Waiting for Godot

This play is not easily understood by the average person. Stunning black comedy(Somber comedy no faith in the governments at the time). I did this play for dramatic arts for a grade 12, did not really grasp the play my self, but now I can see where the play wright is coming from. The tramps are waiting in vain for hope that will never come just look at the poor today. The point the play wright is putting across is that others do not make your dreams come true, that is up to you to make them happen. Another point is time dose not wait for those who do not make things happen for them selves. Epic true to life play, well written work. Very funny if you have the capacity to understand tho play fully.

I will confess to having never seen the play or for that matter ever hearing of this story. I will also confess that I did not see the film from the beginning so I really have no clue to what it is about BUT that being said "Waiting for Godot" is a very intriguing film. If you are a fan of pure dialog this is a must see, or should I say "a must listen" because the visuals are not that important. My only complaint is that it does take some effort on the part of the viewer. This is not something you watch casually. If you do you will be lost!

The last consideration we can make about "Waiting for Godot" is to be an adaptation of Samuel Beckett's play, perhaps for issues involving copyright or respect and admiration either by the author or the text, Michael Lindsay-Hogg, director of the film Made in 2001, ends up presenting a production that is largely the same, a piece that was filmed with rare oscillations and space opportunities for a possible draft audiovisual exercise. In short, it is not an adaptation as it seeks to be more and respect a theatrical record.

Samuel Beckett (1906-1989), "Waiting for Godot" (1948-1949), was the first play written by the director, playwright and theater scientist, has features of Beckett's distinctive style, as well as marks Theater of the Absurd developed by the author, as well as the question of existentialism and its view of human life without meaning or purpose, easily identifiable mark in Waiting for Godot, where two lords, Vladimir and Estragon, await the arrival of someone every day Who never comes and who goes by the name of Godot.

In the 2001 film by US director Michael Lindsay-Hogg, nothing in the original text is abandoned, unlike anything else such as the indications, marks, lines, rubrics in brief, the entire text structure of the piece is presented In the film, we even have the division of the film into two acts, equally the division of the piece, but, this is not the point, which reduces the potentialities of the film. Although the director has gone through copyright to Beckett's piece, which has a rigid and accurate manual of how it can and should be assembled, where, for example, all the author's indications can not be modified, the piece is practically Followed by an instruction manual that does not allow any changes. Still with this possible prerogative, we can not consider as a limitation, as the film often presents itself, since the cinematographic tool has its own expressiveness and that if incorporated into this history, would have great potential.

In large part we have a film where the camera does not assume the posture of an audience, but also, little is assumed as a mark of a direction, it is limited to register dialogues and carry out plans and against plans, in the sequence and mediated dialogues and against Di-analogs. Few times we have the use of other plans or camera movement that allows a cinematographic grammar, and when they arise cause great enthusiasm, as in the "traveling" I went through the void of a beautiful work of theatrical stage, but very well done and that Presents a deserted road that can not be described because it does not resemble anything at all, and where there is a skeleton of a solitary tree, without leaves, but in the passage from what would be overnight, or who knows of many days , Is made to flower with some leaves. Besides this "traveling" punctual, we have two or three movements of "plongée", in the others we have a cadence of general, medium and closed plans. I do not mean by this that the director is limited or that the little exploration of a grammar does not make it a filmic possibility, what I mean is that by clinging to theatrical marks, a unique setting, inexpressiveness of movements and the persistence of Text, we have a slow and tedious material that if we want to be theater or theater record before the possibility of being cinema, which is pitiful when we combine the text of Beckett, the possibilities of surrealist art, of absurdity and the vast experience of Hogg In the production of music videos, where he directed clips of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones and then migrating to TV, theater and cinema.

With the limitations of one direction resulting in an unimpressive film and resulting in the disfigurement of Beckett's proposals, and not generating the reflexive and provocative pungencies originating from the text, the few positive ties to the film are a precise work of art and enlightenment, very faithful to the History and the construction of its narrative and also of a beautiful work of the actors, who, by the way, take to themselves (completely) the film.

Barry McGoverr (as Vladimir) and Johnny Murphy (as Estragon) perform a work of extreme duplicity, which promotes unique moments, as in the game very close to the clown field, with a stylized floor and especially in the scene of a hat that goes From a slow-moving hand to the rapidity of the gesture. Barry enjoyed a major international success with Beckett's award-winning "I'll Go On," which Gate Theater presented at the Dublin Theater Festival in 1985. Already the game written by Alan Stanford (as Pozzo) and Stephen Brennan Like Lucky) are equally duplicitous and provocative moments that range from pure laughter to the revolting place between the exploited and explorer, in a game very close to the circus and commedia dell'arte style. At last we have Sam McGovern, who emerges as Godot's boy of errands, the boy who ends his acts in the promise of a delayed but hopeful arrival, moreover, this boy is full of meanings, languages, and metaphors.

I believe that all experience is valid and it is up to each person to draw on personal experience of their own, because in this way, it is possible to arise and visualize points that touch him, which are more important and urgent to him, but in my experience, Relevant to Hogg's achievement. I invite others to go further in the experience of reading the book or watching Beckett's play because the film can frustrate and even generate false understandings for those who seek a first contact with Beckett's theater, and if it is desired to accompany The film, that does not do it exclusively, but if it looks for the other and original ways for the theatrical work that in no way manages to assimilate with this work realized in the cinema.

This is a magic piece of work. I am sure if Becket could see it, he would be justly happy of the performances and how it was laid onto celluloid. For those unfamiliar with it, there are no filmic landscapes or action, just the action and landscape of life.

This version of Waiting for Godot stands out as an excellent piece of film making, having just seen a amateur production of Beckett's Endgame I see why it is that during Beckett lifetime he endeavoured to oversee everyone of his plays in its production process.

Beckett's work may be universal in its themes and its setting and its language, however, when put into the hands of a director who even for a split second fails to recognise the premise of the work it can easily fall short of its intended mark. This is why this film version of Waiting for Godot works so well. What the cast and director convincingly convey throughout this movie is the emphasis on whether Godot will ever arrive, having seen this movie twice I am still left with the feeling that Godot, whoever he may be, will come riding past on his horse all may even fall down from the heavens. The director has done an excellent job of keeping the dialogue and the direction of this play fluid, as though the characters are saying these words for the first time and in every scene Godot seems to be prevelent. This is a testament to the strong acting of the cast and most importantly the director who doesn't for a second relieve the tension of this play or lose track of its theme of waiting, or time passing, or moments lost, or endless days. As an introduction to Beckett this movie is perfect though I'm sure Beckett would be dissapointed with this movies insistent focus upon on spoonfeeding its audience with the Beckett like ideas, but I feel this is the only way in which to get across the message of the play. I'm of the opnion that his plays have to be stripped down its essentials and any attempt at a production of Beckett that leaves the audience with a feeling of understanding is a success, this movie does exactly that.

Waiting for Godot is not a play souly dependent upon dialogue and setting, it is also dependent upon movement and conviction in the central idea of time. This is what this movie emphasises and once you have completed the movie for its duration you can only be left with a feeling of total awe for Beckett.