Right Round - Flo Rida

Talking about eacutorial plays? yup we saw a good one called "nuestra señora de la nubes" which I loved will of my laughter...and the other called "La Flor de la Chukirawa", which was also good.

La flor de Chukirawa, as soon as we entered the auditorium we saw the stage with 3 characters in still picture, in different levels, in different colors. And as everyone entered, they started talking about why where the actors like that. This change of the usual beginning of a play created expectations from the audience. SO a technique to captures audience atention? ...start in a unique way!. Ok, so the stage basically, was divided in 3 parts, the left was used by a male actor wich stood in still picture for the whole play, expect when he had to run ....and just those 10 seconds, you could tell he practice for like a month to acomplish those movements. His actions were precised and flow. He represented the son who was an ilegal imigrant, I think in the US. In the middle of the stage, was the mother, how basically was the main character. She told her story, about how her son left her. This actress developed her character well, but the thing I liked the most was her diction and her accent that she used. THey were soo real, because you know how the Cholitas talked, and we really think that they only cant pronounce the R, but no, the actress found all the characteristic words, entonation used by them. Well acomplished!!!. She used real props, stones, and everything from the middles to the left looked very real. However, on the right of the stage, was supposed to be the imaginary part, it was the statue of the saint that the mother always prayed for. I really didn't get that part .... until roberto explained me. Best thing about the play? voice of the actress AND how the characters that were not in action stayed in still picture, instead of going off stage. THANK GOD we go off, because I don't think i'll be able to stay in a certain postion for so long!!..... bad thing? the ireal word..that i didn't get AND the part when it looked as if the play finished, but it didn't! so ...spaces where lights go down and is silence should be avoid to stop confusion.

On the other hand!! we find the play I liked to most from all, Nuestra Señora de las Nubes. So, as we entered the room we found all sort of drawing on the floor, that I really thought that the actors were going to use them ....but they didn't JAJAJAJ. Ok, so the play evolves from the Exiled. It is about two people (a man and a woman, who were exiliados from NSdlN and they tell each other stories from their past). At first, we see the 2 actors ...and you enmediatly think that she is totally CHAVESCA and he is totally wierd and something is wrong with him. She was a copy from all the jokes, way of saying things from el chavo. (even she had her ...gorrita) HE from the beginning i didn't like. The actress I think was the key for the success of the play. Since the play tells stories from the past, you see how they change characters! and....like, the woman she is so great at the rolls she do! she is great. To tell you the truth, the play was succesfull becuse first, it envolves the public, then it has Loads of jokes but they are not repeated, they use jokes for ALL ages and not shoking etc. ...

However, there where somethings I didn't like, for example
1) The main thing was good, but at one part it had to finish! and it didn't it kept for a little bit longer, not much ...but it didn't. If the play finished at that part, then it was perfect...but it didn't.
2) The change of character that was seen (the one with blue light!) I didn't like, the ones that the character changed but like in an evolution was great! and awesome, but hte ones that you watch the actors CHANGE...that sucks..becuase you see the actor...not the character.
3) The man! he sucked...he really never ....changed his character ...like his main character was similiar (voice, movement, actions) ..to all of his others (expet for meme)...he was waaaay to below the woman, and that might be the reason why you noticed a great contrast between both of them.
4)MEME, I'm sorry but I think those kindd of people still are a taboo for society...and they should be performed with care. Even though they didn't make fun of them...they are still there and intentions might be missunderstood.
5) accent of the woman, even though I loved her! I think the thing she misses is that to get rid of her spanish accent when she acts as the lady BECAUSE at the end she talks (as she..) and is the same..so all her character that was built up ...was a letdown.

SO IN CONCLUSION! Nuestra Señora de las Nubes! best play ever (until now) ...and it was better than the other ecuatorial. So How to apply the techniques to our play. I think that we really cant, not this time. Contact with audience, jokes...that is not good things, but in any case, the Clarin /rondin guys are the ones encharged of it! so ... :) make jokes! make them effective! DO NOT REPAET!...and if we notice the different levels of acting between the man and woman!? will our play ...be the same!? could the audience difffrentiate my acting form...rodrigos? or Felipes with Sebastians!? since me and sebas, we are just beginnign in this DRAMA industry ...? How much will it differ!?

Billie Jean - Michael Jackson

The Tusday on USURA DRAMA WEEK, we went to watch a spanish play called Divina Palabras, which practically was a Giberish for me. I understood NOTHING. However, I did like the play, but yet again, up to one moment on which the play just was too much for me, the lost my atention.

Story Plot: ...what I understood is that some reddish hair was having an afair with some guy. And someone die and the family was fighting for the earinngs of the dead...but more thant that...nothing.

Performance of the Actors: meen! the actors /actresses were great! they had control of they body 100%. They could perform any kind of acrobacia. And as a matter of fact, I saw the play more in the idea of beauty of movement. For example, I loved the stand of the women, all women stood with the right toes up and hands in hips. And I also loved and think was very rescueABLE, the voices and characterisation of the character. Every character had a different voice, stand, movements etc. But I got confuse whenever the actor changed roll, since the outfit really changed much (or like the face of the actor stayed the same, so I thought it was the same character but dressed up differently).

Bellatrix!: the actress that looked like bellatrix (harry potter) was the oscar winner in this play. She created this character that was sort of a creature with a very squicky voice. and she also acted as a lady. and when I realized it was the same actress I was shocked. That was impossible! good versability.

Scenery: the toillet paper rolls were great! I think every body liked the rools used as tables, wheel barrows, towers etc. It was a very creative way of creating different setting witout saying them explictly, HOWEVER, the bad things about this things is that they rolled all over the place. There where 2 times that the rolls went out of controls and the actors had to improv. in order to prevent them to fall from the stage.

Narration: every scene change, a character came in front and talked (whcih I didn't get) and I supposed that they said something about what happened or ..what is happening.

Temptation: the most amazing part of the play was, the temptation. The Actors where semi naked and they made this cool dance that everyone ending up loving. This shows that doing things that look difficult for tha audicen is a very effective technique in order to impress them. However, this distracted the whole idea of temptation, as the audience payer atention to the acrobatics that the actors were doign a the background, the main action of the ginger head and the man was completely ignored.

Outfit, The outfit of the play will help sandri in the making of the outfits for our own play, specially I think for the outfits of the Aceitunas.

In conclusion, characterisation is very important, however, sometimes making funny noices / voices might not allow the audience to get what you were trying to say. Also, the scenery for this play was very simple but very effective, and ours is more explicit, there is a palace a tower and a hill. So, what is better!? to show a table!? or to use somehting else and let the audience think it is a table? how much do props have to be the actual thing we need?! and finally!? is text effective in a play!? upto wahte extend?! sometimes text ruins the play (e.g this play, since I didn't understand a word)

Carousel - Blink 182

The Monday of USURA DRAMA WEEK we went to watch an argentinean play called "Desdichado Deliete del Destino" which was a total mess. So, without any further floreo, I'm gonna analyze the play.

Plot: At first, the main plot was very clear, conflict in a normal house, Dad who fights with mom, complains about everything (loud music) and that Dad loves roses (too much) and some ants ate the roses, and he blames her poor daughter for everything. However ...It changed for no reason, to football and the fathers love for football, and secret pasion of the girl for a football team member, and then all of a sudden, the plot changes again for no reason, and to the music that dad likes, and football again, and flowers, but music, and football ...MESS. As a contrast to Dominicanish, this play opened many proposition and ideas but never really closed them.

Characters: In my opinion, characters were not defined. The Dad, at first we are presented a Dad that is pasionate, but also grumpy, and then nice, and grumpy again, then happy..but sad. As well as the daughter, even though she was the only good thing about the play, her character was like dumb through out the play, but then ...at the end, it was all made up (it would have been interesting how she in her own character would've kill her dad, not changing into another her....) she changes even her voice, her voice turns more of an opera singer. And finally, the third character, what can we say about him? HE WAS THERE JUST TO MAKE TIME. he was never really needed in the play, and I think he was one of the reasons the play failed. He changed 180 the plot of the play, he was funny, but even his jokes became boring and plain.

Culture: I understand that in Argentina saying bad words is normal, or ....ever more common than peru, but they need to understand that some bad words in argentina such as "puta madre" or carajo, estupido and many more...are a little bit shocking when peruvians hear them on stage, at least I do. I really don't want to pay to hear some random guy say 50% text 50 % bad words.

Lighting: the lights stood the same through out all the play, BUT when the dad died (and the other dude too) the light changed, it was focused and cme from the right, I like those kind of lights. I think they give intensity to the play and also it gives me the idea of real. Don't know why. But that lights are very efficient for me :) . Improve: when the dad was talking about the flowers, I would've like to ...see the flower pot. Becuase, and I know this happens in festivals, the lights were not directly above the pot and so ...the pots that were closer to the audience, were in complete shadow. And if a they lighted that part, It would've given strenght tFiro it.

Girly Girl, the girl is the only thing I can save in my "GOOD THINGS" list, since she was the character that everyone liked. The worked really well her column, her face, her movement, her stand, her voice her look, her movemnts. I can tell that she changed alot from actress to girl becuase at the end, when she talked it was another person, completely different. And you end up like " WOW ..is she the same actress?". Also..the best joke, is the one with the cloth and the fly, when she hears the phone call. She stood in her charecter very well, she owned it. however, as i said before, I didn't like how she changed at the end.

Concluding the play: At the end of the play, the explained the difference in cultural aspects of the play, since it was very argentinean ish. BUT, i really don't think that was necessary. It was a waste of time, and the jokes were bad...not good.

In conclusion, the play was funny, at first, but it turned confusing. NOT GOOD, NOT GOOD. As I said before, not very much things that I will keep in my "Good things" list, and as the play passed, i realized that the jokes were the same, but nobody laughed at the end. soI start to wonder, up to what extend jokes can be repeated and still be funny?