Site - Specific Plays Day 3

Sophie: I felt Sophie used her space in a really interesting and really effective way. Before seeing the play, I had no idea how she was going to use this space, with it being so compact and also having only part of it facing where the audience was standing, and she used it in a way that really worked for the story. I loved how for the entire beginning (and possibly first half) of the play, all we see of Natalie's character is her head popping out, and we mostly only hear her responses to Hugo's character. I loved how their relationship unfolded, and how by the end we really got a sense of how each character was feeling, especially Natlaie's. As Chandler said in class, it was a surprise to hear Natalie's character say she got laid off, and it explained a lot as well and answered many questions. Questions in the beginning of the play - Where exactly are they? Why is Natalie's character taking little interest in what Hugo's character is saying about the bees? Why doesn't he care about what she has to say? - were slowly explained throughout and the answers were revealed not too soon but not too late. I liked that it was at the very end when she told him about losing her job, and that was when the play came to an end, leaving us with many questions about what was going to happen to each character after that, and where their relationship was going to go. As great as it is as a 10 minute play, I'd love to see it expanded because I really want to know what will come next (but I guess the great thing about it is that it leaves the audience wondering and wanting more).

Natalie: I loved how Natalie, like Sophie, had part of the play happening off stage and how it played into the story really well. I thought the reversal of Natalie's character in the beginning talking about how everyone loves her and she'd never be alone, and then ending up alone, was really powerful. I really disliked her character throughout, and was almost happy she didn't get the part in the end, and that was when I realized I actually cared about the character and what was going to happen, and I think it's important to have characters the audience has an attachment to. The character was so defined, and the dialogue felt very true to her character (and the others). I also liked the other reversal, as Chandler mentioned, with Hugo's character who ended up having the cast list all along, but deciding not to reveal it at first. I was also left wondering what was going to happen to Natalie's character, and how (and if) her life would be different once the play ended.

Hugo: I loved that even though there was very little movement in most of the play, there was still so much going on. This is actually interesting considering the comment made in class about how moving around the small space that was chosen will help move the play along (or something along those lines), and this play almost did the reversal but I felt it really worked. I loved how Natalie's character remained a mystery, not only to us but to Hugo's character as well. As someone said in class, the reversal at the end was so unexpected and interesting. When Hugo's character went to get the flashlight and bring it back, I was expecting him to say something about how he just missed her, and instead he blamed himself and thought he was going crazy which completely threw me off from my original assumption of what would happen, and I loved that. I thought I knew his character well enough to expect a certain reaction from him and then it ended with this insight into Hugo's character. I also liked how Natalie's character slid away as Hugo's character left. This play, like many of the other plays, left me wondering so much and having so many questions - Where was Natalie's character going when she left? Had she been there before? How often does she come there? - as well as many about Hugo's character and I really wanted to know if the two were ever going to meet again. The space was used in a really unique way, and completely strayed away from its original use, and I really felt transported to where it was taking place. I loved how mainly only one section of the space that was used, and even though there was a lot of space not being used for most of the play, it really brought us to where the two characters were and made the situation more intimate.

Ben: I, like many people, also had many questions. Not only did I have questions throughout, but I had questions wondering about what was going to happen to each character after the play ended. The question of why Montana's character was in that space was slowly revealed and I thought it was interesting to have my character really oblivious to the fact that Montana was homeless. It was an interesting choice, instead of having it come up and have the characters discuss it. I was also wondering certain close questions - How often does Montana's character come to that place? Has my character been there before? How long had Montana's character been there and how long is she planning on staying? - and I loved how it ended the way it began, coming full circle, as Chandler said.

Montana: I really liked how the two characters ended up in the same place for very different reasons, and they were able to connect on a certain level and start to reveal themselves. There were many questions about each character, one obvious one being why each character was there. Ben revealed the answer to this pretty easily toward the beginning of the play (revealing something about his character), but my character was the opposite and was very closed off and annoyed by Ben's character. It was interesting to see how my character slowly was able to reveal to Ben's character about why she left her apartment and how she feels about her parents fighting. I also thought the play ended on a really interesting note - right when the two characters were starting to connect and open up, Ben's character had to leave. It left me wondering "what if."