Reflect on the reading of the week analyzing a quote or reflect on the movie and how it realizes the play. What does the movie add to the play beyond the reading of the words only?
Reminder: This blog is due before midnight Sunday, March 16.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
49 comments:
The movie version of the play adds to the play by giving it another dimension. I like to see the action and the acting that goes along with the words. One example of this is when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are playing the question game. In the play they use tennis terms to say how they were scored, in the movie they were on a tennis court and acted like they were playing tennis as they said thier lines. Little things like this make the movie very entertaining to watch.
I feel like seeing the movie of the play really helps understand what is going on as opposed to just reading the words. One thing that I felt was really was more clearly expressed in the movie was how Rosencrantz and Guildenstern mixed up their names and identities. When reading the book it was difficult to tell if the they were just playing around or not. In the movie I felt like both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were confused as to which one they were. This was most clearly seen when one of them was pretending to be Hamlet and the other was pretending to be one of them. I feel like this adds to the character of both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
When reading the book, the lines are rather boring, and make the entire play seem like just a conversation, with no real action going on. It's hard to imagine what Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are actually doing while they're speaking, or where they are. The movie helps to turn the conversation into something more interesting to watch, and helps understand and give more entertainment to the story. When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were practicing asking each other questions when they were about to speak with Hamlet, it was hard to understand with the back and forth conversation when reading it, but in the movie, it was easier to see and understand what each of them meant to say.
I strongly believe that the movie version portrays the story a lot better then the book. I have a hard time getting "emotion" and "feeling" from the book text. The movie does a great job of bringing the play to life. You can see the actions that the characters are doing while reciting lines. The way characters say their lines is also hard to read, unlike the movie where you can tell when the characters are being humorous. Overall I believe it is good to read the play and watch the movie. Instead of doing just one or the other, it gives you a could comparison point as well as a personal view on which version you find more interesting. I think it was to the classes advantage to read Hamlet before reading the new book. Instead of spending time understanding the background of why they are at the castle and what is going on, we can just focus on the two main characters and their quest.
The movie gives a much more realistic view of what is occuring in the play. The sarcasm in the characters voice comes out more while watching the movie. One quote that has stuck in my head from the play is from Rosencrantz: Life in a box is better than no life at all, I expect. You'd have a chance, at least. You could lie there thinking, "Well. At least I'm not dead."
This quote could be taken two different ways. The first meaning could feed off of the idea Hamlet shared about the talents we have. This quote could be refering to staying in the box and not using any of the talents we were given and life being pointless. And, the second way someone could inturpret this quote is that there IS a purpose to life. If we are put here on this earth we might as well stick around even if it means staying in a box for the rest of your life.
I like watching the movie scene by scene after we read each act because the movie gives life to the words of the play. I feels that in this book there is a large amount of dialog that has no description or direction that is portrayed to the reader. So with the movie, I am able to comprehend the character interaction with characters that speak directly and indirectly to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Also, the movie adds a bit of extras that the book does not even mention. I like this because it gives the movie a different and more interesting spin than the book.
I like the movie a lot more than the book as when listening it read aloud you don't hear the exasperaion that you can see and hear in the movie, though this is more the readers *cough* ted *cough* than fault of the script. With a visual it also helps me understand whats going on in the play, even though this play uses a lot easier to understand language than Hamlet, it goes off on tangents that are difficult to keep up with.
Watching the movie gives you a better appreciation of the whole book. All the missing stage directions that we don't read in class come into the movie and almost double the density of the play. While the words are the important part so is the way that the words are presented. The way Guil and Ros react to each other and how they talk over each other really brings out their true character in a way that us students could never do in a simple class time. There are funny parts to laugh at during the reading but the movie really takes the prize there.
The movie easily helps realize the play because it helps shape where the play is going. Along with that helps show us where/what the characters are doing whilst they talk.
Now the movie adds a ton to the play beyond just the words. It shows us that when people get R&G mixed up it is not jokingly they do so n purpose. It also shows us what they are doing when there are say...silence parts in the play. But the best part about the movie is that there is so much more emotion in the movie, and we know exactly what the author wanted us to see.
Watching the movie version of this play adds more humor to the characters and scenes. I think that this is because when we are in class, reading out loud is much different than actors who have rehearsed these scenes over and over again. I think that watching the movie gives us more insight to the different personalities of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Obviously Rosencrantz is the one who is curious and always trying to invent things, and the movie lets the reader of the play see this in a large, visual aspect. I think that the director made good choices regarding the tone of the two when they speak to each other. Because the two speak so fast, one can tell that they know each other, and can also be confused with each other too.
I think it is interesting to see the story of Hamlet in the eyes of R+G. Since we are so familiar with the story of Hamlet many of the parts are really interesting to see in a new viewpoint. It was interesting to see how R+G were witnesses to the killing of Polonious. It seems that they were always there, spying on Hamlet, but in the movie of Hamlet we never really saw them.
I also enjoyed seeing the characters of R+G played out. They truly act as if they don't know their own name, and the curiousity of R shows up in many of the scenes. The two actors who play R+G do a really good job, they seem as if they aren't really sure who they are, they want to discover things and they constantly are talking as if they are one person, with one interrupting or talking over the other. They are really humorous during the interactions with each other, you can really feel the friendship and connection between them, and it is evident in the way they communicate and interact.
Watching the movie is more enjoyable than just reading the play by itself. The play can sometimes be hard to follow because it is such "back and forth" conversation. In the movie it shows how this conversation could actually work. Like how elise said about them using tennis terms in the play and then in the movie they are on the tennis court. The movie shows you a different side to the play and I think helps you enjoy the play more becuase now when we read further on we can imagine what it will look like in the movie and not just have to read the lines in the play. The movie adds lots of character to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
I have enjoyed watching the movie much more than the book. While reading the book you can sense there is sarcasm between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern but the movie really brings out the sarcasm between the two. Also the movie is much more exciting and helps you to better understand what is going on throughout the play.
One of the examples is the scene when the two are under the apple tree and are playing the question game. Rosencrantz is the one who seems to never know what is going on and it seemed to me that the only reason he actually followed the game by only asking questions was because he was so confused. Guildenstern is the one who holds the two together and is more likely to be the one to speak if they were ever to get into any mischief.
I have enjoyed watching the movie much more than the book. While reading the book you can sense there is sarcasm between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern but the movie really brings out the sarcasm between the two. Also the movie is much more exciting and helps you to better understand what is going on throughout the play.
One of the examples is the scene when the two are under the apple tree and are playing the question game. Rosencrantz is the one who seems to never know what is going on and it seemed to me that the only reason he actually followed the game by only asking questions was because he was so confused. Guildenstern is the one who holds the two together and is more likely to be the one to speak if they were ever to get into any mischief.
I am enjoying the humor in both the book and the film. I think the film is a great addition to reading the play because there are scenes in the film that are not in the play, but that are fitting and amusing. For example, when one of the characters (I think it's Rosencrantz) is playing with the pots and they are acting as a pendulum, and he wants to show Guildenstern but they shatter when he swings them again.
It is really helpful to watch the movie version of the play, rather than just read the text. The movie does a better job of showing the differences between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, based on the way that they say certain things. It is interesting to see how fascinated Rosencrantz is by the simplest things, like the paper boat. Aside from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, the movie has some unusual scene changes. I really liked how the scene with the players practicing the Murder of Gonzago immediately transitions into the king's reaction to the play. Overall, it is helpful to read the play first, so that we can get a sense of the plot, and then watch the movie and see the finer details.
I really enjoy both the text and movie versions of the play. I love the banter that is present in the play and the movie is great in adding background and setting to the conversation between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The part in the movie where Rosencrantz is standing on the trap door holding it shut with his hand is absolutely brilliant and really helped mesh this play and the lines of Hamlet that are included in it, something that is somewhat difficult to visualize when you just have the words in front of you.
I enjoyed the movie more than the play itself. It was better to see it in action and it was actually funny sometimes. With the book it was hard to put emphasis on words or how they said anything. Also in the movie they had many parts where Guidenstern and Rosencrantz were just listening in on others conversations. I also found it weird that the actors used the last scene of Hamlet as a play, the actors are very mysterious in this play than in Hamlet. To already have a play made for something that will happen in the future is a little creepy, and the fact that there were 8 dead total, not 6. They show 2 people getting hung at the end. I don't know if Guild and Ros were concerned with that or not, but that turns out to be them.
I had a very hard time understanding the humor from simply reading the play (which is unuasual for me) but when the movie really put it into picture everything became a lot more clear. The movie really made the important emphasis that I really needed to enjoy this work. For instance the Question and answer thing made no sense to me whatsoever when just reading it, however, in the movie it became clear what they were doing and I was able to enjoy the ideas being pounced across the screen. Although reading the book helped me really understand what they were saying. Without the text it would have be very hard for me to understand what they were actually saying some of the time.
I prefer the movie to the actual text. The text can be interpreted in different ways depending on who assumes the roles of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. This, in turn, makes it difficult to understand what exactly is occuring in the play, and often times the actual funny aspect of it is taken away. Watching the movie portrays the meaning of the text, and thus, allows for easier understanding and enjoyment of the story.
The movie version of "Rozencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" adds to the play by truly animating every single line and action in the play. Furthermore, the movie version, while still following the play exactly, adds to humor and depth through the actions of Rozencrantz. R's scientific realizations are impressive to the audience, and hilarious to see with Guildenstern's reaction. However, this scientific feat is lost in the text.
I enjoyed watching the movie along with the book because I felt that the play while only reading it did not have much action. Trying to visualize while reading R&G are Dead it seemed to me that each act there was no action it was just the two of them sitting in once place talking about life or some other bazaar topic. However, once we watched the movie I was able to much better visualize what had been happening. When in fact there was alot that went on during each Act it was just action that was taking place behind the action of Rozencrantz and Guildenstern talking about a new topic. So the movie did help visualize what was happening and make it more realistic that R and G had been dropped into a scene of a play and the play is taking place behind them.
The movie helped me to understand the play a lot better because i could actually understand what was going on. In the play a lot of times it was just dialogue between rosencrantz and guildernstern and it got kind of hard to keep track of what was going on. It also made it difficult because Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are often confused and make plays on words or play games with their words. When i was reading the book this style made it difficult to follow the story, but when we watched the movie i could actually see how they were interacting with eachother and then i got a better understanding of what the words meant and how they related to the story.
I feel watching the movie is important because it allows us to know what's actually supposed to happen. i don't think in reading it we pay enough attention to stage direction, and it sorta detracts from what we've tried to understand
The movie definitely makes the play easier to understand and more exciting than just one liners from each character. I can much more easily understand the exestentialist remarks that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern make that I missed when reading the book. There is also a lot of stage direction that we skipped over that actually ends up adding to the play. A specific example is that in the movie it was a lot easier to understand Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's identity mix-up.
The movie is a nice complement to the book. Watching corresponding scenes of the movie as we read the book made the play much easier to understand. The constant bickering of Ros and Gil is given a very dramatic and important affect when watched in the movie. When reading as a class it is easy to miss the subtle jokes. As a whole, I thought that this play had some good ideas, but they were represented in a rather boring conversation between Ros and Gil. Luckily, the play was short enough to tollerate.
Without the movie the play is just words, and it's hard to see the emotion that is meant to be. Because the play has a lot of sarcasm and double meanings it's easier to understand those when you can visually see the characters and their expressions. Also, the movie showed much of Hamlet (Ophelia drowning, Laertes returning, etc.) as part of the dumb show. I thought this made it really cool and it was also concise and easy to follow (having already read Hamlet). I feel like there was also little to no stage directions in the play. This gave the director a lot of flexibility and choice to do what he wanted to.
Reading the play gives no idea of the comedy created by the characters. The entire play is based on the interaction between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern which is not well demonstrated in the play. Sure the back and forths are all the same but the actual comedy in the movie was very physically and you couldn't see that reading. Also the play gave little idea of the setting of the play and because of that you were lost compared to the movie which interpreted the setting and added to the comedy.
The physicality of the movie adds tons to the play. In fact when read, the play has very little entertainment value because the play is meant to be performed and the actors playing all of the characters are extremely talented and the way they deliver each line makes you want to know what will happen next. Also, since the author of the play also directed the movie he was completely liberty to add any scenes or actions or images he could with no worry that he may be breaching the royalties for the play or will anger the fans and author of the play. With this liberty he can created a wonderfully absurd world in any way he wants.
The movie was a lot more interesting for me of course. Mostly because I had an idea of what was actually happening in each scene. There was no clue about the tone or the mood of the scenes in the written version of the play. It was much easier to put all of the pieces together and connect each side scene involving only Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to the rest of Hamlet. I also like that the movie made R and G's characters seem very comical and at times, clueless. This made the play realistic and much more interesting.
I think the book was a LOT better than the movie. Just kidding, but seriously the movie obviously adds a lot to the text. When just reading the text, it was funny at first but then it just got boring and I almost fell asleep. But when we watched the play, there are little things that the director throws in that keeps your attention. For example, when they are showing the part of the play out of Hamlet where Hamlet is chasing Ophelia around and says "Get thee to a nunnery!", the director of R and G decides to put them in front of the actors while they disrupt their practice. Also, there are facial expressions and body language that you just can't pick up on in the book, like when R and G are talking to Hamlet when they are eating and Hamlet gets up on the table and starts talking about how life is pointless, R and G just look back at each other like they are in the room with a madman and are forced to listen to his nonsense.
The movie really adds alot to the play. When simply reading the text, the expression and the humor don't come through very much. Seeing the play acted reveals the humor and takes the text to a higher level. There were a few things that were added to the movie that were not in the text. Many of the experiments that Rosencrantz, (or was it Guildenstern?) did were not written in the text but I thought that they emphisized the questions within the play regarding the reason for life and questioning physics and the natural world. The movie also adds to the character of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and their personalities differientiate a little better. All in all, I like the movie better than the text.
Although the general meaning of the play is understood by just the text alone, the movie helps to make it much more understandable. It also adds many different actions done by Guildenstearn and Rosencrantz that the book doesn't even mention. One example of this is when Rosencrantz is playing with a pinwheel made out of an apple core and paper. He uses it to help stir a pot full of boiling water, and it is shortly after incorporated with the context when he and Guildenstearn argue about the wind and which way it is coming from. Yet it never excplicitly mentions anything about this object in the book. Overall these small actions make the play more interesting and also allow the reader to comprehend what is happening much more easily.
I think that the movie of the play really makes the play a lot easier to understand. In the play there are a lot of choppy one or two word lines that I get bored and lost in, but in the movie, the actors really put the words together and actually make it funny rather than short and uncomprehensible.
The movie adds a comedic value to the play and it also makes it easier to understand. I think the movie also adds personality to the play because you can kind of notice which Rosencrantz or Guildenstern seems to be the "smarter" one and which goofs off most of the time. Opposed to reading the movie also gives us imagery and something tangible that we can be like "oh i get it" unlike the book in which you probably won't understand
I believe that by watching the movie version of the play, you are able to better understand what is taking place. The humor seems to come out more and the confusion that takes place between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. One explain is when both of the men are talking to Hamlet and Hamlet doesn't know which person he is talking to. They also seem to confuse themselves with each other. When planning on what they are going to say to the King of England, neither of them knows who each other is. By this being displayed in the play it makes for the whole movie to be much more enjoyable, and a better understanding of the play is presented.
I enjoyed watching to movie a lot more than the book. The book is very confusing at times because you have almost full pages describing what the actors are doing, versus in the movie when they are acting it out. The movie is much more easy to understand. However, the movie has more parts added to it, and some of them seem almost pointless. Parts of the book that were confusing to read but easier to watch is when they were playing tennis. In the book, it sounded like they were just asking questions back and forth, where in the movie they actually pretended to play tennis, it made it much easier to understand.
Watching to movie act by act after reading the play was very helpful in understanding what was going on. While reading the play we didnt read the stage directions so we didnt really know what was going on. Watching the movie definatly helped to know what was happening and it gave a better visual of the characters. The play was kind of confusing and the movie cleared up everything.
I believe that the movie is a very good representation. Tim Stoppard in the movie is able to portray Rosencrantz in a way that wasn't shown in the book. In the book he seemed more like Guildenstern's sidekick. In the movie you see that he thinks for himself and is constantly exploring the world around him i.e. building fans, paper airplanes, the hanging clay pots. If the movie didn't put this into a visual media it would have been completely lost. I think that Tom Stoppard made a lot of interesting choices regarding the stage directions and it will be interesting to see how the movie plays out.
After watching the movie Rosencratz and Guildenstern are Dead I have a greater appreciation and understanding of the book. The movie adds liveliness and excitement to each scene and character. Also, the movie gives much more than conversations by providing a great visual of the setting and actions of the play. This is especially evident in the scenes when they play the question and game and question about life in a box.
I really enjoy watching the movie of this play instead of reading the book. I think that everyone who reads does a great job but watching the conversations between rozencrantz and guildenstern is much more funny and entertaining. If think that the movie bring the characters to life and puts their actions literally into action. Many of the students agree that watching the play helps them learn and understand what is going one because they are able to picture the people and what is happening as we are remembering what we read. Overall I think that the movie is a great representation of the play and I think that it follows the play very well and makes it very interesting to read.
I think that I enjoyed the movie more than the play. The movie of "Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead" really brings it to life and seems to add another dimension of understanding. I felt like I connected more with the movie because through the directors choices I was able to understand parts better. I also believe that the movie brought parts that I felt almost dragged on into more interesting scenes. I have ended up enjoying the movie, however, I think this would be even better if I saw it being acted out in a theater. This play is not one of my favorites to just be read, I think in order to get the full meaning, understanding, and experience there needs to be acting or at least more expression when reading the play.
I think that the movie really helps you to see what the lines were portraying. Just reading the lines was kinda boring as well as confusing. The scene where they are playing the question game as well as playing tennis when read was really confusing and i only knew a little of what was going on. When i saw it in the movie i finally understood what was goin on. It really helped.
The movie shows the exetentialism much more because the confusion of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is realized. Rosencrantz is always fiddling with things that show the ways of physics and Guildenstern is always posing questions about the abnormalities of life. The movie also shows a lot of scenes that are not in the book that add to the shortness of the play, while also making the story more interesting. I also liked how the story of Hamlet was shown in a play inside of the movie.
I really enjoy watching the movie. The play was good but it was not as good as the movie, because when reading the play there are little of emotion, expression, and body languages that could help readers to understand it more. The movie helps a lot in showing the interaction between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and from that it helps create a better understanding to the play and its setting. The movie really engages their viewers to realize the purpose of the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead through the many philosophical theories, scientific practices and comedic values of "what is life"--it is not just an endless meaning of what life is, or is it not?
~~Mea Pen~~
When we read the play in class i missed most of the jokes that the movie brought to light. Like a comedian the way things are said adds so much to the comedic affect. Also the body language and things that R and G do without saying anything. For example, the fiddling of Rosencrantz are funny because he stumbles upon significant scientific ideas by accident. Then Guildenstern ends up distracting him from making a theory about why the events are happening. This also supports the theory of existentialism because even though Rosencrantz has the opportunity to make scientific discoveries, he is stopped by outside forces. He can't control anything outside himself.
I like watching the movie for it emphasizes important themes of the play that are hard to relay in the book. For example, there's the idea in existentialism that there is no purpose to life, and the movie is really just about the dialogue between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern which really has no action for at least the first part of the play. However, it highlights the point that we create our own values as we improvise our way through life, constantly changing ideals we have. This is highlighted with the richness in their dialogue and the complexity with how they indirectly direct existentialism.
Molly Riegel
The movie give Rosencrantz and Guildenstern more personality. You can visualize how they react with each other and it helps to understand what they are feeling as opposed to just their conversation without any feeling or passion in their voice. It also helps to see the setting and how they interact with their surroundings.
Post a Comment