Throughout most of the play I didn’t really see what was really wrong with Blanche. From just the dialogue you couldn’t really tell or notice anything. In the play reading it there was some stage direction but not too much to explain what Blanche was really doing. Like in the beginning of the play when Blanche is already there and Stanley comes home. At the time Stella is in the other room. In the play reading this you don’t know if there is tension or if Blanche is acting strange because there isn’t as much dialect talking about it. But in the movie you see the tension between them and the looks they are giving each other. Blanche also seems to have an attraction towards Stanley by the looks she gives him and the music in the background.
In the movie you also got a better sense of what the characters were like more because you could see what they looked like. But what I didn’t understand is in both the movie and the play Stanley is played up to be a macho guy who is tough, and handsome. But in the movie after the first time he attacks Stella when he is calling to her in that well known scene he is crying. He is crying and almost breaking down, the same scene in the book to be just sounded like he was drunk and yelling, not as upset as it seemed in the movie version.
Mitch in the movie version looked very shy and not very confident. All the other guys are mostly rude and don’t really care. Mitch dresses nice and leaves the games early to take care of his sick mother. All this was even more present in the movie in his dress, voice and everything he did. What he most reminded me of was in the movie “Chicago” the husband Amos. They both look alike and are both shy and let people, especially women walk all over them and take charge, or wear the pants in the family.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I'm glad that you brought up the movie "Chicago" because I agree. Both Mitch and Amos are very similar, I even thought they were the same actor at first. Anyways, I like how Mitch was portrayed in the movie. He was kind of awkward, but sincere and I liked him. He definately did let Blanche walk all over him. For example, when he brings her flowers and she makes him bow before he presents the flowers to him, I think that is really strange. In the movie you can really see that Mitch almost seems embarassed of doing so. He looks around, bows and then gives her the flowers. It seems that he was just happy to have a pretty woman in his life, and it seems that being with Blanche may have been particially to please his sick mother. So, maybe that's why he let her walk all over him, I don't know.
I did not like the way that Blanche was portrayed in the movie. I felt that she was too over the top in the movie and was not acting the way that she did in the playwright. I agree with you that it was difficult to tell what was wrong with Blanche in the movie, but I suppose this is because there was so much detail put into every aspect of the playwright. Also, I think the actor who played Stanley was not physically the best actor to take this part, but overall he was definitely the best actor with the most experience. Throughout the movie I found it hard to enjoy because the acting, overall, was very poor.
Blanche’s portrayal in the movie was troubling. Her over the top attitude and actions really seemed to be over the top. It made Blanche's character unbelievable and boring. There was little depth to her. She was in just one state- crazy. After reading several blogs I think that the acting may have ruined Blanche the character. It was just too over the top.
Laura,
I do agree with you that the facial expressions of the different characters do bring the play to life more in the movie. Reading the script, you have to try to imagine everything yourself which is much more difficult. I do not however, believe that there is much of a difference in the beginning of the play between the script and the play, except for the fact that Blanche does not meet Stella in her house in the film, but goes instead to the bowling alley to meet her. I did not pick up on the fact that Stanley was crying in the film when calling for Stella whereas in the script he was not, but this is a very valid point for you would think that it would soften his character a bit. In the movie, I feel that it shows that he has some emotions, but it’s almost as though he is just crying in order to get Stella back, not because he sincerely misses her, but because he wants her physically.
I agree that in the play you couldn't really tell what was wrong with Blanche and in the movie it was much easier.This is because in the movie there is not just dialogue there's body language, and emotion which when added to the dialogue creates a much different picture.
Laura,
I totally agree with you about the film portrayal of Stanley. I was completely caught off guard by the way that Marlon Brandow played Stanley. He seemed to be much more in control of his emotions in some scenes; not as reckless as I imagined him when I was reading the play. But then he started crying, and against, I could not understand what was going on. Stanley was supposed to be this powerful, controlling man, who felt nothing but lust and anger, and here he was crying! I had a really hard time getting over this huge difference in character.
Post a Comment