The Cherry Orchard Movie

I enjoyed watching the Cherry Orchard movie a lot more than I did reading the play. I think this is mostly because it was easier to remember each character in the play when I had a visual representation of each person. It was a lot more difficult to try to remember each character's personality or motive by just knowing a person's name, but much easier when I could remember an actor's face. Because I didn't have to worry about remember who was who, I could enjoy the story much more. Although the movie was cheesy at moments, for example when Ranevsky would break out crying, I did like seeing the play acted out.

The cherry orchard

I did not know what to make of this play. I found it funny and very sad at times, and very annoying at others. Everybody constantly crying in the beginning annoyed me, as they had not yet covered the background story concerning what was making them upset; so rather than feeling bad for the characters, i felt annoyed. However, as the play developed, I began to care more about the characters and their fate. I thought some parts were funny. The most difficult part of the play was remembering who was who; the names were very hard to remember. I could not tell if the ending was happy or sad. Obviously, many of the characters were upset that the estate and orchard were sold, but some were happy at the opportunity for a fresh life. I felt extremely bad for Fris being left alone at the house, left to hear the place he has spent his whole life being chopped by ax men outside.

Cherry Orchard

Many of our classmates have mentioned that the play was harder to follow than Miss Julie because of the number of characters (and foreign names), but I think their difficulty was more in part due to how the play shifted from the logistical plot of how to sell the estate to the human element of all of the lovers. I found this transition somewhat difficult to ease into, and I also felt that it took away from some of initial intrigue. I was far more interested in the estate dilemna than I was about who loved who, who crossed whom, etc. Finally, the businessman accounced that he bought the land, but it was a bit too late. Then the play introduced several new characters, and even ended with Firs, a character I found irrelevant.
Overall, I was excited to find out the future of the cherry orchard, not the people in the play. Is that so wrong, considering the play's title? I would have liked to have seen a more obvious connection between the cherry orchard and the characters. Maybe I just did not pick up on the parallels. I am curious as to how the discussion will go tomorrow.

The Cherry Orchard

Like many of my classmates, I found this play to be very hard to follow. There were too many characters which took away form the importance of a few. It seemed as if a lot of them were unnecessary and distracting. The fact that the names were Russian made it worse because I was unfamiliar with the pronunciations. 

I think that this play had a good theme to it. The idea of social change and moving on. However, there was too much randomness going on throughout the play for me to really focus on the theme, or for it to have a strong impact. I found Ranevsky to be be extremely annoying. She seemed like a selfish person and I didn't feel badly for her that she lost her Cherry Orchard.

I guess this play play does, however, provide a good portrayal of the social change and the devastation of poverty and loss going on in Russia. It wasn't a bad play, but I it could have been more concise. 

The Cherry Orchard

         I found this play to be very hard to follow. This is mostly because there were a lot of characters in this play and I had to keep flipping through pages trying to figure out which character was which.This was frustrating, because it took away from my experience of the play. I also was not able to relate to any of the characters as much as I would like to, or get a clear picture of their personality because the play had so many characters to discuss.
         After reading "Miss Julie", which was so clear cut and easy to follow, "The Cherry Orchard" proved hard to understand. I look forward to the class where we can discuss the play because I feel like there were many parts that I didn't fully understand or interpret correctly.

The cherry orchard

This play was very interesting to me.It seems that most of the characters or rather jus the theme is much focused on memory in this play.Trying to memorize personal identity and to prevent the memory of happiness. Like the character Ranevsky,she seems to be trying to forget all about her present life Nd focusing more about her past.This Play I thought was very informative,and I really enjoyed readying it.

The Cherry Orchard

I couldn't tell if I found this play humorous or depressing. The humor was really dark, and I thought it was kind of sad. I could see how some people would find Anya and Varya telling their Uncle to be quiet and stop talking to be funny, but I thought it was mean and obnoxious. Another part of this play that annoyed me was when Anya gives the background on why Madame Ranevskaya lost it. It was so awkward and obviously only in there to describe what happened. It was just out of place and seemed unrealistic that someone would just say that to them self. I think it would be a lot more effective if Anya was telling it to someone else in secret or something. I didn't like that all the young women were betrothed to these awful men that they didn't like. Lopakhin was the worst and the fact that Varya was crying when she was talking about her marriage to him was so sad. Dunyasha said she wasn't that into Yasha, but to his face she tells him she is madly in love with him.
I really hope we don't have to answer any questions about characters names in this play, because after a certain point I just ignored any names but Madame Ranevskaya, Lopakhin, Anya and Varya because everyone else was just too confusing. One part I did find humorous was when Firs is making the coffee and weeps with joy at the fact that he can now die that his mistress is home. I also thought it was funny that Charlotte felt so above all the people there, but everyone just ignored her. Then I felt bad for her because even though she was extremely vapid, people ignored her when she was trying to talk about her past. They only paid attention to her to make fun of her for being so shallow. Finally, they start liking her when she impresses them with her magic tricks. I also thought it was really funny when Anya tell Firs to go die, and her calls her an addleplate.
And then Firs dies and the last sound you hear is the orchard getting chopped down... MOST depressing ending.

The Cherry Orchard

The Cherry Orchard was very hard for me to get through. Unfortunately, I had great difficulty keeping track of all of the characters. While Miss Julie only had 3 characters to keep track of, The Cherry Orchard had over 15 characters that were particularly hard to keep track of because of their foreign names that were hard to recognize. However, although I was only able to read the play once, I was still able to pick up on some great aspects of the play that I think make Chekhov an exceptional playwright.

         Primarily, I really appreciated how the historical relevance of the play was portrayed, right after the emancipation of the serfs in Russia. It is pretty clear that Chekov supported the social change that was happening in Russia, as the old aristocratic lass was being reduced to poverty (who once owned serfs),while the children of serfs are succeeding financially. The book mentions that Chekov’s support of this social change may be due to the fact that Chekov had an impoverished children, and the fact that his grandfather was once a serf. I also really enjoyed Firs character in the play, as he has the opposite views of Chekov and does not support this social change. His death at the end of the play symbolizes the end of his generation, and the inevitability that this social change will only continue to grow.

The Cherry Orchard

          The Cherry Orchard had beautiful writing, and parts of the play were truly thought-provoking and engaging. With that said, I found it nearly impossible to get through the play. For a short play, there were a ton of characters to keep track of, and in many cases the characters were called different names or nicknames than the original name Chekhov gave in the script. I know that seeing The Cherry Orchard on stage, and having actual human beings represent the characters, would make this a lot less confusing. However, the names and amount of characters made it hard for me to read.
       I find it really interesting that Chekhov intended the play to be a comedy. Reading the play, the tone I picked up on from the writing did not feel like a comedy or farce. Strindberg, the playwright of Miss Julie, spoke about how the interpretation of a play (whether it is a comedy or tragedy) is dependent upon a society and it's social state. He felt that the reader would not interpret something as tragic if they could not personally relate to it. Chekhov's play was surrounded by socio-economic forces that were occurring in Russia (a rising middle class and the sinking of the aristocracy). However, reading the play in the 21st century serves as a different experience. We have all experienced a crashing market and many citizens losing their houses and possessions. I think that this state of the economy can provide an explanation for why the tone of tragedy feels intensified.

Miss Julie; Evan Koehler, response

One of my favorite quotes is that you either marry your mother or your father. In a broader sense, that obviously just means that the person you fall in love with will be like some parent; it’s usually the one that was more accepting of you. With Julie, I see that, in the genesis of her life, parental positions have swapped and had periods of alternative dominance. She states that her mother had extreme influence on her in the early years---forcing her to hunt, adopt boyish activities, et cetera---but that, with her mother’s passing, the father took a controlling role. At one point, Julie says that she has not had one thought that was not influenced by the Count. I find the confusion of the sexes the play’s most powerful statement. I find few criticisms other than, like always, how unrealistic the dialogue is. The long-winded love speeches, the elegance in every sentence, the flower of the language---I really cannot imagine this play sounding this pleasureful in a Germanic language. I thought the end cheated the story, but was really happy with the opening scene. I do not have any specific reasons why; but I like that things started mid-action and maybe it is the description that really captivated me. And on that note, I very much enjoyed the description in the play; the stage descriptions prior to the dialogue are more in depth than those which we have previously read. I, also, found one of my favorite quotes in this play: the one about the wealthy having time to think about love all day and that the poor do it when they are not working. 

Miss Julie

Although obviously a famous, well- written play, I did not enjoy reading it. The two main characters, Ms. Julie and Jean, were crazy and annoying, and the plot kind of bored me. Why didn't somebody help Julie?  Why was she allowed to behave the way she did? It was confusing how the characters went back and forth so often with feelings and love/lust and then evil dominance. The plot of this play was not nearly as straightforward as others we have read and I wasn't able to relate to the characters as much.
I did, however, enjoy the symbolism and themes of love and lust and feminism. You can tell how feminism is becoming more prominent in theatre as time goes on.

Ms. Julie, Poor Little Rich Girl

When I hear of stories, fictional or otherwise, about well-healed people who lament of freedom from their "trappings" I want to scream. Is the human condition so cruel as to impose this constant dissatisfaction on us; even those so obviously blessed? It is hard to read this play all the way through, no matter when it was written, given the current conditions of places like Darfur, Afghanistan etc. and not want to spit.

The only saving grace of this play is the nuanced writing that is delicately balanced in such a way as to invoke a dance between the two main characters, otherwise it is was pretty hollow in meaning, merit and importance.

Cyrano

Even though Cyrano was entirely French, I was able to follow quite well, with the over arching themes coming across despite the obvious language barrier. I found my self not wanting the scenes fast fowarded. I wanted to watch the whole thing, which is rare for me. I went back over YouTube videos of the movie to re-watch certain parts. Overall excellent.

French Movie

Although this movie was in french, I still enjoyed it very much and was able to get a good idea about what theatre was like in France during this time. Theatre was much different back then. It was more valued probaby because things like movies and cell phones had not been developed. The costumes and the scenery were also very well done. It is interested to see how such things have changed from that time to now, and also across cultures and countries. I would have prefered to see this movie in English so I could understand what the people were saying, but still was able to stay intrigued and interested.

Miss Julie

I enjoyed reading this play, and I thought the play was very good at keeping your attention, however, I did not like the characters in this play. I felt like at some point in the play each one of them were annoying, especially Miss Julie. Miss Julie came off as extremely naive throughout the play, and she was always confused with what she wanted. She did not know if she loved Jean or hated him, if she wanted to run away or to face the wrath of the Count, or if she hated men or she hated women. Miss Julie was also weak, because she let Jean order her to most likely commit suicide. Jean was no better because he was conniving and manipulative while he tried to seduce Miss Julie. Overall, I did like the play and it kept my interest throughout, but the main characters were not likable.

Cyrano

I think this would have been my favorite movie that we have watched in class if we could have been able read the subtitles as we watched it. The plot seemed very interesting, and the characters seemed likable also, but without fully understanding the dialogue I feel like I could not enjoy the movie as much. However, I did like the movie and the sets were very impressive and the actors who portrayed the main characters seemed very talented, even through my language barrier. I thought the end of the play, in which the woman finds out it is Cyrano she was in love with, was very touching, and the actors did a good job of showing their emotions through their acting.

"Cyrano de Bergerac" Film

While I did not fully grasp what was going on in this film because it was in French (I really wish it had subtitles), I found that watching it was very beneficial because it gave me a good feel for what theatre was like during the Royal era. The Royal era was all about going back to refinement and how the bourgeois and nobility mingled. The opening scene was particularly eye opening because it really portrayed how social theatre was during that time. I also got a strong sense of the sexual aspect of this time period.
Aside from getting a good feel for the Royal era, I also found that Cryano's character was particularly amusing and funny. I thought that the film was going to be much more serious than it was, but the fact that the film revolves around Cyrano's big, unfortunate nose was very surprising and entertaining to me. The part where Cyrano used better language to insult his nose was humorous.
It also interested me how the film portrayed the French academy and how they judge the plays, and how involved the audience was.

Evan Koehler: the Cherry Orchard

The Cherry Orchard is the first play we have read that deals with the class system. The play is, also, the first to not focus largely on religious or spiritual topics. Because the play approaches this new topic and eschews the old ones, I expected to like The Cherry Orchard more---an expectation that was not mitigated by the textbooks praise of Chekhov as a realistic writer. I liked this play, and its exposition of upper-class ennui and indulgence is probably the source and inspiration for novels, movies and art that followed; while the Bret Easton Ellis book The Informers does not say anything about shifts in society, the novel uses similar, hapless characters in an aristocratic yet almost decaying society. But I am still unsatisfied with the dialogue; I have not read a play this year that gives an accurate portrayal of how humans actually speak to one another. I am not an expert in early 20th century linguistics, but I believe there is a serious disparity between how humans communicate and what Chekhov thinks they do. Playwrights have a difficult time believing this, but there is fodder and garbage when Billy speaks to Bill. Oscar Wilde is the only human that I have heard of that is said to have spoken like Trofimov and Madame Lyubov. On a different note, I think this play is extremely relevant today; while any serious symptoms of a depression have disappeared, movements like Occupy Wall Street, though in decline, show evidence that there exists a portion of the American public that find current wealth distribution disagreeable.

"C'est tout? OUIS!"

What an incredible work. I first saw Cyrano de Bergerac my senior year in high school in my french literature class, and I absolutely loved it. From the beginning of the play, Cyrano delivers the most exquisite monologues and dialogues that capture the attention of the audience (although they are in french, but that is why we have subtitles). Most of the credit in this particular movie must go to Gerard Depardieu. Like professor Parent said, the character of Cyrano is so unique in his incredible use of speech and diction that it is very difficult to find a suitable actor. I think that Gerard does a great job in this movie, with both serious emotional undertones and witty humor. I did, however, research Gerard with my friends when we first watched the film (we were rather obsessed), and I found out that he got arrested for peeing in the aisle of a commercial airplane. A rather interesting fact I thought I'd share. The scenes we watched in class are incredible, especially Cyrano's initial encounter with the Comte, but there is so much more to this film! I hope that if we don't watch it in class some people will because the love story between Christian, Cyrano and Roxane is not only emotionally captivating but full of comedy and hilarity. I have not yet seen the black and white version of Rostand's work, but I would love to in the near future. This movie is great! "C'est tout? Ouis!"

Cyrano de Bergerac

            Having watched the scenes we were shown in class, I now would very much like to see the rest of Cyrano de Bergerac. It’s exactly the kind of sweeping epic that I particularly like. The performances, particularly that of Gérard Depardieu, are expressive enough to break down the language barrier. After seeing the size and scope of the story, though, I can’t help but wonder how it would be possible to tell this story on stage. As such, I’ll jump at the chance to see it performed live.

French Movie

I found this movie to be entertaining, but hard to follow without any English subtitles. It wasn't always easy to understand what was going on, because the film was made for people who speak French, and not everything that was going on was explained in the action. That said, the costumes and scenery were very well done. They gave a good sense about what life was like during that time period. I liked that the theater was such a place that when going to the theater, the play itself was only half the fun. It was not just a place to see and be seen, but also to court, to play with friends, to steal, and to fight. It was interesting to see the director's interpretation of this lifestyle. The main character was very funny from what I gathered from his expressions and others' reactions to him. I had a lot of trouble understanding why he wrote the letters in the name of the other guy to the girl even though he loved her himself. It was depressing that she found out and then he died. I would have liked to understand more of the dialogue, but the film without it was enjoyable enough.

Medieval Theatre

I found the Medieval theatre video to be a bit boring, but interesting for the amount of information that it offered. After watching the video, I felt like I had learned many things about Medieval theatre that I had not known before. In particular, I did not know how much control the church had over plays during that time. It was also interesting to learn about the "community effort" that existed in plays during this time. By this, I mean the division of play's subjects to different people because of their profession and subsequent material belongings. It made me think about the importance of plays during this time, and a sense of community formed around plays that has since faded. The video made it seem to me like plays were not so much an anticipated and flashy production, but rather a routine and enjoyable event for the people involved. They did not sit in a lavish auditorium, but rather stood close by the actors themselves and enjoyed the productions in a much more casual fashion. Although not having modern medicine might be a little annoying, I would enjoy taking a trip back into time to really see what these productions were like for the average person. 

Dr. Faustus

Burton's "Doctor Faustus" was not exactly how I had pictured the play, but I did like some of the aspects of the movie. Although it had some wacky scenes, the movie's use of special effects added to the visual portrayal of the production. In particular, I found the scene that depicted Faustus's descent into hell very interesting. The reddish fog and Elizabeth Taylor's evil laugh made the scene a little more comical than I had imagined. Also, the scene with the 7 deadly sins was much more theatrical than I had imagined. The "study" that Faustus works in for the majority of the movie was much more dark and evil than I had pictured. I thought that this created a more sinister portrayal of Faustus throughout the film. Although Elizabeth Taylor is beautiful and undoubtably helped the overall production, I could have lived without the annoying music that accompanied her appearance. Overall, I thought that the movie did well in portraying a visual depiction of the dark and evil character, but it did not create the same character advancement throughout the production. You can sense Faustus's evil, but I had trouble depicting his transformation. If the movie could have been a little more on par with the text, it may have been better overall. All in all, I thought it was a well made movie for the time period.