5 comments about Moviemakers' Master Class: Private Lessons from the World's Foremost Directors.

1. as film student, this text is very inspirational and i keep going back to it for motivation. i read the whole book through the moment i turned the first page. this is a great inspirational book for anyone who is interested in studying or working in film.



2. This is, hands down, the best collection of advice -from the world's best directors- that I've ever laid my hands on. I came away from each of the interviews feeling illuminated and motivated to tackle my next directing job.
   
   If you want to read something that is actually helpful, rather than some long-winded, boring 'how-to' book (which, let's face it, are almost always terrible) then this is the book to pick up. It is loaded with practical advice, articulated by very intelligent and respected individuals.
   
   Want to know how Woody Allen shoots his films? He sums it up in about two paragraphs! Want to know what lenses Cronenberg shoots with? Well, he tells you! Whether you agree with the techniques of each of these directors, it is fascinating to hear them describe their unique approach.
   
   I will always reference this book before tackling a film project...



3. This book is great and has a wealth of insightful conversation with some amazing directors but my one complaint is that the bulk of the book is framed too similarly. While the directors all have their unique take and insights, Tirard essentially asks them all the same questions which leads to repetition over the bulk of the book. In no way am I saying not to purchase this book but I'm simply criticizing it's redundancy.



4. This is exactly what a moviemakers master class should be. It asks technical and artistic questions to some of the greatest directors of all time.
   
   If you want to hear why Tim Burton likes wide lenses, which contemporary directors Scorsese admires and why, Jean Pierre Jeunet's theory of camera movement, David Lynch's "secret dolly move", John Woo's method of shooting and cutting scenes to music, The Coen brothers writing process, Lars Von Trier's take on the rules of Dogme 95, Jean-Luc Goddard's theory of filmmaking out of desire vs. need, then this book is your ticket.
   
   This is a goldmine of knowledge. There are no fluff interviews here; only the best filmmakers in the world relating solid technical advice and tried and true shooting strategies developed from years of experience.



5. Great stuff. Gives a lot of info on each director. For example; Sidney Pollack was an acting coach before he became a director.
   This book is filled with insight, knowledge and terrific stories all from the top directors of our time.

5 comments about Three Uses of the Knife: On the Nature and Purpose of Drama.

1. I read this book every year, and every year I take something new from it. There's SO much in this short book. It's FILLED with truth about life, art, and life & art.



2. Through studying David Mamet's theories, I came to realise that a character can be understood not only through what they do, but also through what they say. My style has started to incorporate Mamet's technique of having characters talk, often to each other, as well as to express themselves through physical acts like gestures and walking. The education in this book has convinced me to abandon my earlier style, where characters have wordless internal monologues while not moving for a play's 2 or 3 hour duration.
   
   3 stars.



3. This book is a great essay about dramaturgy and politics that evolves some philosophical and psychological theories.



4. I bought this book when it first came out in hardcover. It was about triple the price that it is now on Amazon, and many people I knew thought I was insane to buy such a small book for a high price.

   But to me -- it was all too worth it.

   David Mamet is all at once a very clear writer and a very mysterious writer. Critics of this particular book mainly see fault in its "seeming" lack of clarity -- Mamet has the intellect of an academic but does not feel that he should write like a dry academic because ACADEMIC PAPERS ARE BORING -- right? At least, I think so.

   Three Uses of The Knife -- I've read it about 30 times, I've underlined my favorite parts, and the dust jacket is falling to shreds. When I had Mamet sign it at a book reading he gave me this confused look because everyone had a brand-new book (it was South of the Northeast Kingdom) and I had this tattered one. I had to have that book signed because that book is really awesome and means a lot to me (it taught me alot).

   Wether you love it or hate it you have to appriciate it. Mamet's genius is undeniable, and the confidence he enbues in his writing is unforgettable.




5. This reads like a weekend brainstorm into the dictaphone, or party-chatter with metropolitan friends. First glance - you've got the large font, wide-margins and generous line-spacing to pad these notes out into a book. Then you notice that nearly every paragraph includes several parenthetical thoughts (like I just had another way-outer to squeeze in here, okay?), plus quoted after-thoughts (sorry, couldn't find "the right words" just then, you know?) - and foreign phrases swept in from every part of the old country - like this gem: "This pronunciamento can be taken as a jejune promise". Footnoted brain-sprinkles complete the overall intellectual profile of this work.

   The reader doesn't get any help to piece it all together. Eventually, you might suspect Mamet has something to say about the "three acts" of theatre (no other dramatic structures apparently exist). Mamet dips here and there into the function of drama, his bold thesis being that theatre is magic. Theatre, he declares, is a place of wonder, and no place for popular entertainment or politics. We are to walk out of theatres with "cleansing awe", knowing we are "sinful and worthless".

   Mamet never considers any ideas apart from his own. He draws heavily on the Old Testament and a primer on Freud for back-up, but no theatre theorists ever get a mention - apart from Brecht, with a single word, namely: "problematic".

   Most of "Three Uses" is actually nothing to do with theatre. It's an outpouring of quotables about statesmanship, the "Information Age", the psychology of the masses, the causes of gambling ... all argued with arrogant inconsistency: Mamet rails against "centralisation by the body politic", and then derides all manner of extremism; he argues against "avant garde nonsense" with absurd phrases like "In endorsing a blank canvas, or the Domino Theory, the individual becomes like a King Canute". For Mamet, "good art" is no more than The Bible, Shakespeare and Bach, plus an American work - "Death of a Salesman", of course. There are no surprises in the ideas, however much they're dressed to impress with showy associations and stiff fundamentalism. Too bad that the result is more like a freshman's freewheeling weblog on "life", than anything from the likes of Brook or Grotowski on "the theatre". American critics equating it with such works is no more than chauvinism.

   One use of the knife Mamet forgot was editing. Then he might have been able to communicate something useful here - into 3 or 4 pages. But there's no holding back the primary process exhibitionist. You have to get out the knife and do the editing yourself.
   
   Oh, yes, the knife. Nice title, and it's the substance of a few lines near the end, which Mamet cares - and seems only able - to explain by offering more curly metaphor: "the knife is the dramatist's bass line". Meaning? Dramatists are misanthropes who basically want to kill their audiences? Who knows, but the meandering content and grandiose style of this work sure suggests Mamet's fundamental contempt for the reader.

5 comments about Of Mice and Magic: A History of American Animated Cartoons; Revised and Updated (Plume Books).

1. I purchased this book for a class, it was the textbook we used. It was interesting and seemed to encompass a fair amount of history. I do wish he'd expanded more on the history of computer animation, but it's pretty extensive in and of itself.



2. The book I ordered was in perfect condition and delivery right away. I got it about half the amount of business days I was supposed to get it. Plus the book isn't mind-numbing to read as it's about the coolest subject ever.



3. When I think of the history of animation, I tend to divide things into three periods: The Golden Age, noted for early Warner Brothers cartoons and the classic Disney movies such as Snow White and Fantasia; The Age of Mediocrity, where creativity seemed to reach its nadir, as seen most notably in the bland Hanna Barbera cartoons; and the Modern Era, with the resurgence in cartoon creativity, which, starting with The Little Mermaid in the movies and the Simpsons on TV, animation reached a new level of popularity and respectability. Leonard Maltin's book, Of Mice and Magic, shows that my own view of cartoon history is roughly correct but also overly simple: there was plenty of mediocrity in the Golden Age and plenty of decent stuff in the Age of Mediocrity.
   
   Maltin starts off with a chapter about the silent era, when animation was just beginning. Over time, experience would refine the process, but the big leap would occur with sound, in particular with Walt Disney's Steamboat Willie featuring Mickey Mouse. After the silent era chapter, there are chapters that serve as "biographies" of the major animation studios, starting with the biggest of them all, Disney.
   
   The Disney characters are among the most popular in cartoon history (or film history in general). Mickey Mouse may have been the biggest name, but he didn't have much of a personality, so he started being pushed aside in favor of more developed characters, especially Donald Duck, the first major Disney character with any sort of edge. In fact, this is a constant theme in the book: that the weakest cartoons from any studio were the ones that featured characters with no distinct personalities.
   
   Success would often come with the most offbeat and edgy characters, such as Donald Duck, Bugs Bunny, Popeye and Daffy Duck. But some of the studios had a mercenary nature that would put quantity ahead of quality; probably the worst in the bunch was Terrytoons where good cartoons were the exception, not the rule. Although even Terrytoons would have some memorable characters - in particular, Mighty Mouse and Heckle & Jeckle - even many of the cartoons featuring them were not very good (which is why in the world of cartoons, the Terrytoons characters will never outshine even some of the Disney or Warner Brothers second-stringers).
   
   Space limitations prevent me from going as in depth on this subject as I would like, but suffice it to say that after reading this book, I still do feel justified in defining an Age of Mediocrity. It was not that every cartoon in that period was bad, but the good ones were few and far between and classics were very rare indeed. The Age of Mediocrity was filled with bland cartoons that were more cute than funny, often repeated the same gags over and over again, and had few remarkable characters.
   
   What about what I call the Modern Age? It would have started right after this edition of the book was published (1987), so it is understandably, but sadly omitted. Also missing is any real look at TV cartoons, so Bullwinkle, Underdog, Yogi Bear and the Super Friends, among others, are only mentioned in passing. Maltin admits up front that this book won't cover these TV cartoons, nor non-American products, hence the omission of international fare such as the Italian Fantasia-like movie, Allegro non troppo.
   
   The strengths of this book, however, far outweigh the shortcomings. While my opinions sometimes differ from Maltin's on the quality of various cartoons, these are a matter of individual taste (overall, he tends to go easier on the films than I do; for example, he has a more favorable opinion on the UPA cartoons than I do); besides, this book is more of a history of cartoons than a critique of them. In addition to good writing, we gets lots of pictures (only a few in color) and an extensive filmography for all the chronicled cartoon studios.
   
   You probably need to be a certain age (probably at least 30) to fully appreciate this book, as younger readers may not have really grown up with these cartoons and may not have even seen them as adults (and since many of these cartoons were geared only to kids, they would not even have much appeal to those over 10). But if you remember these cartoons and look back at them with fond nostalgia, this is a great book.



4. I found this book to be an excellent reference source for cartoons produced to be shown in theaters. However, entitling it "A History of American Animated Cartoons" is not exactly truth in advertising. I think most people (except for perhaps some obsessive purists) would agree that the cartoons produced for television from the 40/50's onward would also be considered American Animated Cartoons. But none of these great cartoons (i.e., Gumby, Beany and Cecil, Clutch Cargo, Hanna-Barbara's Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear, Pixie & Dixie, and others through the present) are included here in any detail. Also missing from the appendices of studio output are the more obscure products like Warner's Private Snafu and other animation produced for corporate clients. Mr Maltin would do cartoon lovers well by commissioning a second volume to complete the story.



5. Leonard Maltin has a real knowledge of animation and his passion and enthusiasm for cartoons is apparent. The book traces animation from its beginnings at the turn of the century up to modern day. Extensive coverage is provided to all the major cartoon studios and many of the key directors. The illustrations are excellent. Maltin provides a fair amount of detail but not too much to overwhelm the casual fan. Anyone interested in the history of animation or just wants information on which films to see is well advised to pick up this very well written book.

5 comments about Dutchman and The Slave: Two Plays.

1. LeRoi Jones, now known as Amiri Baraka, wrote Dutchman in 1964, but its themes of racism and fear still resonate today. A must for anyone studying African American literature and contemporary drama -- it is a seminal work. The Slave is less successful -- its message is muddled and the dialogue stilted -- yet it is worth reading to get a complete view of Baraka's work.



2. "Dutchman offers a very realistic study in terms of how "Liberal White American", not racism, is murdering the Black American.



3. This play is written beautifully in a style that resembles some very late American Dadaist poetry. However if you take the play as a whole, this play lacks any didactic purpose. Baraka is hypocritical in that he has become the hate-monger that he despises. Other than wonderful banter and a powerfully angst-ridden diatribe, this play offers nothing but hate and intolerance.



4. Wow. I think this play portrays an aspect of the black community that cannot be felt by any other community without some feelings of disingenuity. The rage present in the play is overwhelming. The sense of danger and loss is also present, but more subtly so. This play is also very ambiguous and wanting interpretation. I say "wanting interpretation" because Dutchman seems to call for the reader's own interpretation purposefully... the criticism around it is enough to spark a debate, but still the critical aspects are not overwhelmed by the immediacy of emotion and action.



5. A great representation of race relations in america (in the revolutionary '60's as well as representative of today), man's relation to woman, and the irony and tension that is comes package in. For no other reason, the mythology and theological references are delightfully handled. Sadly, this work is one of the most underrated and underread works of the 20th century.

4 comments about Walt Disney: Young Movie Maker (Childhood of Famous Americans).

1. There are several books that put the biography of Walt Disney in a format meant for children, and this is the best of them. The majority of the book tells what Walt's life as a child was like. The publisher has produced a whole series of bio type books for young people, and has a good formula. They try to put the child in touch not only with the life deeds of the man, but his personality, and how he got his start. In understanding a great person from history, it is tremendously useful to know not just what he did, but why he did it. Who and what influenced this person. What was he like as a kid himself? Without these it is hard for a kid to connect to the historical figure, and this book accomplishes it very well. I highly reccommend! For a good adult bio, check the Bob Thomas book, or the Amy Boothe book.



2. Walt disney had an exciting childhood not to mention adult career. My children loved reading this book and having it read to them prior to visiting Disney World.



3. I really enjoyed reading this book. I thought that Walter was a very intelegent young person. I thought Marie Hammontree did an excelent job at making a usual boring biography into an intresting tale.I wish that there where many more pages in the book so I could read more and more about Walt Disney. I thought that Marie made him sound like a very lively young child. I thought that Walt was a very big risk taker. I would have hoped that the book would have had more information and details though. all in all I thought that this was a great book.



4. This book was enjoyable. Marie Hammontree described how a person can be a big success while being a little poor. It shows the ups and downs of Disney's life. She describes what it took to get to the top of his career. This book tells who he was inspired by and how they helped him. She told me his problems in his life and how they were solved. It gave me the puzzle pieces to his life so I could better understand it. All in all I think it was a really informative book.

5 comments about Literature - Reading, Fiction, Poetry and Drama.

1. I still have not received this book. My class started on the 29th of AUG, i am in Iraq, and i still do not have a book for class. My wife had to buy it from another location and she scans copies and sends them to me. I looked into requesting a refund, but there were no procedures to follow for 'Not delivered".



2. The product is very useful and actually was cheaper to buy new from Amazon that it was to purchase used from any of the available venues. The only complaint I would have about the book is the onion-paper thinness of the pages. The pages are almost transparent and this makes it very hard if not impossible to highlight.



3. DiYanni gives excellent explanation and great examples of poems, plays, and short stories in his book. I actually bought this book for a Lit. class and I knew I would hate the class and the book when I saw how 'big' the boook was. Turns out I loved them both; and DiYanni in my opinion is an excellent author. This book is a great read for pleasure as well as study.



4. I bought this book instead of buying the 2nd edition. I figured it would be exactly the same. It isn't. It has a lot of the same stories but some are missing, like "The Lottery." Luckily it's a book of short stories, so the stories that are missing you can get online. The price is worth the work. It's half the price of the new book. A paper back book is not worth 58 dollars. Buy this look up the other stories.
   
   Plus it's easy to navigate.



5. The book arrived in great condition and in a very timely manner. I would purchase from this seller in the future.

5 comments about Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human.

1. The used copy of SHAKESPEARE,The invention of the Human/Harold Bloom was received promptly, and in excellent condition. It was hard to believe it was USED.



2. Bloom is at his best when he dissects many of Shakespeare's most wonderful dialogues and speeches. His analysis of Iago's soliloquys or of the pastoral section of The Winter's Tale are unforgettable. He is also quite convincing in demolishing various modern critical attempts to put Shakespeare in one box or another -- feminist, Freudian, anti-colonialist, or whatever suits the day's fancy.
   
   He also makes no effort to hide his "bardolatry," i.e. his worship of Shakespeare. At age 13, I was given a Complete Works and started to read it. I can be assured that if I made something of Macbeth, I made nothing of Love's Labour's Lost. Yet the poetry rang true for me and always has rung true. Bloom brings back that sense of Shakespeare as unequalled genius of poem and character.
   
   However, I grew tired of the constant litany of "Hamlet, Lear, Rosalind, Cleopatra, Iago," and others -- the names that Bloom constantly invokes in every chapter. These are Shakespeare's greatest creations; we know that. Bloom should not belabor the point. It only detracts from the power of a major work of criticism.



3. THIS book is like having an excellent professor guiding you through the labyrinth that Shakespeare can be...and Harold Bloom blows away the doors of perception!



4. Bloom is the great literary critic of our day, the master reader of our greatest literature. Shakespeare has always been for him the central figure of our literary tradition, the one who by far created the most. In his play by play analysis of Shakespeare Bloom argues that Shakespeare invented our present day conception of the human. He is the one who allowed our own inner minds to speak on the page. He is the one who created characters of flexibility and breadth beyond those we had known before. Bloom writes with inspiration as he exalts Rosalind, Falstaff, Hamlet, his major favorites and hosts of others. Bloom does what a great critic is supposed to do he gives us a far richer and greater sense of the work than we had before. He makes us eager to know it more.



5. I have to admit up front that I like reading Harold Bloom. I don't always agree with him and I often find his pronouncements on this, that and the other quite arrogant and short-sighted. On the other hand, his opinions often challenge me to consider my own and I respect his decades of grappling with the Bard and the history of Shakespearean criticism. As a fellow sufferer of Bardolatry, I feel I can sympathize with the man.
   
   And what of this book? Well, it is quite the tome. Containing analysis of each of Shakespeare's plays, it's a test of endurance. Anyone who isn't familiar with the vast majority of Shakespeare's plays would be advised, perhaps, to read the introductory essays and dip into those chapters on the plays he knows.
   
   As for myself, having read and seen most of the plays in the canon, I read the book through. In every chapter I found something valuable and I wouldn't have missed reading it for the world. When he feels a character is interesting or important--Iago, Cleopatra, Rosalind, Lear to name a few--he can wax practically poetic in his insight. The things that don't interest him he dismisses out of hand with a cutting remark or ignores entirely.
   
   Still, to be frank, reading too much of this at once can be tiresome. In large doses it is like listening to the grumblings of an old man who feels his time is past and he doesn't get the respect he deserves anymore. He hasn't seen a performance of Shakespeare he's liked in thirty or more years. He rejects all modern forms of criticism and interpretation. His obsession with Hamlet and, in particular, Falstaff, finds its way into the discussion of practically every play. I love Hamlet almost as much as Bloom but even I got tired of him as he appeared time and again. As for Falstaff: there can be no doubt he is a great character; however I think it takes a man of Bloom's age to rate him so far above many of the other Shakespearean characters.
   
   And as for Bloom's assertion that Shakespeare invented the human as we know it? Well, that may be pushing it a bit far for my taste but I take his point. The introspective nature and universality of Shakespeare's greatest characters was revolutionary. Certainly many important thinkers after him have found in Shakespeare the inspiration for ideas that have impacted our world. Our world--and most definitely our theater--would be different had Shakespeare never written. Still, would the nature of human beings be so very different? I remain unconvinced.
   
   Ah, but Bloom makes it easy to argue with him. He invites it. And I enjoy the debate. If one can ignore the provocative prose and rake for the gems, these are pages worth mining. I, for one, am glad I did.

5 comments about Oleanna: A Play.

1. This is a fast- paced little drama in hard- hitting colloquial language. Two characters a university teacher and his student are the whole action. It begins with the girl student petitioning for a passing grade, but in time becomes complicated by her charging the teacher with harassment. As their dialogue is going on the teacher is also having to deal with the purchase of a house, and family problems. Both teacher and student feel failures but somehow the common element of their situation does not bring them to sympathetic understanding and conclusion.
   Obviously this is a look at the new 'politically correct' ethic which has infested much of campus discourse and life.
   I found it an interesting exercise. But it somehow did not move me on a very deep level.



2. "Oleanna" was a very, very frustrating read for me. First of all, a lot of it probably has to do with the fact that it is meant to be seen and heard, not read. Nonetheless, I'm convinced that a lot of the frustration is intentional. Everything the characters say is mixed up, incompleted, and confusing. The author, or playwright, Mamet, seems to have a very condescending opinion, almost disgust, for the English language. The confusion and misunderstanding is written in a way that makes our language appear almost pointless. I can't help but thinking to myself that anything can be put in a bad light, and shown to be a source of evil and violence, but why make a point of it (at least when its fundamentally unchangeable, like our basic language)? From my reading, I took the conclusion of the story to be something like "Language is futile, and fails us when we need it most." Of all the things I've read in my college literature course, "Oleanna" has been the only thing to leave a distinctly sour taste in my mouth.
   
   Perhaps I'm missing the beauty of the writing, or the composition, or something... but overall this seemed to be a very mean spirited and ultimately pointless read.



3. Although this play has often been characterized as a critique of "political correctness" gone insane, coming as it does on the heels of the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings, the earlier reviewer got it right. Read the epigraph! This is a play that rewards multiple readings and is worthy of a place in the curriculum of a college English class. One thing is certain: it will inspire class discussion!



4. I loved this book/play too. We were required to read it for my Comp 2 class, but I was glad we were. It is very easy reading and DOES make one wonder what side they are actually on. The point we focused on most was that even if the teacher wasn't what they were making him out to be that he eventually became that person because that's what everyone believed him to be. Kind of like the theory if you tell a kid he's bad, even if he isn't he'll eventually become what you make him out to be because there's no point in being any different if people won't/don't accept that you're not who they make you out to be. I liked it so much I even borrowed the video from the library. William H. Macey was awesome playing the part of the teacher, you could just feel the tension between the two characters.If you buy this book and like it I suggest you buy the video too if you can, it's worth the money.



5. The imagery of focused academia and the discontinuity of John and Carol's conversation can be defined as a constant stop n' go. You find yourself wondering if the structure of "Oleanna" will transform a change of pattern from interupted dialog to a free flowing comprehensible conversation. You want to talk irritating-its all here. John the ostentatious Professor is developed into this pompous character and Mamet creates a twisted tone of pathetic sympathy hitched with misappropriated authority. Will John's foolish indoctrination jeopardize his tenure? If you can get through the continuation of interrupted dialog - lots of credit to you!

4 comments about Four Major Plays: (Doll's House; Ghosts; Hedda Gabler; and The Master Builder) (Oxford World's Classics).

1. Rather predictably, the first play offered here is "A Doll's House", the most famous of Ibsen's works. Strangely enough, this ended up NOT being my favorite of the four plays provided in this small collection, but I'll get to that in a moment. Next we have "Ghosts", "Hedda Gabler", and finally "The Master Builder".
   
   "A Doll's House", 86 pages long, is also provided here with the alternate German ending. The ending was deemed so scandalous that Ibsen was forced to write up another ending, in which things go slightly differently. "A Doll's House", a play about a woman who rather does the unthinkable (in that time, at least) to help her husband and then once again to herself, is remarkably interesting. Ibsen plays are generally extremely fun to analyze, simply because there's always something there. Nobody would read dull plays, after all. The alternate ending provided is actually the most interesting part of all. It shows us what the impact of this play was on society at the time that it came out. Perhaps we find these things somewhat more "normal" (though they're actually not, and are still considered rather scandalous) and acceptable, so this ending really reminds us of WHY this play was so impressive and WHY Ibsen was such a strange character for his time. An intriguing play, though not my favorite.
   
   No, that falls to "Ghosts". A play that once again touches on difficult subjects that are most intriguing, "Ghosts" chilled me from beginning to end. It was a more interesting play, overall, because it seemed to me more human. That's not to say that "A Doll's House" wasn't human (it definitely is), but there was something about "Ghosts" that touched me more than the other plays. At 73-pages and with fewer characters, "Ghosts" is an easier play to really read, and certainly an enjoyable one.
   
   "Hedda Gabler" changes things a bit. The plot suddenly becomes a bit more interesting with a touch more mystery and intrigue. There are moments that positively creeped me out ("I'm burning your child") and moments where I just shivered. The ending is a bit more intense than in the previous plays, though less surprising. The play felt very different from "Ghosts" or "A Doll's House", though it was still clearly an Ibsen "morbid but interesting" play.
   
   For me, "The Master Builder" is the odd play out. It's the one that, a. Bored me the most, b. Seemed to take the longest (though only barely longer than "A Doll's House, at 88 pages, and shorter than the 97-paged long "Hedda Gabler"), and c. Seemed the least realistic. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the ending wouldn't seem to work on stage. I felt like at some point Ibsen kind of forgot that he was writing a play and mentioned things that wouldn't really work (unless they have a complex blue screen, but those didn't exist in his time...). There are ways around it, certainly, and it's a minor flaw, but I found that "The Master Building" just didn't have that spark that the other plays seemed to have. No, it's not a BAD play, but it's not my favorite among these either.
   
   While there are many options out there for buying Ibsen plays, this one is certainly a good buy. While the Signet edition also gives us four plays for a few dollars cheaper, instead of the incredible "Ghosts", we get the reasonable "The Wild Duck". For those few dollars, I'd opt for "Ghosts". Also, the book type itself is better in this edition as opposed to the Signet Classics one.
   
   Highly recommended to anyone interesting in a good play to analyze and enjoy. Enjoy!



2. it was an older book, but it was in good shape. good plays too.



3. James McFarlane's and Jens Arup's translations of Ibsen have long been classics and are arguably the best. Although they were published in England almost forty years ago, they still sound remarkably fresh and will be in print for many years to come.

   In "A Doll's House" (1879), Ibsen casts us into the world of Nora Helmer, a young Norwegian housewife and Nordic Madame Bovary. Highlighting the restricted position of women in male-dominated society, the play sparked such an uproar in Scandinavia when it appeared that "many a social invitation during that winter bore the words: 'You are requested not to mention Ibsen's Doll's House!'" In fact, Hedwig Niemann-Raabe, the actress who was to play Nora on tour in Germany, was so appalled at the ending of this play -- at this female "monster" -- that she demanded Ibsen write an alternative one in German, which he did (a "barbaric outrage", in his words). McFarlane has appended this German-language ending (and a translation in English).

   Based on the theme, "The sins of the fathers shall be visited on the children," "Ghosts" (1881) is one of Ibsen's most riveting plays. Like "A Doll's House", it, too, was denounced on its début ("crapulous stuff", "an open drain", one London reviewer called it -- certainly a Victorian exaggeration). As in most of his plays, Ibsen probes the hypocrisies of patriarchal society, which he deems to be rotten at its core, and stultifying provincial life ("Doesn't the sun ever shine here?"). Typically, he also casts women in a favorable light.

   "A Doll's House" and "Ghosts" established Ibsen's reputation as one of the finest playwrights in Europe, but his next two plays -- "Hedda Gabler" (1890) and "The Master Builder" (1892) -- gave him undisputed international fame. As McFarlane points out, the 1890s "were the years when the publication of a new Ibsen play sent profound cultural reverberations throughout Europe and the world." "Hedda Gabler" marks Ibsen's shift away from highly controversial dramas primarily concerned with social and sexual injustice to "domestic" plays that addressed the struggle of individuals to control each other, people who "want to control the world, but cannot control [themselves]." "Hedda Gabler" is a thoroughly electrifying drama about a married woman's devouring sense of decay and confinement. "The Master Builder", which Ibsen coupled with "Hedda Gabler", is his riveting look into sexual potency and the domination of youth by age.

   These plays are not as dark and dirty as they might seem. Whatever reviewers may have said about them when they came out and whatever gloomy stuff psychiatrists have written about them since, if you're at all familiar with prime-time television, they won't offend you -- in fact, you probably wont even lift an eyebrow. Still, I found myself glued to them for hours and I've read them before. Find a copy for your shelf!




4. Actually, I've only read two of these plays before but I did
   want to list the names of the four included in this volume:

   A Doll's House;
   Ghosts;
   Hedda Gabler;
   The Master Builder.
   
   Masterful social drama (to sound like a back-of-the-book blurb).
   Seriously though, Ibsen's plays are wonderful.

No comments about Stop Motion: Craft Skills for Model Animation, Second Edition (Focal Press Visual Effects and Animation).