Show - CLYBOURNE PARK
Judging Category - Characterization
Judge 1 (108) - This section addresses the highest achievement of this production. I would often have to remind myself that the actors were of high school age. The believable character creations, and the actors playing objectives in subtle ways.
Thank you for the preshow warning of language. I have seen this play performed by professionals who sometimes had difficulty handling the severity of the language. This cast worked toward the adult approach to saying inflammatory words as expressions of emotional states, rather than the need to shock.
A bit that made me laugh was Bev's yelling at Betsy's back. So wrong and so inappropriate but encapsulated the insensitivity of the time period.
Judge 2 (458) - Well approached overall. I like the complexity of the majority of what was seen on stage. Each of these characters have a lot going on. I appreciate how each actor, despite having two characters that have some commonalities in personality, are expressed with uniqueness.
I think that Bev/Kathy were a little too similar in their portrayal at times, very one tone until it came to the need for some more bold choices. But was overall very engaging to watch. Could slow down on some line deliveries.
Russ/Dan was very interesting to watch. You could tell something was bothering him in act I but it wasn't given away too soon. The masking the character had to go through came through well. In Act II, very different character choices, very well done.
Francine/Lena - Very strong difference in characters. We see her near the end of act I and the power she possesses but did not bring out until she needed to. And while her character in Act II was also mild mannered to start, did come on strong as well and was very engaging to watch.
Betsy/Lindsay - Also very well done. In Act I I took her constant eye contact early on as good observation on her part, realizing she was deaf, it became a very good character choice. Also very good portrayal difference between Act I and II. I also like the changing dynamic between the relationships she and Karl/Steve experienced.
Albert/Kevin I did not think the actor had a lot of opportunities in act I, but in act II i saw his characterization grow and expand more. I would pay attention to his ability to command deliver key moral moments, they are important, and while handled well, could be more centered when needed.
Jim/Tom/Kenneth - Very well delivered performance, especially in Act I. I don't think the character had as much in Act II until his identity became part of the conversation. As the son, a solid, straightfoward moment that was not over the top, which is a solid choice.
With Karl/Steve, the actor likely had the toughest job as both his characters are the least irredeemable. The actor did do an overall good job of allowing the prejudice to come straight out and accept the fact that his character is not likable. Here is the one note to consider, we, rightfully so, see Karl and Steve both as not good men with questionable values. I do think it would be interesting to explore more in the fact that Karl/Steve truly believe in what they are saying, and in many ways believe that a decent portion of it is justifiable in their eyes. Remember, they are our villain, but does he seem himself as a villain, no. But in the end, solid performance.
Judge 3 (105) - this is truly an ensemble based cast...the commitment to creating real characters and real relationships is remarkable.
- The dichotomy between act 1 & act 2 is only made stronger by this companies driving momentum.
- Bev & Russ: great comedic banter moments at the beginning...this sets a tone for your relationship that makes the shift that much stronger when the bottom starts to fall out!
- during the disparaging racial moments, keep discovering ways to fully internalize/convey how your characters feel. (clenched fists, facial tics, appall, etc.)
- Great banter timing and emotional levels!
- Fantastic character understandings and emotional journey by all...clearly you have done your homework!
Show - DISTANCE LEARNING
Judging Category - Characterization
Judge 1 (75) - There were a few characters that fell flat a bit either because they weren't offered much content in terms of dialogue/ lines or because they showed only on side of themselves. However, I will say that I know this to be true as a teacher- students who might otherwise be multi-dimensional in class lose that in the virtual setting sometimes. This may have been an intentional choice, but it was hard to tell at times.
Judge 2 (17) - All the cast was clearly committed to their characters and the objectives. Emotions came naturally and honestly.
Show - A SIMPLER TIME
Judging Category - Blocking & Composition
Judge 1 (75) - There were a few characters that fell flat a bit either because they weren't offered much content in terms of dialogue/ lines or because they showed only on side of themselves. However, I will say that I know this to be true as a teacher- students who might otherwise be multi-dimensional in class lose that in the virtual setting sometimes. This may have been an intentional choice, but it was hard to tell at times.
Judge 2 (17) - All the cast was clearly committed to their characters and the objectives. Emotions came naturally and honestly.
Judging Category - Characterization
Judge 1 (108) - This section addresses the highest achievement of this production. I would often have to remind myself that the actors were of high school age. The believable character creations, and the actors playing objectives in subtle ways.
Thank you for the preshow warning of language. I have seen this play performed by professionals who sometimes had difficulty handling the severity of the language. This cast worked toward the adult approach to saying inflammatory words as expressions of emotional states, rather than the need to shock.
A bit that made me laugh was Bev's yelling at Betsy's back. So wrong and so inappropriate but encapsulated the insensitivity of the time period.
Judge 2 (458) - Well approached overall. I like the complexity of the majority of what was seen on stage. Each of these characters have a lot going on. I appreciate how each actor, despite having two characters that have some commonalities in personality, are expressed with uniqueness.
I think that Bev/Kathy were a little too similar in their portrayal at times, very one tone until it came to the need for some more bold choices. But was overall very engaging to watch. Could slow down on some line deliveries.
Russ/Dan was very interesting to watch. You could tell something was bothering him in act I but it wasn't given away too soon. The masking the character had to go through came through well. In Act II, very different character choices, very well done.
Francine/Lena - Very strong difference in characters. We see her near the end of act I and the power she possesses but did not bring out until she needed to. And while her character in Act II was also mild mannered to start, did come on strong as well and was very engaging to watch.
Betsy/Lindsay - Also very well done. In Act I I took her constant eye contact early on as good observation on her part, realizing she was deaf, it became a very good character choice. Also very good portrayal difference between Act I and II. I also like the changing dynamic between the relationships she and Karl/Steve experienced.
Albert/Kevin I did not think the actor had a lot of opportunities in act I, but in act II i saw his characterization grow and expand more. I would pay attention to his ability to command deliver key moral moments, they are important, and while handled well, could be more centered when needed.
Jim/Tom/Kenneth - Very well delivered performance, especially in Act I. I don't think the character had as much in Act II until his identity became part of the conversation. As the son, a solid, straightfoward moment that was not over the top, which is a solid choice.
With Karl/Steve, the actor likely had the toughest job as both his characters are the least irredeemable. The actor did do an overall good job of allowing the prejudice to come straight out and accept the fact that his character is not likable. Here is the one note to consider, we, rightfully so, see Karl and Steve both as not good men with questionable values. I do think it would be interesting to explore more in the fact that Karl/Steve truly believe in what they are saying, and in many ways believe that a decent portion of it is justifiable in their eyes. Remember, they are our villain, but does he seem himself as a villain, no. But in the end, solid performance.
Judge 3 (105) - this is truly an ensemble based cast...the commitment to creating real characters and real relationships is remarkable.
- The dichotomy between act 1 & act 2 is only made stronger by this companies driving momentum.
- Bev & Russ: great comedic banter moments at the beginning...this sets a tone for your relationship that makes the shift that much stronger when the bottom starts to fall out!
- during the disparaging racial moments, keep discovering ways to fully internalize/convey how your characters feel. (clenched fists, facial tics, appall, etc.)
- Great banter timing and emotional levels!
- Fantastic character understandings and emotional journey by all...clearly you have done your homework!
Show - DISTANCE LEARNING
Judging Category - Characterization
Judge 1 (75) - There were a few characters that fell flat a bit either because they weren't offered much content in terms of dialogue/ lines or because they showed only on side of themselves. However, I will say that I know this to be true as a teacher- students who might otherwise be multi-dimensional in class lose that in the virtual setting sometimes. This may have been an intentional choice, but it was hard to tell at times.
Judge 2 (17) - All the cast was clearly committed to their characters and the objectives. Emotions came naturally and honestly.
Show - A SIMPLER TIME
Judging Category - Blocking & Composition
Judge 1 (75) - There were a few characters that fell flat a bit either because they weren't offered much content in terms of dialogue/ lines or because they showed only on side of themselves. However, I will say that I know this to be true as a teacher- students who might otherwise be multi-dimensional in class lose that in the virtual setting sometimes. This may have been an intentional choice, but it was hard to tell at times.
Judge 2 (17) - All the cast was clearly committed to their characters and the objectives. Emotions came naturally and honestly.