Analysis of Acting and Directing in The Crucible

634 Words2 Pages

Analysis of Acting and Directing in The Crucible

I saw the play The Crucible and there were examples of styles of directing and acting that were very interesting. The production was put on by the University of Arizona’s theatre department and as such the directing and acting had its good points and its bad ones.

There was one scene in particular that appeared to be very well directed. Act two takes place in the common room of the Proctor’s house about a week after the initial scene in the Reverend’s home. This scene was especially well directed because of its length and the number of French scenes within it.

The space where this scene took place was rather large, but there were obstacles that had to be dealt with by the director. The blocking was done well in that at no point were any of the actors in each other’s way or upstaging each other. There was also the use of the props. At one point Mary Warren entered and gave a doll to Elizabeth Proctor. This doll was placed on the mantle and left alone for a while. Later when the deputy came to arrest Elizabeth the doll was rediscovered. It had been placed originally in a spot where it was still visible and easily found. Another example is the placement of John Proctor’s whip. In the same sort of instance the whip was placed originally in a spot where it was easy to get to later in the scene.

The many French scenes also must have been challenging to the director. Different actors were entering and leaving the common room throughout the entire scene. The timing of these scenes was very well directed and made the scene flow smoothly. The director used the entire stage and at no point was it unbalanced or lopsided.

One character I found engaging was the Reve...

... middle of paper ...

...when the judge and the deputy are attempting to get John Proctor to confess. The way that Frank Mihelich, John Proctor, over did the ending caused me to leave the theatre with a bad taste in my mouth. I also know that if I felt that way then my friend would have felt even worse. She always seems more critical of plays than I do. When Proctor signed the confession and then tore it up and gave his speech about wanting to keep his name, my friend would not have been convinced. She would have said that Mihelich could have got the point of the speech across more effectively with less emotion.

In all, the directing and acting both had its good points and its bad points. Unfortunately, the one well directed scene and the one convincing actor would not have been enough to satisfy my friend, and it was not enough to satisfy me.

Bibliography:

None

Open Document