Some of the characters do good jobs in the film version - for instance, Loman's wife is very convincing on screen. This same concept applies to watching the film version. However, in the onstage version, it is too easy for the viewer to get caught up in the individual playing Loman, and spotting instances of good acting and bad acting that interfere with the viewer and the actual. In a play about the loss of the American Dream, this characteristic is extremely helpful because it helps to reinforce the idea that the problems that Willy Loman goes through could happen to anyone. They are not simply the people one is looking at on stage or on a screen.
One of the strengths of the written version is that the characters could be anyone. Perhaps the main way in which the visual elements of the onstage and film version of Death of a Salesman are incomparable to the superior words of the written version is in the characters. In Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, it greatly appears as though the focus of visuals and other elements provided by the film and the onstage version detract from the focus of the very powerful prose that Miller wrote, as an examination of the characters, scenery, and time shifts in this tale readily indicates. In some ways, the plentitude of visuals can detract from the simplicity and power of the words of a drama.
Still, it largely appears that there is an inverse relationship between a drama's visual elements and its main focus - words.
Watching a play on stage provides a lot of visual elements, while watching a play in a movie provides even more visual elements. Reading a play in a book, for instance, offers no visual elements. All three of these media present a unique experience for the reader or viewer. The three principle ways that one can experience a drama are through reading it, watching it on stage, and watching film adaptations.
0 kommentar(er)
