Acting Stage vs Screen Assignment for The Phantom Essays - Film

Acting: Stage vs Screen Assignment for The Phantom of the Opera You viewed an adaptation for the screen. What do you think are some of the differences between the play version (on stage) and the film version (on screen)? Refer to specific scenes when talking about the movie so we know what part you are talking about. Think about face expressions, body language, volume, makeup, and anything else you think might be done differently between stage and film. Your answer should cover four or more differences and include examples of several scenes. Pretend that the reader might not have viewed the movie when writing about a scene; give details. The adaption from stage to screen is always a struggle especially when the adaption is a musical. It's one of those things where you can't please everyone. If it's too stage-like, it won't appeal to the majority of the audience at all. If it's too different from the stage version, fans of the original will be unhappy. If it's not just the right balance of both, everyone will hate it. Fortunately, the director of The Phantom of the Opera movie probably created the best musical film adaption ever. A first major difference between stage and film is that on screen, actors HAVE to be realistic as their characters. By that I mean, a thirty year old could pass as sixteen-year-old Christine Daae on stage because the audience doesn't see her very closely but on screen, it was necessary to get an actual teenager because the story would not make as much sense if the actor were clearly too old to be dancing in a corps de ballet at the Palais Garnier which is an important part of the character. Another difference is movement and facial expressions. In a stage show like Phantom, there's no reason to be subtle because no one will see it. Any significant movements or expressions have to be seen from the second mezzanine! In screen, it's exactly the opposite. Movements have to appear a little more natural and subtle. For example, during Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again, Christine has some freedom to be a little more theatrical on stage but in the film, Emmy Rossum chose to not change her expression and to try to convey emotion in a more subte way which is probably a good thing because big theatrical expressions are not very appealing to look at on screen (Sarah Brightman's Phantom videos are proof of that). Similarly, the singing has to be toned down at some parts in the movie. It's fine for Sarah Brightman or Sierra Boggess to belt out the music in a theatre but it's not always so nice to listen to in a movie. In Think of Me, the original cadenza is much higher than what was used in the movie. Some fans of the original show were bothered by this but I thought it was a good choice. I think the average movie-goer would actually be turned off by too much opera-sound. Stage makeup is different from the kind of makeup that is needed for screen. Emmy Rossum had very minimal makeup (or if it was a lot, it didn't appear that way). Not only because Christine needed to appear young and fresh but because that's just how it's done in Hollywood. Makeup should look as natural as possible unless the character needs something different (like Effie from the Hunger Games). However, a Christine on Broadway would have to wear much more so that they won't be washed out by the stage lights and their facial expressions can be seen. She'd have to wear fake eyelashes, eyeliner, eye shadow, lipstick, maybe lip liner, fill in eyebrows, blush, powder foundation, and maybe even some bronzer. This may seem like a lot but it's actually exactly what's necessary for a stage actor to wear. It also may have to do with the fact that if Emmy had to put on more makeup- she'd have all the time in the world to sit in a chair and have it done but a Christine on Broadway doesn't have much time backstage. She's probably busy enough changing her costume, she doesn't have time to change her makeup for each scene too.

Movie Review The Impact of Globalization in the Movie Still, the Children Are Here

Movie Review The Impact of Globalization in the Movie Still, the Children Are Here It is been 6000 years since people decided to cultivate rice. During those centuries, the civilization went thought a number of life-circles, developing the new facilities, values and entertainments. Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Movie Review: The Impact of Globalization in the Movie Still, the Children Are Here specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More However, can we easily say what changed since that time when people in India started their worship? The movie Still, the Children Are Here shows the typical life of one village in the West Garo Hills in North East India. For the people who live there life-circle does not change. Although there are modern technologies, cars, computers and television, people go to space and to a depth of the oceans, the villagers use the same methods as their ancestors. Thereby, it is possible to say that the impact of the civilization on the life of the villagers in the movie is not signifi cant and people are able to save their traditional way of life in spite of the globalization. Cultivation of rise as the way of life is the major idea of the present movie. For this society, the natural order of things in life is only one possible way. Perhaps, they do not know about the historical events, political movements and the fashionable trends. They do not care if their life is fair, rich or socially important. They know that life has to be like that. 6000 years their people go to the fields, grow rice and burn down the trees. It seems that the usual way life will never change. However, the population of the Earth grows too fast. India is one of the most densely populated countries. Rural people feel more influence of the urban life. As the modern civilization needs more space and natural resources, rural people have to share their historical land with the newcomers. The village described in the movie is large. Nevertheless, people who live there cannot maintain the separa ted life. The world around them is changing day by day and they cannot stop this movement. So what solution the villagers can find? Perhaps, they will dissolve in the other population of the country, adopting the new facilities and goods, or maybe they will try to save their way of life? Obviously, this question is complicated and causes the sharp discussions. Someone may say that there is no way to resist the Globalization. On the other hand, someone may claim for necessity of saving the traditional characteristics. In fact, both of them are right. People try to keep the traditional life; however, it is impossible to stop the global processes.Advertising Looking for essay on art and design? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The essential nature of man in movie is considered as the cooperation with nature within the culture of cultivation. For the villagers, the natural life, food and culture are the main values. In spite of the facilities and technologies that urban people can bring, the rural population needs their simple but own and native things. In general, those villagers are the same as the urban people. They are human-being with the same needs and characters. They can be hard-working, lazy, worry about money; they drink, eat and have the family problems. However, this way is absolutely natural as it was 6000 years ago. In fact, people do not change. And, at the end, when the villagers will unite with other citizens, they will be the same people inside with the same emotions, but the traditions of their ancestors will be lost.