Why are two scenes of Lulu omitted from the movie?
As we discussed in
the article that there is absence of Lulu’s in two scenes from the movie,
because changes in the film have to do essentially not with the sequence of
events or the dialogues but it depends on how we read the texture of the play
or find the distinctive characteristic in the character is more
important.
As per my understanding, sometimes it happens that some scenes are relevant to the film that’s why it remains in the film. There is nothing deep into absence of some scene from the text or in the film. It is just because Director can’t omit those scenes from the film because somehow it shows human nature, characteristic and condition of the society in his time.
·
Is movie successful in giving us the effect of menace? Where you able to
feel it while reading the text?
We can see the
effect of menace in the movie, because while reading the play we can sense that
Stanley has a mysterious past which we are not informed about. I felt this
while reading the long conversation between McCann, Stanley and Goldberg.
·
Do you feel the effect of lurking danger while viewing the movie? Where
you able to feel the same while reading the text.
While watching the
movie I felt the effect of lurking danger because as movie proceeds towards the
end and other side lurking danger also rises in my mind. It is obvious that
noise of things like constant beating of the drums and knocking door, humming
sound, voice of characters creates danger in mind but silence creates more
danger than noise of something.
- What do you read in 'newspaper' in the movie? Petey is reading newspaper to Meg, it torn into pieces by McCain, pieces are hidden by Petey in last scene.
Newspaper as a means of communication
used by dramatist in play ironically. The characters hide them behind the
paper. When Petey was reading the newspaper meg trying to make conversation
with him unsuccessfully. McCann tearing shows his mentality. When Petey hides
it it means he wants to hide reality from Meg about them and Stanley.
· Camera is positioned over the head of McCain when
he is playing Blind Man's Buff and is positioned at the top with a view of room
like a cage (trap) when Stanley is playing it. What interpretations can you
give to these positioning of camera?
Camera closely reflects all characters
inner state and frustration. It shows Stanley as helpless against them. He
controlled and torchered by Goldberg and McCann. This all movement shown to us
by camera movement , it focuses on power position. We are able to see it
completely which thing don't know the other characters of the play. Thus
nothing can be hidden that is shown by it.
·
"Pinter restored theater to its basic
elements: an enclosed space and unpredictable dialogue, where people are at
the mercy of one another and pretense crumbles." (Pinter, Art, Truth & Politics: Excerpts from
the 2005 Nobel Lecture). Does this happen in the movie?
The basic elements of the
absurd theatre like Pinter pause , silence and torrent of language that all is
main charactricharac in the play. There are use of silence , incoherent of
sounds , and dengerous effect of sounds this all are very effective and we fill
that they are cruel and have mercy on Stanley. But complete truth behind it is
still unknown to us.
How does viewing movie help in better
understanding of the play ‘The Birthday Party’ with its typical characteristics
(like painteresque, pause, silence, menace, lurking danger)?
While viewing , camera movement
clarify every face closely with inner and outer state. What happening and who
are suffering that all visuals and expression is very helpful. Texture , pause
and silence , sounds of different things and dialogue all creates atmosphere of
violence and dengerous. It helps in better understanding of the play.
With which of the following observations you agree:
o “It probably wasn't possible to make a satisfactory film of "The Birthday Party."
o “It's impossible to imagine a better film of Pinter's play than this sensitive, disturbing version directed by William Friedkin”
I agree with statement 2 that it is quite appreciate file according to Pinter ' s play. With all characteristics of theatre it provides very apt film on the absurd play. It is impossible to imagine better film than this .
If you were director or screenplay writer, what sort of difference would you make in the making of movie?
If I was director ,I don't think that there is need of any difference . It is quite apt according to play .no need of difference as per characteristics of the play.
Stanley :- Rajkumar Row
Goldberg:- Nasrudin Shah
McCan :- Anupam Kher
Petey :- Irfan khan
Meg :- Kiran kher
LuLu :- Priynka Chopra
Thank You.....
Comments
Post a Comment