Assignment Prompt & Instructions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhG3JTchKDA
**Critique guidelines MUST be followed**
– a year ago
**files (1)**
– ## CRITIQUEGUIDELINES-2-1.docx
**## CRITIQUEGUIDELINES-2-1.docx**
CRITIQUE GUIDELINES:
Remember, this is your opinion, your personal honest reaction to the production.
Do not give a plot or story summation. I want your specific reactions to the theatrical aspects of the production. Your grade does not depend on whether or not you liked the performance, but how specifically and clearly you state your opinion and support it.
When writing the critiques, I will be looking for the use of vocabulary we’ve used so far in the semester. It doesn't matter to me (in the critique, at least) whether you do or don't like this type of play or whether you did or didn't like the play itself. What I care about is that you support your opinion with specific examples and proper terminology. Here is a "guide" for things to consider:
The critique should be
**3-4** **full pages** in length, typed, double-spaced, and in 12 pt. Times New Roman font. No more than 1" top/bottom margins, no more than 1.25 left/right margins. The paper should have an additional cover page (with the title, your name, etc.) attached (not counted in the page numbers). I WILL NOT TAKE HARD COPIES OR EMAIL SUBMISSIONS!
**Spelling and grammar are a consideration**. Use your theatre program for the correct spelling of character and actor names. Play titles should be italicized (
_Our Town_). When discussing the character as written by the playwright, use the character's name. When discussing the interpretation of the character by the actor, use the actor's name. "John Smith's Willy Loman was intense" or "Willy Loman, as portrayed by John Smith, was intense" would be accurate. "Willy Loman was intense" would not be accurate. But, if you are describing the character "I believe Shakespeare meant for Katharina to be an independent woman" would be correct, and "I believe Shakespeare meant for Jane Doe's Katharina to be intense" would not. Be specific. Avoid generalizations such as "John Smith was good" or "I didn't like John Smith." If you think an actor's performance was effective, be very specific in explaining why you hold that opinion. Refer to specific moments and specific scenes from the play in supporting your opinion.
Start by asking these three questions as you watch the production:
1. What is the intention (of both the playwright and of the production)?
2. How well has it been done?
3. Was it worth doing?
Address the following questions in your critique:
1. What was your overall opinion of the entire production? What is the play's major idea? How was that idea developed? How has the situation at the end of the play changed from what the play was at the beginning? Which characters have gone through the greatest change? Has it been a change for the better? Does the play makes us think about, or does it clarify a truth that's important to us? Does the production succeed in portraying the playwright's concept or statement? What was the style of the production? Did the elements of the production emphasize and maintain consistency with the style?
2. What did you think of the acting? Are the actors believable as the characters? Are they spontaneous and consistent? Do they work well with the other actors in creating an ensemble? Which actor most pleased you and why? (Note: Not which character was your favorite…but which actor did you think did the best performance.) Which actor pleased you the least? Be specific.
3. What did you think of the costumes, make-up, and hair design? What were the characters wearing? What did it say about that character? Did the costume fit the interpretation of the character as the actor portrayed them? Did it help define the time period of the play? Did the costume serve as exposition in defining the character's personality or as a mood for the character? How were line, texture, and color used? How did hair and make-up contribute to the definition of character? What was your favorite and least favorite costumes (Again, in terms of most appropriate costume…not which you personally would wear or not wear.)
4. What did you think of the set and prop designs? What type of space was this theatre? How did the set support the production? Does it serve as a backdrop or a metaphor for the character's lives or situation? Did it seem appropriate to the style or time period of the play? Did it make you react to the play in a specific way or to focus on something particular in the play? How successful was it at creating an environment for the characters? How were color, line, mass and texture used? How well did the props contribute to creating the world of this play?
5. What did you think of the sound design? Was the sound design helpful in creating a sense of place or in evoking the world of the play? Was the sound design well executed?
6. What did you think of the lighting design? Did the lights contribute to creating the world of the play? What information did the lights give about the time, place, characters, mood, and situations in the play? Did you find the lights functional, distracting, and emotional? Were there any moments or scenes where the lights were particularly evocative?
7. What did you think of the direction? What did you think the director's interpretation? Is it different from what you expected (if you had read the script prior to attending)? Did the production seem to have a consistent vision (concept + interpretation)? Did the director compose stage pictures that gave additional meaning to the moments? How was the pace of the show? Did all the elements (set, costumes, lights, props, actors) seem to have a consistent message? How well were transitions between scenes handled?
8. What was your personal response to this theatre experience?
**## CRITIQUEGUIDELINES-2-1.docx**
CRITIQUE GUIDELINES:
Remember, this is your opinion, your personal honest reaction to the production.
Do not give a plot or story summation. I want your specific reactions to the theatrical aspects of the production. Your grade does not depend on whether or not you liked the performance, but how specifically and clearly you state your opinion and support it.
When writing the critiques, I will be looking for the use of vocabulary we’ve used so far in the semester. It doesn't matter to me (in the critique, at least) whether you do or don't like this type of play or whether you did or didn't like the play itself. What I care about is that you support your opinion with specific examples and proper terminology. Here is a "guide" for things to consider:
The critique should be
**3-4** **full pages** in length, typed, double-spaced, and in 12 pt. Times New Roman font. No more than 1" top/bottom margins, no more than 1.25 left/right margins. The paper should have an additional cover page (with the title, your name, etc.) attached (not counted in the page numbers). I WILL NOT TAKE HARD COPIES OR EMAIL SUBMISSIONS!
**Spelling and grammar are a consideration**. Use your theatre program for the correct spelling of character and actor names. Play titles should be italicized (
_Our Town_). When discussing the character as written by the playwright, use the character's name. When discussing the interpretation of the character by the actor, use the actor's name. "John Smith's Willy Loman was intense" or "Willy Loman, as portrayed by John Smith, was intense" would be accurate. "Willy Loman was intense" would not be accurate. But, if you are describing the character "I believe Shakespeare meant for Katharina to be an independent woman" would be correct, and "I believe Shakespeare meant for Jane Doe's Katharina to be intense" would not. Be specific. Avoid generalizations such as "John Smith was good" or "I didn't like John Smith." If you think an actor's performance was effective, be very specific in explaining why you hold that opinion. Refer to specific moments and specific scenes from the play in supporting your opinion.
Start by asking these three questions as you watch the production:
1. What is the intention (of both the playwright and of the production)?
2. How well has it been done?
3. Was it worth doing?
Address the following questions in your critique:
1. What was your overall opinion of the entire production? What is the play's major idea? How was that idea developed? How has the situation at the end of the play changed from what the play was at the beginning? Which characters have gone through the greatest change? Has it been a change for the better? Does the play makes us think about, or does it clarify a truth that's important to us? Does the production succeed in portraying the playwright's concept or statement? What was the style of the production? Did the elements of the production emphasize and maintain consistency with the style?
2. What did you think of the acting? Are the actors believable as the characters? Are they spontaneous and consistent? Do they work well with the other actors in creating an ensemble? Which actor most pleased you and why? (Note: Not which character was your favorite…but which actor did you think did the best performance.) Which actor pleased you the least? Be specific.
3. What did you think of the costumes, make-up, and hair design? What were the characters wearing? What did it say about that character? Did the costume fit the interpretation of the character as the actor portrayed them? Did it help define the time period of the play? Did the costume serve as exposition in defining the character's personality or as a mood for the character? How were line, texture, and color used? How did hair and make-up contribute to the definition of character? What was your favorite and least favorite costumes (Again, in terms of most appropriate costume…not which you personally would wear or not wear.)
4. What did you think of the set and prop designs? What type of space was this theatre? How did the set support the production? Does it serve as a backdrop or a metaphor for the character's lives or situation? Did it seem appropriate to the style or time period of the play? Did it make you react to the play in a specific way or to focus on something particular in the play? How successful was it at creating an environment for the characters? How were color, line, mass and texture used? How well did the props contribute to creating the world of this play?
5. What did you think of the sound design? Was the sound design helpful in creating a sense of place or in evoking the world of the play? Was the sound design well executed?
6. What did you think of the lighting design? Did the lights contribute to creating the world of the play? What information did the lights give about the time, place, characters, mood, and situations in the play? Did you find the lights functional, distracting, and emotional? Were there any moments or scenes where the lights were particularly evocative?
7. What did you think of the direction? What did you think the director's interpretation? Is it different from what you expected (if you had read the script prior to attending)? Did the production seem to have a consistent vision (concept + interpretation)? Did the director compose stage pictures that gave additional meaning to the moments? How was the pace of the show? Did all the elements (set, costumes, lights, props, actors) seem to have a consistent message? How well were transitions between scenes handled?
8. What was your personal response to this theatre experience?