One Act Play- check ✔

Description

Another finished process this year...
Our One Act Play: "A MATTER OF DISSECTION" was finally presented this wednesday 5th, and although we had a 'troublesome' process, the result surprised and filled us with satisfaction.
The HARD process has been described in past entries...
«You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs»
but the question here is, why did the final result turned better than expected?

Analysis

Having time to prepare the stage is always a great advantage.. and after having some possible obstacles (such as traffic) we had the opportunity to do it. This is the first aspect  that contributed to have 'a good final product'.
Although jitters were present before the performance begun, when we entered the stage they were transformed into adrenaline, and this energy was one of the great differences between the performance and other rehearsals. We all transmitted high energy, and were focused in what each one had to do.
For the first time we were completely concentrated on stage and backstage (nobody said a word during the whole play), and we helped each other as much as possible.
In my case, there was another major difference between that day and the rehearsals: I was able to 'connect' with my characters and create 'internal monologues' in my head while other actions were taking place on stage.
The conditions (acoustics) of the theatre allowed us to present a play with a lot of dialogue, but the play wouldn't have been as successful without good intonation and vocalization.

However, not only what happened that day created an entertaining and amusing experience for the audience. We achieved to create intelligent & elaborated jokes, and a variety of characters which definitely made people laugh.The play was dynamic, thanks to aspects such as short lines, sound effects, the use of slapstick and THE GAME, which included TRANSFORMATIONS which surprised everybody.

Connections

*"Shadow Queendom" and this play have demonstrated me that a play cannot be created from one day to another. It implies a lot of creative and team work, because every aspect (stimuli, game, direction and design concepts, production tasks, etc.) has to be given the same importance.

*(Especially for a commedy), dynamism is essential in order to interest the audience. "Mades Medus" could be considered an opposite to "A matter of dissection" in the way that it had very long dialogues and little action taking place.

*Each "aspect of production" should link with each other, (for example. the colour scheme in our play). And if you use music and sound effects, this should also be coherent with the rest of your play:
1. In "La falsa criada" classic music (which was connected to the setting, characters, etc.) was used all the time, but using "tribal music" at the end was not a good election in my opinion.
2. When we saw a performance by "Ballet the Londrina", dancers had different hair styles and colours, and tattoos that dis-concentrated the audience.

*You should not underestimate the audience's intelligence. Lines should not be explicit, and jokes have to be elaborated: like in "Más pequenos que el Guggenheim".

*Different plays depend on the stage where they are presented: Our one act play couldn't be successfully performed in Newton's big theatre, as "more VISUAL" plays work better in a theatre with poor acoustics and great spaces.


Reflection

Although according to our director our group lacked unity, communication and organization, we managed to present a decent (in my opinion great) one act play, thanks to hard work and the instructions we received and finally followed.


...If something is going wrong in a play it shouldn't be ignored, and changes (and limits) can lead you to a great creation."The end justified the means."

Do mistakes (that are fixed) on stage always work and help the play in a positive way?
*Once you have a good start and gain the audience, you can do anything*

Now that this process is over, I wonder if working on our next performance will require the same amount of work... or working in open spaces without dialogue will give us "more freedom" in the creation process.