Level 2- unconsciously conscious
Level 1- unconsciously unconsciously
I have watched the play 'Beautiful Thing' and indeed it is hard to praise it highly enough. I will be evaluating the aspects of the play that enhanced the performance specifically, in different ways.
The setting was naturalistic; the audience and actors believed in the set they were using making a more believable and meaningful performance. The set was an urban row of houses with the three main, yet different families in each. There were three doors that the actors used to enter and exit. This brought a realistic aspect to the play; as if they were actually coming and going from the houses, both grabbing the audiences attention and keeping them engaged. Their were two chairs that were used for the scenes outside and inside the house. The chairs and also the block were effective because they could be used in all scenes whilst still being a purposeful. For example the block was used as a normal concrete step for the actors to sit on outside the house. However it was also used as Jamie's bedside table. Hanging from the door of Jamie's house were baskets of flowers. This brought both colour to the setting and the storyline. As Sandra tended to her flowers so they would grow and bloom, Jamie and Ste were nurturing and growing their love; a bit of happiness in a harsh world, colour in a bleak place. The scene was changed and used very simply, not overcomplicating the scenes, transitions and also not detracting from the audience's attention. The setting brought different atmospheres to different scenes. For example when everyone was outside together there was a communal feeling and made the setting a very intimate place. However when Jamie and Ste were alone in Jamie's bedroom, the presence of other characters created a cautious atmosphere. This shows that the setting could reflect two moods.
I think the costume mainly highlighted the different ages and personalities of the characters. All clothing was modern but ranged in styles. Jamie was in a uniform and Ste was in sports clothing. This shows that Jamie didn't do sports whilst Ste did adding to the characters. How different their worlds were at school, yet how none of it mattered. You could also use their clothing to stereotypically label them as either 'sporty' or 'academic.' As Leah was wearing her own clothes you knew she wasn't at school,giving her an insight to her character slightly more. Also her clothing was very colourful so like the flowers added a splash of colour. It showed that as a person she was bold and not afraid to stand out from the crowd. It accompanied the set in the sense that when three differently dressed people went through three different doors it showed how different they were, yet friends all the same. Plus when in the same set also highlighted the collision of two opposite worlds.
The lighting throughout the play was natural. The colour and intensity of the lighting changed according the scene. for example when they were meant to be outside during the day the lighting was brighter and there wasn't a spotlight on any particular space. However when Jamie and Ste were in the bedroom together as it was night the lighting was dimmer, darker and created a more intimate atmosphere.The lighting wasn't dramatic and therefore the audience still kept that constant feeling of a realistic story unfolding in front of them. The only smoke used in the performance was the smoke from cigarettes when the characters were smoking. I think that this added to the performance as it expanded the characters. Also in an urban area smoking isn't an uncommon thing. Details like this in the performance enhanced it visually and stylistically.
In the play music was used throughout, mainly to accompany transitions. The music was always meaningful to the events that had just occurred or the events that were going to happen. For example when Tony and Jamie had just had a conversation about bullying the transition song had lyrics referring to 'the in-crowd,' a term used to refer to the popular people in a school; the 'top dogs,' someone who Jamie was clearly not. The song that was both ironic and meaningful. The lyrics stated that they 'go where the in-crowd go.' This is interesting as both Jamie and Ste ignore what their peers say and express themselves even though they may be discriminated within the society they live in- so technically not following the 'in-crowd.' I think the music within the play was thoughtful and wasn't played as background noise. If listened to by the audience a deeper meaning to the lyrics could be found.
Slang was used when Jamie listed all the derogatory names people called him just because he was gay. Slang/abbreviations were used throughout the play to highlight the area of London they lived in. However the slang he used in this scene was chosen to make an emotional statement. It shows that even though he may try to ignore it and shut it out, he was aware of the taunting his peers directed at him. His voice when he said it was angry with the people around him at the time. He had finally been able to let it all out yet he still felt that people were judging him. I think the honesty and raw emotion of this scene was overwhelming. The actors, especially Jake Davies (Jamie) delivered a performance that showed his character as strong yet vulnerable.
The section of dialogue that stood out for me was conversation between Jamie and his mother when he finally admitted to her about his relationship with Ste. I think Surrane Jones performed in this scene particularly well because in previous scenes she hadn't show a particularly emotional side to her character. She seemed to have a guard up as she had been hurt before and even though she may like to think she'd moved on, she was still cautious of being hurt. However in this scene we saw her emotional side, perhaps brought out because of her son's distress. I think Jones mastered the balance between a caring mother and a knocked back women- both of which her character was.
I think overall the performance was just the right balance of comedy and emotion. I felt constantly engaged as an audience member and every scene effected me and the story in different ways. Small details put in by the director made a impact both comedically and artistically. For example in a scene when the mood was tense yet comedic there were comments and actions reflecting both moods to keep the pace of the scene changing. The costumes were adapted well to fit the era the play had been adapted to be set in, as was the setting. The actors reflected the scenery with their accents- mostly London apart from Tony, who still tried to sound like the others. I think the actors were all key to the performance and the development of the story. I thought they had all developed their characters, taking them and making them their own by adding mannerisms and details to make the character memorable and personal. I think the performance was political and entertaining, two things that many good plays include. I would watch it again and think stylistically, it is one of the best pieces of Theatre I have seen in a while.