Musical Hair Critiquing Essay Example for Free

Musical Hair Critiquing Essay 1) What show are you critiquing? Hair 2) Give a brief summary of the story line. Claude Hooper Bukowski, an Oklahoma farm boy, heads to New York City to enter the Army and serve in the Vietnam War. In Central Park, he meets a troupe of free-spirited hippies led by George Berger, a young man who introduces him to debutante Sheila Franklin when they crash a dinner party at her home. Inevitably, Claude is sent off to recruit training in Nevada, but Berger and his band of merry pranksters follow him. Sheila flirts with an off-duty Sergeant in order to steal his uniform, which she gives to Berger. He uses it to extract Claude from the base for a last meeting with Sheila, taking his place, but while Claude is away, the unit flies out to Vietnam, taking Berger with them. The film ends with the main cast singing at Bergers grave, followed by scenes of a large anti-war protest outside the White House in Washington, DC. 3) What did you like best about this show? Hair succeeds at all levels—as lowdown fun, as affecting drama, as exhilarating spectacle and as provocative social observation. It achieves its goals by rigorously obeying the rules of classic American musical comedy: dialogue, plot, song and dance blend seamlessly to create a juggernaut of excitement. 4) What did you like least about this show? The film omits the songs The Bed, Dead End, Oh Great God of Power, I Believe in Love, Going Down, Air, My Conviction, Abie Baby, Frank Mills, and What a Piece of Work is Man from the musical. Many of the songs have been shortened, sped up, rearranged, or assigned to different characters to allow for the differences in plot. 5) Who was the hero/heroine? Claude Hooper Bukowski/ Sheila Franklin. 6) Who was the villain? The General. 7) Were you able to understand everything? If not what did you understand? A major plot difference between the film and the musical involves a mistake that leads Berger to go to Vietnam in Claudes place, where he is killed. The musical focuses on the U.S. peace movement, as well as the love relationships among the Tribe members, while the film focuses on the carefree antics of the hippies. But why not make the film ending a happy one? In that case, the movie will better reflect the aspect of American Culture Happy Ever After. 8) Did you get a chance to listen to the soundtrack? Unfortunately not. 9) What was your favorite song? Aquarius. 10) Did you think that the actors were well cast? Sure. The cast featured John Savage as Claude Hooper Bukowski, Treat Williams as George Berger and Beverly DAngelo as Sheila Franklin. Williams was nominated for New Star of the Year in a Motion Picture Male. 11) If you were to remake this show who would you cast in the title roles? Why? If I were to remake the show, I would sill choose the actor and actress as the hero and heroine. The actors are really good-looking, and they can sing and dance well. 12) What aspect of American Culture do you see in this show? Nothing ventured nothing gained. Berger is not only at the heart of the hippie Tribe but is assigned some of Claudes conflict involving whether or not to obey the draft. His death led to the large anti-war protest and featured the carefree antics of the hippies.

Prisoners Without Choice Essay -- Zoology Zoo Animals Essays

Prisoners without Choice When people go on a trip to the zoo, it can be assumed that they do not think about much more than what they can see. Signals that make zoos unfair and sometimes unbearable for the captive animals are not visible to most spectators. This essay will explain how zoos are unjust and should not be supported. Animals should not be held captive due their negative behavioral changes, lack of natural habitat and the zoos failure to effectively preserve endangered species. Even though zoos try to imitate the natural habitat of each animal, the area for the zoo might not be able to support the animals needed environment. When visiting a zoo many people fail to notice that the animals have living areas measuring an acre or smaller. â€Å"Their enclosures are often small, barren, and without shade or privacy† (Laws). â€Å"Animals also need to endure dirty living conditions, stagnant water, and hard floors to sleep on at night† (Laws). It’s obvious that in the wild any animal has almost unlimited space to live in. They catch and forage for food naturally and mate naturally. Natural hunting and mating behaviors are virtually eliminated by regulated feeding and breeding regimens. Captive animals are not able to choose their own mates. After a captive animal does eventually breed, their mate is taken out of the area. This can be emotionally damaging for those animals who choose a mate for life. Most animals are similar to humans in the fact that they need a connection with their mate. Zoos often eliminate this option. The animals are closely confined, lack privacy, and have little opportunity for mental stimulation or physical exercise, resulting in abnormal and self-destructive behavior. This b... ...re not met. Animals are living beings that deserve rights and respect, and being kept in a zoo does not meet these standards. People need to realize that animals are worthy of some of the privileges we receive. Endangered species can ultimately be saved by us, if we support their natural habitats and fight the people who kill them. â€Å"Significantly, we object to human captivity for one reason only, that humans have a right to freedom, or just ought to be free. Why shouldn’t this be the case with non-humans too?† (Bostock). Zoos should not be supported because they are violating animal rights. Works Cited Bostock, Stephen, Zoos and Animal Rights: The ethics of keeping animals, 1993 â€Å"Laws as they apply to Animals and Zoos†, http://www.petaindia.com/zoolaws.html, Accessed 4/5/03 â€Å"Zoos: Pitiful Prisons†, http://www.peta.org/mc/facts, Accessed 3/20/03

The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Anton Ermakov Period 4 US History Essay The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki On August 6th, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, and then, three days later, dropped another bomb on Nagasaki. Since both bombs were dropped, there has been controversy over this important event. Some people feel strongly that the United States was justified in the decision to drop the bombs, whereas many other people believe that it was not necessary to bomb Japan at that point in the war.Write a five-paragraph essay in which you state your opinion on this difficult issue and then explain, describe, and support your point of view with examples and details. The atomic bombings of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki occupy an important place among the most controversial events in the history of humanity. Even though almost seventy years passes since these events, their morality and justification are still questioned extensively by both scholars and ordinary people. In my opinion, the bombings were a grim necessity, which gave the US an opportunity to avoid heavy casualties and conclude the war triumphantly. In this essay, I am going to explain my views and provide arguments in favor of my point of view. Personally, I believe that using the deadliest weapon ever created by a man played a crucial role in crushing the Japanese morale and battle spirit. At the end of World War II, the Japanese society was heavily militarized and fanatically devoted to serving Emperor Hirohito, who was viewed as a living god by his subjects.Therefore, the entire country of Japan lived by the warrior code of bushido, ready to fight for the defense of their mainland. Despite this fatalistic readiness for a final fight, the Japanese were not ready for experiencing the terror of nuclear warfare. The tragic events at Hiroshima and Nagasaki forced the Japanese nation to abandon their will to fight to death, causing the Japanese government to agree with the American terms of surrender. Second of all, I believe that the bombings actually helped save tens of housands of lives from both sides of the conflict by helping the US military to bypass the need for a massive invasion of the Japanese mainland. Before the completion of the Manhattan Project, the military planned to mount an invasion from the newly-captured islands of Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Considering the scale of the defensive preparations conducted by the Japanese government leads to me to believe that a conventional invasion of Japan would result in a massive number of American casualties. The operation of this magnitude would also be extremely harmful for the civilian population of Japan.These reasons make me believe that the unfortunate eradication of the two Japanese cities was a lesser evil. Finally the atomic bombings provided the United States with an opportunity to establish its position as a new superpower, demonstrating its military might to the prospective rival superpower of the USS R. Even though demonstrating the capabilities of a weapon of such destructive power on the civilian population is definitely immoral, it was the best way to showcase the atomic bomb, which eventually became an important asset in keeping the Soviet aggression in check.By using nuclear weapons in combat, the US managed to get an upper hand in an early arms race with the Soviet Union and maintain that position until the testing of the first Soviet nuclear bomb in 1949. In conclusion, I would like to say that, even though the bombing raids on Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths, they were instrumental in overcoming the stubborn resistance of the Japanese government, bringing the war to an end, and saving a far greater number of lives in other Japanese cities. Beyond all doubt, these events are tragic, but they should not be perceived as a horrible and unnecessary atrocity.

Alexander the Great - Biography, Timeline, and Study Guide