Through the evolution of the performing art, the market and industry of performing start to rise in popularity. The concept of going to theater is cool because people are able to enjoy the visual effects of live shows that people cannot experience when watching television at home. Going to theater seems to be simple and usual but people are reluctant to sacrifice leisure time to watch shows at a theater. The differences between watching television shows at home and attending theater shows are the personal experience and the cultural atmosphere. When people are watching the television shows alone, they are unlikely to feel the powerful effect of rendering the stage. The interactions between the audience and the actors do not seem realistic on the television because the ambience does not penetrate through the screen to reach the people. Going to theater also provides the …show more content…
The context of the persuasion of the audience exists in the modern era when people are reluctant to experience outdoor events. The targeted audiences of the presentation of promoting going to theater are the peer classmates and the University of California, Irvine undergraduate students who prefer watching television shows at home. The chosen audience of peer classmates attributes to the fact that the presentation is directly presented to them so the classmates are the primary audience that my presentation should persuade. The persuasion of the peers acts as the standard of my presentation, determining the effectiveness of my presentation to the targeted audience. The targeted audiences of the college students in University of California, Irvine are the people that the presentation should aim at convincing because the purpose is to popularize the trend of watching live shows and appeal the students to spend leisure time going to theater more
...re as same as the audience use in their everyday life. Easily connecting to the audience, with visual, audio and performer’s performance” one can imagine himself/herself in performer’s shoes.
The duration and cost of the production have been compared to other media which provide entertainment, such as television and film. A theatre performance is more expensive to attend than cinema. The play only lasted for 85 minutes, a film can go on for two hours or even more. This can have a big influence on why people would choose one medium over the other. Accessibility has also to be taken into account when investigating the relevance of theatre in the 21st century. Television is a medium which can be accessed from home, and usually doesn’t cost a lot of money, whereas theatre costs money and is harder to access. Although the production was Australian, the actors talked with an American accent. Bearing in mind that the play was written in America, which could make it harder for an Australian audience to familiarise with the dilemmas going on, on stage, while the themes discussed seem to be more relevant there than in Australia. Overall this play doesn’t contribute to the relevance of Australian theatre in the 21st century, due to the many other sources people can access for entertainment, and because the play seems to be more relevant for an American audience rather than an
In this essay I will be exploring the nature of the challenges Site-Specific theatre presents. It is ever growing as a genre with practitioners such as Punchdrunk and Station House Opera leading the way in the UK, as performances not set in conventional theatre buildings are becoming increasingly popular. Conventional theatres provide a comfortable performance arena with unspoken rules an audience adheres to, as explored by Nicolas Bourriaud in Relational Aesthetics suggesting that ‘forms, patterns and functions’ of artistic activity ‘develop and evolve according to periods and social contexts’ (Bourriaud, 1998, p1 ). If an audience sit in a Victorian theatre, they will act as if Victorian manners still apply. Site Specific and Immersive performance have no such boundaries and I will be arguing that this genre of theatre produces its own specific challenges and to what extent must we as an audience adapt to these. I will also be analysing the works of established practitioners in this field and similarly my own practice.
What differentiates theatre from film in this aspect is that in films, figures such as puppets or digitally-made creatures like robots and monsters can also become an actor (Bordwell and Thompson 2013: 131). There are two primary components in an actor’s performance: sound, which consists of the actor’s voice and their delivery of their lines; and visual, which consist of bodily movement such as physical gestures and facial expressions. The eyes- its expression, movement, and eye contact- are especially important in communicating a character to the viewers. They are the mirror of the soul, and in performance, they reveal the mind of the characters and sets the narrative into motion (Cohen 2011).
Theatre is dying. It’s been a slow process, a process that started in 19th century Russia and continues to this day. Until Pushkin, theatre had been seen as entertainment, but in his Aphorism he stated ‘Sincerity of emotions, feelings that seem true in given circumstances- that is what we ask of a dramatist’, this was echoed by Stanislavski who revolutionised acting from entertainment to art. His ideas changed the ways we thought about theatre but by revolutionising theatre Stanislavski outlined its flaws, flaws that continue to this day.
Being normal can be difficult, because society sets the definition of normal that people should achieve. However, this is not the thought process individuals should be following. On November 7, 2016, I experienced a wonderful performance at the University of Michigan-Flint theater. Next to Normal was a play that brought out a variety of emotions within the audience. This musical gave a delightful act on expressing mental issues and how it affected a certain family. Theater is a way of storytelling that which allowed us to observe how this one family can be greatly impacted by a mental illness. Not knowing what to expect from the show, the set and program provided me with a glimpse of what I am to see.
As part of the Art Symposium we recently had the opportunity to tour both the Performing Arts Center and the Hyman Fine Arts Center. The PAC’s tour focused on the technical qualities of the performance space and how the theater is able to accommodate a wide variety of performance. During the tour of the Hyman Fine Arts Center, staff and students were busy putting the finishing touches on this semester's production of The Tempest. Recently I was able to enjoy a performance of Crimes of the Heart at another theatrical venue, Florence Little Theater. With the abundance of performance spaces in our community, I started to weigh the pros and cons of each space.
This essay will investigate a variety of different approaches to using film by both Forced Entertainment and Frantic Assembly. Both companies claim to produce energetic, memorable and contemporary theatre and have both incorporated the use of film in their works. Although Frantic Assembly and Forced Entertainment both produce work that is placed under the umbrella of physical theatre, their ways of working and the work they produce differs from other theatre companies which also adopt this title. The two companies I will discuss have differences and similarities in their approaches to using film and have both incorporated it into their practices in groundbreaking ways. From the use of actual moving film in their stage performance, to exploring the different elements of film and exploring ways in which those same principles can be adapted unto the stage. Frantic Assembly and Forced Entertainment make claims of creating innovative theatre that offers to lure and shock spectators. Their works demonstrate that they are both in constant exploration to push and break the boundaries of how theatre is viewed today. Both Frantic Assembly and Forced Entertainment have always created theatre that is influential and relevant with the times, so it comes as no surprise that the use of film has been a big influence on the their works.
“The theatre was created to tell people the truth about life and the social situation,” says Stella Adler. Theater is unique and intriguing because it blends literary and visual arts to tell a story. Before Theater 10, I viewed theater on the surface level: cheesy plot lines with dramatic scenarios for entertainment purposes. Throughout the course, I have learned what it means to appreciate theater, such as understanding Brechtian and Chinese theatre; however, I believe understanding theater’s ability to convey crucial historical and social messages, such as in the production of RENT, is more relevant and important for theater appreciation.
That theater has undergone many changes since its early incarnation in ancient Greece is a fact obvious even to the casual observer. And it is likewise clear that, as the cultural and social structure of the world shifts and changes over time, it is appropriate that its art forms change as well, in order to address appropriately the new reality in which they exist. However, perhaps not too unexpectedly, there are those who reject our modern manifestation of theater as insincere or false -- indeed, as there are in every time those who contest the latest evolutions of all types of art.
In this paper, I will be focusing briefly on my knowledge and understanding of the concept of Applied theatre and one of its theatre form, which is Theatre in Education. The term Applied Theatre is a broad range of dramatic activity carried out by a crowd of diverse bodies and groups.
Over the decades, we have strived to think of a better lifestyle for people throughout the world in terms of entertainment. Inventors developed many different television screens for the audience to be captured and inspired in whatever they were watching. When the big screen was introduced, it was a huge impact on people and it remodeled our perspective on the way we look at movies today. Let’s face it; we all have learned lessons, and maybe changed something about ourselves from just watching a simple movie. Movies are a wonderful thing that can sometimes clear our minds and show us it is okay to have an imagination that is infinite. Thanks to technology, we can enjoy watching our favorite movie of our choice pretty much whenever and wherever we want. The main ways of watching a movie is going to the theater with friends and/or a significant other, or watching at home. The question is which is better; watching a movie through your home television screen or in the theater?
Theatre as we know it now was born more than two thousand years ago and has gone through many streams until it reached the current modernity. Among these streams is the avant-garde theatre. This theatre achieved a break in the traditional theatre and became the forefront of a new experimental theatre. Therefore it is necessary to ask how this theatre started, what impact it had on society and if this type of theatre is still common in our modern era.
In a movie theater, there are experiences that some will not have while at home and watching Netflix, such as the enormous screen, comfortable movie theater seating, and the theater speakers. Netflix can be used in a causal way with friends, but the main purpose of watching a movie is enjoying the experiences one can get from the movie itself. While at the movie theaters, the environment is completely different, because everyone is supposed to be quiet or else they risk being thrown out. The experience does not compare to the feeling someone gets when that intense scene appears, and they get immersed into the atmosphere of the theater. Movie theaters have the opportunity to give someone an unforgettable experience unlike Netflix, because the ambiance is truly unique and unmatched by anyone’s living