This paper is a critique of a production of Never the Sinner, a murder drama written by John Logan, which was performed and produced by the Department of Theatre and Dance at E.S. Strother Theatre located on the campus of Ball State University. Director Judy E. Yordon captures the viciousness and brutality of the murder of an innocent, young boy in this dramatic account of a homicide at the hands of two young men who are intertwined in a dark, sexual relationship. During the murder and trial of “the crime of the century” the director and cast portray to the audience the sheer violence and torment these two men are willing to affect on another human being for the utter enjoyment of killing another person. This is done by exposing the events of the murder to the audience and then allowing the audience to conclude the motive of the murder, by means of interpretation using the final scene as the keynote in the performance. I found the last scene of the performance to be rather disturbing to say the least.
The performers in the production were very suitable for the roles in which they were cast. Dustin Bennett (Nathan Leopold) and Andrew Burt (Richard Loeb) were excellent in their performance and portrayed their characters well. Both ideally fit the roles in which they were cast. As for the other five members of the cast they to were well suited in their roles and showed much talent in their ability to portray different characters in the same performance. Especially that of Natalie Ellis who portrayed both a girlfriend and a doctor in the play and who easily adapted to her changing roles within the scene.
The actors knew their lines of dialogue and exactly what they were talking about, which made it easy for the audience to follow along. The actors could clearly be heard and had clear enunciation, expect during the scene of the trial, in which, the police officer was on the stand. This was in part due to the fact that he was seated in an area beside the audience and it was hard to make out what he was saying because the audience was blocking him from my view. The voice the characters used was appropriate, especially during the trial when the attorneys were speaking and when Germaine Rheinhardt was on the stand. The men were harsh, loud and assertive and Germaine spoke in her sweet, innocent and naive voice when answering their questions.
This examination will look at the short story “Killings” by Andre Dubus and the main characters in the story. The story begins on a warm August day with the burial of Matt and Ruth Fowler’s youngest son Frank. Frank’s age: “twenty-one years, eight months, and four days” (Dubus 107). Attending the funeral were Matt, his wife Ruth, their adult children and spouses. Matt’s family is extremely distraught over the murder of their youngest son/brother, in their own way. There are implications of wanting to kill Richard Strout, the guy accused of being the murderer: “I should kill him” (107), as stated after the service. This comment is considered a fore-shadowing of what is to come in the thought progression of Matt and Ruth.
Arthur Miller’s The Crucible is a play that discusses many issues and spurs contemplation within the reader. While reading this play, because of the controversy of many issues detailed within, it is difficult for one not to take a look at one’s own morals and determine what one would do if placed in a similar situation. The key issues discussed within this play, the effects of hysteria, marital betrayal, and the murderous powers of lies, are portrayed intriguingly and effectively. The lessons that can be learned from The Crucible are still quite applicable today.
For a college production, the acting was outstanding. I really felt the emotions. The lead Wendla, who was played by KyLeigh Zimmerer, was amazing. I have also seen bits and pieces of the Broadway version which starred Lea Michelle, and obviously if I were to compare the acting, the Broadway version would be victorious. However, for a college production, these actors have limited past experience, but their acting was professional. Also, when they sang the song "Those You've Known," I felt chills and had goose bumps because that was such an emotional song. You could feel all the emotions and guilt Melchior, played by Ryan Ramirez, was feeling because both his best friend, Moritz, played by Justin Noblitt, and the girl he impregnated, Wendla, died and he believed he was to blame. Moritz committed suicide while Wendla died from a botch abortion her mom for...
I could see how Harold Hill’s tactic changed from something along the lines of ‘to deceive’ to ‘to woo’ around the song “The sadder but wiser girl”. Marian Paroo’s tactic also changes from ‘to avoid’ to ‘to love’ around “My white Knight”. These actors also projected extremely well, as I could hear everything being said. They articulated well too, which I believe must be hard for them as every character had a southern accent. The actors easily incorporated their character’s goals into their acting and onstage
Their acting chops were very impressive whether it was comedic, emotional, or just stunning overall. Yet, on the other hand, some minor characters weren’t as well heard as others. I feel as the play could be better if some of the minor characters had projected their voice more, allowing their character to be known. However, although some voices were much stronger than others, all actors were full of talent, capable of dealing with script’s requirements, and did a good job
In examining popular, tragedy-style theater pieces, it becomes apparent that human morality is a prevalent theme, as it consistently appears throughout various stories. William Shakespeare’s notable play Macbeth, to provide an exemplar, contains such a matter; the literary masterpiece explores the issues of guilt, and the loss of one’s integrity. A perfect display of these conflicts occurs in Act III, scene IV, during which Macbeth struggles with the realisation that he has become a murderer, and will remain forever bound to his crimes:
The author’s purpose is to also allow the audience to understand the way the guards and superintendent felt towards the prisoners. We see this when the superintendent is upset because the execution is running late, and says, “For God’s sake hurry up, Francis.” And “The man ought to have been dead by this time.” This allows the reader to see the disrespect the authority has towards the prisoners.
As far as acting, the performers were able to convey the feelings they needed to. However, some characters such as Ol' Cap'n played by Dick Lambert and Luttibelle played by April Curry, seemed more committed and engaging in their roles than others. A crucial factor in April Curry portraying her role so well was her vocal talent far exceeded that of any of the other major performers. She had an amazing voice that I was dazzled by from curtain up to down and left me craving for more. This almost compensated for my disappointment when it came to the ensemble singing to the soundtrack. Many performers were dependent on the cd and were not confident as to when to begin or stop singing, which dampered many moments of the performers. Another element of acting that I enjoyed was the exaggerated use of cooning throughout the duration of the performance that brought characters to life, and enabled certain moments to seem real.
Throughout the drama, The Crucible, the characters are faced with chilling choices as they maneuver through a world that has lost its moral compass. The crucibles, the serious tests, of their dearly held values put them in the position of having to figure out what is right and true in a world turned upside down. The value of truth is tested when lies are rewarded and truth brings suffering, shame and the scaffold of the gallows. The value of justice is challenged by a system that comes to be based on coerced confessions, unsubstantiated charges and self-serving political scheming. The value of love, be it of husband and wife or of friends and community, is put to the test where true love is exemplified by fatal choices.
All characters in the movie were played well by the actors in my opinion. They
As a literal deathbed revelation, William Wilson begins the short story by informing the readers about the end of his own personal struggle by introducing and immediately acknowledging his guilt and inevitable death, directly foreshadowing the protagonist’s eventual downward spiral into vice. The exhortative and confession-like nature of the opening piece stems from the liberal use of the first person pronoun “I”, combined with legal and crime related jargon such as, “ crime”, “guilt”, and “victim” found on page 1. Poe infuses this meticulous word choice into the concretization of abstract ideas where the protagonist’s “virtue dropped bodily as a mantle” (Poe 1), leading him to cloak his “nakedness in triple guilt” (Poe 1). In these two examples, not only are virtue and guilt transformed into physical clothing that can be worn by the narrator, but the reader is also introduced to the protagonist’s propensity to externalize the internal, hinting at the inevitable conclusion and revelation that the second William Wilson is not truly a physical being, but the manifestation of something
The play, set in the 1600’s during the witch hunt that sought to rid villages of presumed followers and bidders of the devil is a parallel story to the situation in the US in the 1950’s: McCarthyism, seeking the riddance of communist ideologists. Miller sets this story more particularly in a village called Salem, where the theocratic power governed by strict puritan rules require the people to be strong believers and forbid them to sin at risk of ending up in hell. However, the audience notices that despite this strong superficial belief in God, faith is not what truly motivates them, but it is rather money and reputation.
Besides the fact that I didn't like this play, the actors did do a pretty good job with their acting and memorization of their lines. Couple times Marisol hesitated with her lines but it wasn't too bad. I like the accents they were using. It wasn't to hard to understand what they were saying, but once again there were those times when their accents did effect a little on their pronunciations and my understanding on what they were saying. Overall, I don't think they were too believable with their characters. They didn't reach me.
Whether they were a drunk or a punctual control freak, each actor clearly put a lot of thought into their work. Each actor was fully committed to every action they made and they moved with a definite purpose. Despite the definite movements and the definite character choices made by the actors, there still appeared to be a sense of forced emotion in their words. For example, the man acting as the drunkard overplayed the alcoholic, hung over, and stereotypical wobbly walk. He made a few obvious mistakes, like flubbing up lines and other things to that effect, and it appeared to be because he was trying so hard to look and act drunk that he forgot to act. The woman playing Daisy was, in fact, one of the best. She had few mistakes and played her role the most realistically out of all the actors. The blocking of the play allowed for a few characters to upstage themselves and others, which made it hard to hear some words and conversations, but besides that, the technical aspects of it were good.
Murder in the Cathedral is an ingenious play that employs the uses of a variety of literary tactics to better express the theme. Eliot designs many ingenious forms of imagery, metaphor, and diction to better express the noteworthy ideas of the drama. His imagery gave mental pictures between the man and God, the metaphors provided real life connections, and his syntax pulled it all together to form a literary masterpiece.