本文是一篇Book Report代写范文，文章主要讨论观看了话剧《花边》（凯恩兵变）这部经典戏剧。在两个半小时的演出中，密集的对话给我留下了深刻的印象。在一个单一的军事法庭场景中，通过有限的姿势，人物的性格和情节通过他们的语言得以展现。作为侦探小说的粉丝，我喜欢看关于法庭审判的戏剧。该剧改编自美国作家赫尔曼·沃克的普利策获奖小说《凯恩兵变》。
In early October, during the National Day in China, I watched the play Hua Bian (The Caine Mutiny) while I was in Beijing. I bought the tickets because I wanted to see this classic play performed by the well-known Beijing People’s Art Theatre.
I was very impressed by the dense dialogues that ran through the two-and-a-half hour performance. Presented in a single Military Court scene and with limited postures, characters’ personality and the plot were shown through their words.
Being a fan of detective stories, I enjoyed watching the play about the court trial. This play was adapted from the American author Herman Wouk’s Pulitzer winning novel The Caine Mutiny. If opportunity arises, I would like to see the English version again, to compare with the Chinese to see different possible presentation based on one screen script.
The play was quite successful in telling the story. The main plot is about a trial happened during World War II. Lieutenant Commander Queeg was relieved of his title by Lieutenant Myrak, because the two men had a major disagreement in which direction the ship Caine should head to, and Myrak gathered evidences to prove that Queeg had mental problems, thus unable to command. After the incidence, Queeg filed lawsuit against Myrak. As mentioned in the beginning, the play was mainly consisted of dialogues. Those dialogues, either heated with emotions or subtle logic, drove the plot to go deeper, and successfully revealed the entire storyline. For instance, Lieutenant Commander Queeg spoke with a sense of arbitrariness most of the time, but exhibited extreme fear and derangement when talking about the hurricane. This way of speaking revealed Queeg’s paranoid psychosis, which was the reason why Myrak released his position.
There were clear beginning, middle and end in this play. It started with one intermission of the trial, with Lieutenant Myrak and his lawyer Greenwald. In this beginning scene, Myrak wanted to confess, while Greenwald was confident in winning the trial for him. The dialogue between the two men informed audiences of the story’s background. Also, it prepared for Greenwald’s transformation in his attitude throughout the play. The middle of the play is marked by another intermission in the court, when Greenwald discussed his tactic with Myrak. The ending was the feast scene, which was to celebrate the winning of Myrak. It was in this final scene, Greenwald expressed the truth from his heart that Myrak was truly guilty, and the novelist Keefer was actually the manipulator of this mutiny. This ending was very powerful. I could completely feel the struggle of Greenwald and the change of his mindset during the trial process, and therefore genuinely applauded for the actor’s performance skill.
In my opinion, Greenwald made the best choice to express the truth, even it was after the court trial. His choice of speaking out did not change the result of the trial, but revealed that Keefer was the real initiator of the mutiny. Although the court did not give justice to Lieutenant Queeg, we as audience were clear who was the sinner.
The play presented characters including the judge, the jury, various witnesses from the signal officer to the psychiatrist, as well as the attorneys, the prosecutor and the defendant. The lines they spoke, as well as their gestures and facial expressions matched character’s roles and personality, thus quite believable. The interactions were entirely driven by dialogues, with a lot of emotional intensity sparked by the aggressive interrogation style of the attorneys.
The play was generally well performed, despite that the psychiatrist character had a minor fault by dropping his glasses-cleaner cloth on his knees, which caused a small pause. Though barely noticeable, this action did seem a bit unnatural. I understand that in a play with such dense lines to memorize, it can be challenging for actors.
The play was performed in the Capital Theater in Beijing. The stage was in the Proscenium style. Build in 1954, the Capital Theater has a dignified and solemn look, which was quite suitable for the military court atmosphere in this play.
I think the playwright has raised two main points. On one hand, the play revealed some military officers who did not have real capacity but craved for greatness and success, and did unlawful things to grab what they wanted. The tough commander Queeg, who respected military rules got punished. The ironic statements by Greenwald in the end revealed this problem. On the other hand, the moral issue concerning the profession of the attorney has also been raised. This point was successfully conveyed in the final dialogues of Greenwald’s. Although Greenwald won the trial and displayed great logic, he lost his conscience. His regret was expressed through his final words. For this second point, I think it relates to many professions today. For lawyers, it might be still true, that they win some case which is against their own conscience. Similar situation also happens for photographers who take photos of victims but make no real action in saving them.
All in all, watching Hua Bian was quite an enjoyable experience for me，for its intriguing dialogues and the deep moral issues behind the story.
以上就是本篇范文全部内容，欢迎阅读，范文内容和格式仅供留学生参考学习，不得抄袭，如有report代写需要，请咨询网站客服。
