Theatre Production Critique – What My Husband Doesn’t Know
my lil term paper I wrote for my online theatre class on the David E Talbert play What My Husband Doesnt know with Morris Chestnut and Michelle Williams. tell me what u think
Mark Anthony Howard
Into to Theatre
Production Critique; What My Husband Doesn’t Know
My production critique of a theatre play was based on the script What My Husband doesn’t know by playwright David e Talbert. The play was in was held at the San Diego. This was my actually my first attendance to a theatre play as an adult and I found it was a very enjoyable play. I believe the chapters in our books reading (chapters 2 and 3 ) really gave me the proper preparation as far as expectations of good theatre. Through preparation in the book I felt as I was a distinguished attendee in the plays particular audience. The books reading also really enabled me to enjoy the experience of the play on a deeper level than I would have without such reading. I was able to identify the play type, critique the entirety of the play, and I believe I was able to follow along with the developments in the play much better. I understood the structure, and I even found the play deeply inspiring. I am a very ambitious person, and I truly feel that I would love to right scripts as a playwright. So even as this was my first theatre experience I imagined myself as the playwright for this very play.
There only a total 9 characters in the play. Paul- a plumber falls in love with the lady of the house “Lena” the neglected young housewife of the much older husband “Franklin” who is a very busy businessman who later realizes the importance of quality time with his wife in his home after her affair and dilemma with Paul. The characters agenda’s where developed thoroughly in the script. I really felt I understood the full of each character as well as the motives, the perspective, and I thought the playwright was excellent in this area. Paul the hero of Act 1 became the Antagonist of Act 2. Paul was a tall, handsome, charming character and caused the women in the audience to screaming, cheer and whistling every time he walked on to the stage. I found that amusing and imagined myself as capable of playing that character as well.
The main comedic character “Falana” was Lena’s best friend; she plays a wild, sex driven woman who first encouraged the affair with the charming, handsome stranger. She was very funny. She truly elevated the enjoyment of the play with her wit, humor, and comedic pun. When lena tries to end the relationship, Paul becomes violent towards the dramatic climax and ends up being shot and killed by a Gun toting neighbor “Moody” (the secondary comedic character).
The acting consisted of a Realistic style Black Theatre. All the actors wore microphones so the projection of each was great. I still however feel that the main male character Paul could have been scripted as a much deeper character than just a plumber fixing the pipes in a mansion home.. I found it unrealistic that a man (Franklin) would grant a plumber full access his home in seclusion with his wife for a such a period of time efficient enough for such an affair to develop; and be completely naive to such negligence all the while! I would have rather Paul’s character been some relative or old friend of Franklin’s that was down on times and needed a place to stay for a while. I think this would have added to the intensity of the drama and gave more room for Franklin to develop as the hero in the play and therefore giving more weight to the scripts theme and moral of “Love over Lust”
Outside of the theater I wouldn’t normally have identified with the playwright. (such as movie version.) But inside the theater I felt very open and participant with the concept of the play. The playwright was definitely well enough to relax and enjoy the play with constantly looking to object. I appreciated the cross of styles in the play form the romanticism of heroic drama to the verbal humor of a domestic comedy, to the real life family issues of domestic drama. The playwright even sprinkled in some light song of characters as in a melodrama.
The stage design was a domestic layout in mansion home living room. The stage design was very attractive, fitting and practical for the play. The only falter I found in the design elements of the play was when I noted that from four large portions the audience section scenes locations where inhibited completely. The P.A. system actually blocked visibility of four kitchen scenes from the left and 3 short character entrances from the right. I believe the stage designer and set director should have sat down form each angle of the theater in a rehearsal to ensure the quality viewing for each member of the audience. I believe this obstruction surely took away from the quality of the play for the members of the audience in these seating sections.
Stage left was completely invisible to the left side of the theatre audience. And stage right was completely obstructed by the pa system for the right side of the theatre audience. The sound from these same four areas was also poor at times. The ushers were also terrible by actual seating people incorrectly and then moving those same people mid act. Late people were allowed in mid-act and ushers had trouble seating them as well mid- act. I think the ushers should have late comers wait until intermission to be seating ensuring the quality of the performance and audience experience
Overall my experience and critique of the play was a positive one and I enjoyed it very much. I believe my preparation in the class and my followings of the required readings was an excellent advantage for my understanding of the scrip. I found I was able to relate to the direction of the play and truly appreciate the production in all of its elements. Overall I was able to deeply appreciate and enjoy “THE THEATRE EXPERIENCE!