the world.

A few weeks ago, I had a chance to watch Les Miserables at Imperial Theater. Les Miserables is play based on Victor Hugo’s award winning novel. I must admit that the play made me realize the great stories that will continue be told in mass media for years to come. Much to my astonishment, the characters in the play essentially delivered a great show, ranging from their acting to their singing.

In today's busy world, people usually struggle to find time for fun and a way of relaxation but when it happens, they often spend it on entertainment. One of those forms of entertainment is watching stage or film productions. Theatre and film have lots of aspects in common and depend on each other, however, they involve differences. People choose between theater and film based on factors and their own preferences. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast between those two forms of art.