IGCSE DRAMA 10

Monologue 1

Monologue 2

Monologue 3

Choose a scene from the list below and write a mini review focusing on the actors’ performances. Briefly explain what is going on in the scene. Then, comment on the aspects of acting studied in class such as: voice, physicality/movement, energy, focus and believability, as well as the interaction between the characters. You should express an opinion on the quality of the acting that is backed up by specific, detailed examples of observable acting technique.

20 thoughts on “IGCSE DRAMA 10

  1. In monologue 3, a woman is telling about her experience when her lover was asking her hand in marriage. She exclaims that he proposed her more than a couple of times and the way he did it, annoyed her. He had ample opportunity to be quite romantic, but he disappointed her, for he did it in a very confident sort of way. She did adore him, but she just didn’t approve of his methods. She could always see it coming and it was never a surprise.
    The actress over here, speaks in a very subtle British accent, posing emphasis in needed areas. Her eyes showed frustration when she explained the situation and looked down whenever she was disappointed. She paused at the right places, and even though there wasn’t any movement, her voice modulation brought life and emotion into the monologue. Her energy quavered when it had to and rose to high levels to show her annoyance. She was seated in only one place, but the way she spoke convinced the audience of the character she was portraying. She was believable enough.

    • Clear, thoughtful identification but need to more specific with the scenes. How did the eyes show frustration? Posing emphasis, where? which part is modulated? how did her modulation affect her acting? At what point did her energy quavered? why just believe enough? what’s your rationale. 8/10

  2. In monolouge 1, a middle aged man is being interviewed to get discharged from prison for 40 years for a crime he committed when he was an adolescent. As the man was talking to the interviewers, his voice was raspy and seemed uninterested which signifies that he has been in one of these interviews before. The character showed an agitated movement when he crossed his arms in front of him, to further emphasize that he is inpatient and annoyed with the interviewers. Additionally, to show that the character has evolved from when he was a boy to a man, the actor looked at the interviewer directly in the eye to indicate that what he has grown up. The actors acting is very much believable from the way he talked and by the way his voice was raspy further suggesting that he’s tired and exhausted. Also, the way the actor only focused his glare at one person, makes it believable that he’s angry inside but he’s trying to keep it in.

    • Insightful and convincing. What was believable in the way he talked? What is raspy? Why did his voice affect the character? Glare in what? Site specific sample on the scenes or dialogues to support your observations. 8/10

  3. Monolauge 2

    Voice: her voice stayed constant throughout the monolauge. The accent provided a comedic layer to the peice
    Movement: There was not much movement done by the actor except for picking up a brush and waving it around.
    Energy: the energy was high throughout the monplauge.
    Focus: the focus of the character in the monolauge was mainly on the camera/audience and delivering the story. There were no “slip up’s” in the peice.
    Believability: the story was beliveable as it sounded like a story someone would tell around a campfire pr something.

    • You need to be clear with your evidences.Give more analysis to the performance and explain it thoroughly. Your comments are good. 5/10

  4. Monolauge 1
    Voice: his voice is so deep and clear, with a lot of confidence.
    Movement: he didn’t move much, he just sat on a chair and spoke.
    Energy: he had a up and down type of flow in his energy like he would go to a high energy when he had to emphasize something.
    Focus: he wasn’t moving his eyes a lot he focused at the police officers and looked down or to the side when he was recalling of something.
    Believability: his act was convincing to me but, it was still a bit off because of his less movement.

  5. In The ideal husband monologue, the actress didn’t stand and move around but it was unnecessary because her voice expressed her feelings without moving. The monologue was about how Tommy always proposed to her and how she gets annoyed by him. The monologue was funny not only because the script was funny, but because the actress changed her tone and loudness when she was acting. When she was saying something that was important to the monologue like when she tells that “once a week is enough to propose”, she raised her voice and also stayed on one focus, so that everyone could hear her and pay attention. I think I should learn this technique since my voice is always at the same loudness and I have a habit to walk around during the monologue.

    • Good choice of sample work. Good self reflection on your part.
      You need to be specific with your ideas like, “funny”?why funny?and why did you choose “once a week is enough to propose”?7/10

  6. Monologue 1: Morgan freeman is playing a man given a life sentence if which he has completed 40 years of already. He is asked whether he regrets committing the crime he did and confirms that he does. While doing so, his voice is very calm and subtle. He doesn’t want to seem too agitated even though he is. He doesn’t make any movement and is very unenergetic. He’s very focused on his goal of trying to make the judges believe that he regrets his actions, always keeping his eyes on the judges, which in turn makes the audience believe in his statement adding to its believability. The interaction between Morgan Freeman and one of the judges flows smoothly. The quality of acting is really good because he is really stepping into his role of a convicted fellow and not breaking character, always staying serious, subtle, and in focus, while talking to the judge.

    • Insightful remarks. The evidence is clear.Next time include specific dialogues to support your analysis or the scenes. Keep it up!
      8/10

  7. Monologue 1

    The actors performance brought the best out of the character because he spoke with such intencity that an anti speach against society made me get goosebumps. He delivered his lines without moving his body, which gave the feel of a man of great wisdom and knowledge and made me side with him in whatever the problem was.

    • You have to write more. It’s not enough Adarsh. You have to add more content to your answer. Give evidences and samples. The writing is not insightful enough. 5/10

  8. I choose the last monologue called my ideal husband where the character is happy for the fact Tom proposed her but not happy with the way he did. By using happiness and using anger as her emotions, the contrast between them created a funny play at the end. From her perspective she wants Tom to propose her but then she doesn’t like the way do it as he is so sure and he was proposing like a doctor which she doesn’t like. It’s a very good monologue and it is funny too that can make the audience laugh.

    The actor was good with her laughter and that smile which really caused the audience laugh as those emotions contrast with the monologue. The movement of her body made it look like this girl really wanted Tom and she really wants him to propose her in a different way. The energy of her’s was high as the speed of the way she was speaking was fast. Her voice is really high which also gives a clear thought for the audience that she is a typical girl who desperately wants something. Her physicality gives me a thought that she is the kind of the girl who gets whatever she wants. And each and every time she emphasis on the words it gives the audience the believability.

    • Good examples and insightful. What do you mean by “high”? How did the movement of her body used to show contrast?what impression did you get when she was speaking fast?what is a typical girl who wants something? What was her physicality? How did she show? Some of you comments tend to to generalize but your on the right track. 8/10

  9. I am writing about Monolgue 2. The monologue was about a woman who is talking about Tommy, her romantic partner, who proposes to her far too often for her liking and does that same with the mannerisms of ‘a doctor’. The actor did not use much movement on the stage, she was stationary, except for her moving head. Her voice was well modulated. Both these factors radiated the image of a character who wasn’t very high-spirited or extremely emotionally expressive. Her head was moving from one side to another, creating the image of a group of friends, or maybe even the audience being the recipients of her message. I think the fact that her blocking wasn’t overly done, backed by the fact that her voice and expression were subtle yet precise, made her monolgue believable and commendable.

    • Well chosen comments. Some of the comments were too general. Be more specific with your evidence like “modulated”, how? at what point was it extremely expressive? what was your impression about her movement? why do you think her blocking wasn’t overly done?

      8/10

  10. Monologue 2
    In this monologue the character is talking about her friend or boyfriend tommy who proposes her all the time. She is a little bit annoyed by him because of the way proposes her in public, and she says that tommy acts like a doctor when he is romantic. The character look like a calm and clear minded woman. It looks like she is talking to a specific person (audience) who probably knows her and Tommy, askes the person (audience) to tell Tommy to stop proposeing her wiredly in public. The character didn’t move around (no movement)
    , she had the same voice tone through out the monologue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *