|
Post by Nicholas on Jun 17, 2016 17:43:37 GMT
I’d love to know how many of the under-25s going to that have never seen a Shakespeare before. I’d love to know how many hadn’t seen Julius Caesar or Henry IV before. I’d love to know how many hadn’t seen Phyllida Lloyd’s Julius Caesar or Henry IV before. I am not sure if I'll be able to catch this as I am turning 26 in November. But it totally caught my attention and I can inform you that I have never seen Henry IV (seen Julius Caesar in a different country about 6 years ago), never seen a Donmar production and don't know Phyllida Lloyd. So I don't know what you're implying here..?
I think the inherent fault in a scheme like this is that it doesn’t get new theatregoers in, it only gets the same theatregoers going. My friends who don’t think they can afford theatre, my friends who can afford cheap theatre but still think theatre’s for the elites, my friends away from London who’d have to pay an extortionate train fare anyway – they don’t get to see these despite the free tickets, and in some cases can't afford to go due to travel anyway. If the Donmar was truly committed to broadening audiences, this pop-up theatre would go on tour, would discount based on finance not age, and would send adverts out to the non-theatre circles so they were aware of these productions and their freebies. Instead, the same regular young faces will go see this – perhaps the free tickets will allow a greater number of financially constrained young faces, but as I say, I’m under 25 and can afford a lot of theatre, where plenty of over 25s I know can’t, and my inner milquetoast socialist, my inner Ken Loach, thinks it’s unfair that I get a free ticket based on my age and they have to pay despite their income.
I was exaggerating a little when I was banging on about having seen these before, but only a little. I saw Julius Caesar for £7.50 (day seat) and Henry IV for £10 (Barclays), both on non-age-related schemes, and I think the people who’ll mostly be excited about that are people like me, lucky enough to have seen the earlier shows, and people like you, members of Theatreboard who love their theatre. Of the free-ticket users, a minority will have seen the other Lloyd productions already, a fair number will have seen these plays in some form already, and the majority will see Shakespeare on a regular basis. This doesn’t do anything to entice new theatregoers, only keep enticing the existing regulars.
Got to say, though, book the free tickets now before you’re 26, if you go after your birthday play ignorant and pretend you’d forgotten, and just go, because Julius Caesar and Henry IV were riveting, haunting, thrilling productions and you really, really should see them! When you go, though, ask the people around you whether they’d ever been to the theatre before or regularly went, and the answer will be a depressingly frequent “All the time!”
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on Jun 17, 2016 19:27:22 GMT
I am not sure if I'll be able to catch this as I am turning 26 in November. But it totally caught my attention and I can inform you that I have never seen Henry IV (seen Julius Caesar in a different country about 6 years ago), never seen a Donmar production and don't know Phyllida Lloyd. So I don't know what you're implying here..?
I think the inherent fault in a scheme like this is that it doesn’t get new theatregoers in, it only gets the same theatregoers going. My friends who don’t think they can afford theatre, my friends who can afford cheap theatre but still think theatre’s for the elites, my friends away from London who’d have to pay an extortionate train fare anyway – they don’t get to see these despite the free tickets, and in some cases can't afford to go due to travel anyway. If the Donmar was truly committed to broadening audiences, this pop-up theatre would go on tour, would discount based on finance not age, and would send adverts out to the non-theatre circles so they were aware of these productions and their freebies. Instead, the same regular young faces will go see this – perhaps the free tickets will allow a greater number of financially constrained young faces, but as I say, I’m under 25 and can afford a lot of theatre, where plenty of over 25s I know can’t, and my inner milquetoast socialist, my inner Ken Loach, thinks it’s unfair that I get a free ticket based on my age and they have to pay despite their income.
I was exaggerating a little when I was banging on about having seen these before, but only a little. I saw Julius Caesar for £7.50 (day seat) and Henry IV for £10 (Barclays), both on non-age-related schemes, and I think the people who’ll mostly be excited about that are people like me, lucky enough to have seen the earlier shows, and people like you, members of Theatreboard who love their theatre. Of the free-ticket users, a minority will have seen the other Lloyd productions already, a fair number will have seen these plays in some form already, and the majority will see Shakespeare on a regular basis. This doesn’t do anything to entice new theatregoers, only keep enticing the existing regulars.
Got to say, though, book the free tickets now before you’re 26, if you go after your birthday play ignorant and pretend you’d forgotten, and just go, because Julius Caesar and Henry IV were riveting, haunting, thrilling productions and you really, really should see them! When you go, though, ask the people around you whether they’d ever been to the theatre before or regularly went, and the answer will be a depressingly frequent “All the time!”
You're probably right that people who don't go to theatre at all won't get to know about this (/maybe won't be interested anyway). I don't know in what ways they're promoting it or not so I'm not judging that. The idea of deciding based on the actual wealth of the person sounds fair but also very unrealistic - how would you prove that? You mentioned jobseekers or people from certain districts - not sure how reliable that criterion would be. That could also rule out students or perhaps at least foreign students - and while I realize that is another potentially controversial debate, I don't think closing up is a good idea. So yes while such schemes would be valuable, so are the young people ones I believe. It might not be people who don't go to theatre at all, but maybe some who have seen something more commercial, saved up to see their favourite performer or musical and wouldn't do so to just branch out and try something new; it might open them up to a totally new way of staging plays. I am of course looking at it from a very selfish point of view: these schemes benefit me so I like them, haha. I go to theatre a lot, I have studied it and want to pursue a career in it: but only these schemes, day seats etc. allow me to do so in London as well, where it truly inspires me (in my country theatre is perhaps 5 times cheaper, but also a bit rubbish). So yes you definitely do have a point and this scheme doesn't solve everything, but when I remember the stage when I was only discovering the world of theatre and it was bringing me so much, I think yes please, give that chance to other people as well. Haha thanks for the tip, might need to try it then, if it's really so good :-) EDIT: Looking back at this I realize I must seem exactly like the annoying "all the time" kind of person...but it's not like I had the money and spent it in a pub instead, basically all my money goes to discovering British theatre. I can clearly remember the phase before I studied it when I was starting to go to theatre as a teenager because it only cost about the equivalent of 2 pounds, those are the people I think it is great for.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 20:53:03 GMT
Young people shouldn't get ultra cheap or free theatre tickets What are you talking about? Do you only want to see elderly rich people in theatre? Especially NT's Entry Pass and Haymarket's Masterclass are absolutely incredible. I was on the other hand baffled that Menier Chocolate Factory had a discount for seniors and not for students. fair comment I agree with the need to get new audiences in, but I think some of the massive discounts (particularly the free tickets for the Donmar) don't achieve this, because: - they go to people who are savvy enough to know about the scheme, ie young existing theatregoers (this is why "A Night Less Ordinary" was scrapped I believe) - some of the discounts are so huge, that the jump to paying real prices when you hit 25 (or whatever) means you just stop going (this is what my younger sister did!) I do agree with "access" schemes for people on limited incomes which of course does include some young people and students!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 20:53:33 GMT
And for my next unpopular opinion:
London has too many fringe theatres so it doesn't actually matter if some of them shut down.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 21:59:26 GMT
And for my next unpopular opinion: London has too many fringe theatres so it doesn't actually matter if some of them shut down. He has a point, and it makes things all the more confusing. Another unpopular opinion of mine: Some more theatres that are actually in the West End should be eligible for the Oliviers. If King's Cross Theatre is considered West End and eligible, so should the Arts and Charring Cross.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 22:30:16 GMT
Another unpopular opinion of mine: Some more theatres that are actually in the West End should be eligible for the Oliviers. If King's Cross Theatre is considered West End and eligible, so should the Arts and Charring Cross. I don't think there's a wise old sage who decides on which venues are eligible on the basis of expert geographical knowledge. Isn't eligibility earnt by the venue owners or producers bunging a big enough membership payment to the Society of West End Theatres?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 22:33:01 GMT
Another unpopular opinion of mine: Some more theatres that are actually in the West End should be eligible for the Oliviers. If King's Cross Theatre is considered West End and eligible, so should the Arts and Charring Cross. I don't think there's a wise old sage who decides on which venues are eligible on the basis of expert geographical knowledge. Isn't eligibility earnt by the venue owners or producers bunging a big enough membership payment to the Society of West End Theatres? I think that is the case, my unpopular opinion then is it should be based on geographical then haha, would make the Oliviers alot more competitive and interesting!
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 17, 2016 22:45:36 GMT
I agree that it'd be great to have more venues involved for the exact reason you state, more competition, but I think these "unpopular opinions" are headed in the direction of just "opinions"
|
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 17, 2016 22:57:40 GMT
Young people always got very cheap seats, but they had to stand at the back, they're young and can cope with it and if the theatre has empty seats, just before lights down, it would be stupid not to take it. I don't get with the young people and their entitlement.
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas on Jun 18, 2016 1:13:01 GMT
I think the inherent fault in a scheme like this is that it doesn’t get new theatregoers in, it only gets the same theatregoers going. My friends who don’t think they can afford theatre, my friends who can afford cheap theatre but still think theatre’s for the elites, my friends away from London who’d have to pay an extortionate train fare anyway – they don’t get to see these despite the free tickets, and in some cases can't afford to go due to travel anyway. If the Donmar was truly committed to broadening audiences, this pop-up theatre would go on tour, would discount based on finance not age, and would send adverts out to the non-theatre circles so they were aware of these productions and their freebies. Instead, the same regular young faces will go see this – perhaps the free tickets will allow a greater number of financially constrained young faces, but as I say, I’m under 25 and can afford a lot of theatre, where plenty of over 25s I know can’t, and my inner milquetoast socialist, my inner Ken Loach, thinks it’s unfair that I get a free ticket based on my age and they have to pay despite their income.
I was exaggerating a little when I was banging on about having seen these before, but only a little. I saw Julius Caesar for £7.50 (day seat) and Henry IV for £10 (Barclays), both on non-age-related schemes, and I think the people who’ll mostly be excited about that are people like me, lucky enough to have seen the earlier shows, and people like you, members of Theatreboard who love their theatre. Of the free-ticket users, a minority will have seen the other Lloyd productions already, a fair number will have seen these plays in some form already, and the majority will see Shakespeare on a regular basis. This doesn’t do anything to entice new theatregoers, only keep enticing the existing regulars.
Got to say, though, book the free tickets now before you’re 26, if you go after your birthday play ignorant and pretend you’d forgotten, and just go, because Julius Caesar and Henry IV were riveting, haunting, thrilling productions and you really, really should see them! When you go, though, ask the people around you whether they’d ever been to the theatre before or regularly went, and the answer will be a depressingly frequent “All the time!”
You're probably right that people who don't go to theatre at all won't get to know about this (/maybe won't be interested anyway). I don't know in what ways they're promoting it or not so I'm not judging that. The idea of deciding based on the actual wealth of the person sounds fair but also very unrealistic - how would you prove that? You mentioned jobseekers or people from certain districts - not sure how reliable that criterion would be. That could also rule out students or perhaps at least foreign students - and while I realize that is another potentially controversial debate, I don't think closing up is a good idea. So yes while such schemes would be valuable, so are the young people ones I believe. It might not be people who don't go to theatre at all, but maybe some who have seen something more commercial, saved up to see their favourite performer or musical and wouldn't do so to just branch out and try something new; it might open them up to a totally new way of staging plays. I am of course looking at it from a very selfish point of view: these schemes benefit me so I like them, haha. I go to theatre a lot, I have studied it and want to pursue a career in it: but only these schemes, day seats etc. allow me to do so in London as well, where it truly inspires me (in my country theatre is perhaps 5 times cheaper, but also a bit rubbish). So yes you definitely do have a point and this scheme doesn't solve everything, but when I remember the stage when I was only discovering the world of theatre and it was bringing me so much, I think yes please, give that chance to other people as well. Haha thanks for the tip, might need to try it then, if it's really so good :-) EDIT: Looking back at this I realize I must seem exactly like the annoying "all the time" kind of person...but it's not like I had the money and spent it in a pub instead, basically all my money goes to discovering British theatre. I can clearly remember the phase before I studied it when I was starting to go to theatre as a teenager because it only cost about the equivalent of 2 pounds, those are the people I think it is great for. Trust me, you’re not being selfish or annoying – I don’t think anyone here will judge anyone else for wanting to see more theatre, quite the opposite! Besides, I think schemes like Entry Pass are essential a) for our finances and b) for sending a message to young people that theatre is accessible, and I never meant to say they should be scrapped. I agree with xanderl, though, I think they tend to be flawed and have no suitable follow-up for 25 and older. As my time with the cheap tickets draws to an end (less the chimes at midnight, more the chimes at brunch), I’ve started thinking about how the theatre could open up past 24, less for existing theatregoers and more for people who don’t catch the theatre bug so young, or can’t afford to.
With the income thing, I know it’s unrealistic, but there are ways around it. Some theatres have a “Pay What You Can” Scheme (I know the Arcola does, and some cinemas do too). It’s probably a scheme that’s easy to abuse if you’re a selfish cheapskate, but on the other hand it’s also a nice scheme for allowing people without the money to get to the theatre. The West End needs something like this which is open to all ages: less well-off Londoners, perhaps people with hefty travel bills, and students and young people. Alongside Entry Pass-esque ideas, this sends the message that theatre really isn’t just for the rich or the in-the-know, it’s for anyone who wants to find it.
In my theatrical utopia, I’d keep student and under 25 schemes more for the message they send out (Phantom, they’re not entitlement, they’re encouragement, unless they’re taken too far), but I’d also have these pay as you go schemes, also day seats for everyone, and hopefully make money back through full price ones. I’d hire economists and sociologists to tackle these issues practically. I know what I said was unrealistic, but I’m an idealist. You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. With enough cheap tickets for the financially needy of all ages (but nothing free, making theatre free literally devalues it), I’d hopefully have an audience that’s broad, enthusiastic, curious, willing to learn, and ultimately passionate about theatre, and that’s what we want.
I mean, there are also dozens of other issues which stop young and old getting into theatre – lack of decent touring, blogging (self-funding criticism with limited travel funds) making the regions under-represented, the London-centric financial irony of free seats in the third most expensive place to live in the world – but I read about schemes to lure new audiences in, all schemes focused on the young and all schemes focused on money, and I just think “NO! These won’t work! It’s more than money! Don’t lure the young in, lure people in! And keep them there!”
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 8:40:00 GMT
It is crucial that young people see theatre which is lively and addresses them directly.
This can be classical theatre, as in the marvellous example of Emma Rice and Tanika Gupta's A Midsummer Night's Dream at Shakespeare's Globe.
But on the other hand I despair that any normal young person would have any inclination to go to a Kenneth Branagh at the Garrick play.
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on Jun 18, 2016 9:58:51 GMT
You're probably right that people who don't go to theatre at all won't get to know about this (/maybe won't be interested anyway). I don't know in what ways they're promoting it or not so I'm not judging that. The idea of deciding based on the actual wealth of the person sounds fair but also very unrealistic - how would you prove that? You mentioned jobseekers or people from certain districts - not sure how reliable that criterion would be. That could also rule out students or perhaps at least foreign students - and while I realize that is another potentially controversial debate, I don't think closing up is a good idea. So yes while such schemes would be valuable, so are the young people ones I believe. It might not be people who don't go to theatre at all, but maybe some who have seen something more commercial, saved up to see their favourite performer or musical and wouldn't do so to just branch out and try something new; it might open them up to a totally new way of staging plays. I am of course looking at it from a very selfish point of view: these schemes benefit me so I like them, haha. I go to theatre a lot, I have studied it and want to pursue a career in it: but only these schemes, day seats etc. allow me to do so in London as well, where it truly inspires me (in my country theatre is perhaps 5 times cheaper, but also a bit rubbish). So yes you definitely do have a point and this scheme doesn't solve everything, but when I remember the stage when I was only discovering the world of theatre and it was bringing me so much, I think yes please, give that chance to other people as well. Haha thanks for the tip, might need to try it then, if it's really so good :-) EDIT: Looking back at this I realize I must seem exactly like the annoying "all the time" kind of person...but it's not like I had the money and spent it in a pub instead, basically all my money goes to discovering British theatre. I can clearly remember the phase before I studied it when I was starting to go to theatre as a teenager because it only cost about the equivalent of 2 pounds, those are the people I think it is great for. Trust me, you’re not being selfish or annoying – I don’t think anyone here will judge anyone else for wanting to see more theatre, quite the opposite! Besides, I think schemes like Entry Pass are essential a) for our finances and b) for sending a message to young people that theatre is accessible, and I never meant to say they should be scrapped. I agree with xanderl, though, I think they tend to be flawed and have no suitable follow-up for 25 and older. As my time with the cheap tickets draws to an end (less the chimes at midnight, more the chimes at brunch), I’ve started thinking about how the theatre could open up past 24, less for existing theatregoers and more for people who don’t catch the theatre bug so young, or can’t afford to.
With the income thing, I know it’s unrealistic, but there are ways around it. Some theatres have a “Pay What You Can” Scheme (I know the Arcola does, and some cinemas do too). It’s probably a scheme that’s easy to abuse if you’re a selfish cheapskate, but on the other hand it’s also a nice scheme for allowing people without the money to get to the theatre. The West End needs something like this which is open to all ages: less well-off Londoners, perhaps people with hefty travel bills, and students and young people. Alongside Entry Pass-esque ideas, this sends the message that theatre really isn’t just for the rich or the in-the-know, it’s for anyone who wants to find it.
In my theatrical utopia, I’d keep student and under 25 schemes more for the message they send out (Phantom, they’re not entitlement, they’re encouragement, unless they’re taken too far), but I’d also have these pay as you go schemes, also day seats for everyone, and hopefully make money back through full price ones. I’d hire economists and sociologists to tackle these issues practically. I know what I said was unrealistic, but I’m an idealist. You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. With enough cheap tickets for the financially needy of all ages (but nothing free, making theatre free literally devalues it), I’d hopefully have an audience that’s broad, enthusiastic, curious, willing to learn, and ultimately passionate about theatre, and that’s what we want.
I mean, there are also dozens of other issues which stop young and old getting into theatre – lack of decent touring, blogging (self-funding criticism with limited travel funds) making the regions under-represented, the London-centric financial irony of free seats in the third most expensive place to live in the world – but I read about schemes to lure new audiences in, all schemes focused on the young and all schemes focused on money, and I just think “NO! These won’t work! It’s more than money! Don’t lure the young in, lure people in! And keep them there!”
Yes I do agree with you that there are lots of other issues and things like the London centrism go far beyond this debate. I was defending the idea of the young people schemes which I am convinced help the situation - but yes there totally are other issues that ideally should be dealt with. Specifically about the Donmar thing, I've noticed since that on the website they ask people to partly back this project up - that makes it a bit questionable for me as well to be honest.
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on Jun 18, 2016 10:23:30 GMT
Unpopular opinion: Young people are not all angsty teenagers. But on the other hand I despair that any normal young person would have any inclination to go to a Kenneth Branagh at the Garrick play. I don't see the problem with wanting to see some of Britain's best actors on stage? Maybe I'm just middle-aged at heart then, but I thought Ken Branagh and Judi Dench in the Winter's Tale were sublime so I am super excited to hopefully see The Entertainer as well. Yes the direction was non-existent and the ensemble uneven, but they made it a brilliant showcase of two different acting styles at their best. In my opinion. Yes I am ultimately more stimulated by something at the Almeida (haven't seen the Globe production you mentioned unfortunately), but why not see and appreciate quality in the different components of the show? Should I prefer Dr Faustus to the Branagh stuff because it's rubbish but "edgy"? I don't think so.
|
|
448 posts
|
Post by ShoesForRent on Jun 18, 2016 11:12:42 GMT
Unpopular opinion: Young people are not all angsty teenagers. YES
|
|
2,859 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Jun 18, 2016 13:48:56 GMT
But on the other hand I despair that any normal young person would have any inclination to go to a Kenneth Branagh at the Garrick play. I saw Winter's Tale at the Garrick when I was 19 and I really loved it. And I'm quite normal, btw.
|
|
448 posts
|
Post by ShoesForRent on Jun 18, 2016 13:55:00 GMT
I was 19 also when I queued all morning for cancellation tickets at the Globe for Macbeth.. got a really good seat in the end- great production! Problem is here (in Israel) even the cheaper "student" tickets are pricy, but I do try and save up and go from time to time.. Most theatre here that I see is pretty morbid- I don't know what that makes me though ha!.
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on Jun 18, 2016 14:17:39 GMT
Problem is here (in Israel) even the cheaper "student" tickets are pricy, but I do try and save up and go from time to time.. Most theatre here that I see is pretty morbid- I don't know what that makes me though ha!. What is theatre in Israel like? Do you have any points of reference in Europe? Or is it totally different?
|
|
448 posts
|
Post by ShoesForRent on Jun 18, 2016 14:35:09 GMT
Problem is here (in Israel) even the cheaper "student" tickets are pricy, but I do try and save up and go from time to time.. Most theatre here that I see is pretty morbid- I don't know what that makes me though ha!. What is theatre in Israel like? Do you have any points of reference in Europe? Or is it totally different? I'm not sure what 'points of reference' means- I'm sorry. In general, straight theatre is somewhat popular- we have 1 major national company that has a home theatre in Tel Aviv and tours the country, about 6-7 medium theatre companies that have home theatres throughout and also tour and some fringe. All theatres (that I know of) are repertoire (as in there isn't a theatre that homes just the one show), and some of those larger theatre groups (I'd say around 3) also add in a musical to their repertoire once a year. We get an international tour come in once every 5-6 years roughly- so practically never. The quality isn't the best, at least of the musicals (as I said- the price often doesn't justify a straight play for me). There isn't a single degree course in musical theatre- not one. So the actors come from straight acting school programs and often don't sing very well. The dancers come from dancing only programs so the chorus isn't rich. All productions are translated (as in British or American)- we've had our first Hebrew musical premiere last year (it was terrible in my opinion) and the last original Hebrew musical debuted over 50 years ago. But we have some pretty good Israeli plays every year. (Musicals currently running are My Fair Lady- great, Evita- poor, Hair- very fun but dated and the message doesn't sit well in an Israeli audience where military service is mandatory by law to all, and new- West Side Story which I enjoyed from the first row a few weeks ago [all are classics as you can tell, we don't really get anything fresh] ) Also a private theatre company is bringing in Billy Elliott but ticket prices are insane I can't justify it. But it helps get my fix lol and every few years I save enough to fly out to London and binge
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Jun 18, 2016 14:46:56 GMT
But would you consider yourself a typical normal young person?
Not by the sounds of it!
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on Jun 18, 2016 15:01:34 GMT
What is theatre in Israel like? Do you have any points of reference in Europe? Or is it totally different? I'm not sure what 'points of reference' means- I'm sorry. In general, straight theatre is somewhat popular- we have 1 major national company that has a home theatre in Tel Aviv and tours the country, about 6-7 medium theatre companies that have home theatres throughout and also tour and some fringe. All theatres (that I know of) are repertoire (as in there isn't a theatre that homes just the one show), and some of those larger theatre groups (I'd say around 3) also add in a musical to their repertoire once a year. We get an international tour come in once every 5-6 years roughly- so practically never. The quality isn't the best, at least of the musicals (as I said- the price often doesn't justify a straight play for me). There isn't a single degree course in musical theatre- not one. So the actors come from straight acting school programs and often don't sing very well. The dancers come from dancing only programs so the chorus isn't rich. All productions are translated (as in British or American)- we've had our first Hebrew musical premiere last year (it was terrible in my opinion) and the last original Hebrew musical debuted over 50 years ago. But we have some pretty good Israeli plays every year. (Musicals currently running are My Fair Lady- great, Evita- poor, Hair- very fun but dated and the message doesn't sit well in an Israeli audience where military service is mandatory by law to all, and new- West Side Story which I enjoyed from the first row a few weeks ago [all are classics as you can tell, we don't really get anything fresh] ) Also a private theatre company is bringing in Billy Elliott but ticket prices are insane I can't justify it. But it helps get my fix lol and every few years I save enough to fly out to London and binge Interesting, I am from the Czech Republic and athough we have many more theatres, some of the issues are still the same - like the lack of musical theatre training. But I'm sure it's not so bad if they're able to put on Billy Elliot, that would never happen here.
|
|
448 posts
|
Post by ShoesForRent on Jun 18, 2016 15:26:50 GMT
I'm not sure what 'points of reference' means- I'm sorry. In general, straight theatre is somewhat popular- we have 1 major national company that has a home theatre in Tel Aviv and tours the country, about 6-7 medium theatre companies that have home theatres throughout and also tour and some fringe. All theatres (that I know of) are repertoire (as in there isn't a theatre that homes just the one show), and some of those larger theatre groups (I'd say around 3) also add in a musical to their repertoire once a year. We get an international tour come in once every 5-6 years roughly- so practically never. The quality isn't the best, at least of the musicals (as I said- the price often doesn't justify a straight play for me). There isn't a single degree course in musical theatre- not one. So the actors come from straight acting school programs and often don't sing very well. The dancers come from dancing only programs so the chorus isn't rich. All productions are translated (as in British or American)- we've had our first Hebrew musical premiere last year (it was terrible in my opinion) and the last original Hebrew musical debuted over 50 years ago. But we have some pretty good Israeli plays every year. (Musicals currently running are My Fair Lady- great, Evita- poor, Hair- very fun but dated and the message doesn't sit well in an Israeli audience where military service is mandatory by law to all, and new- West Side Story which I enjoyed from the first row a few weeks ago [all are classics as you can tell, we don't really get anything fresh] ) Also a private theatre company is bringing in Billy Elliott but ticket prices are insane I can't justify it. But it helps get my fix lol and every few years I save enough to fly out to London and binge Interesting, I am from the Czech Republic and athough we have many more theatres, some of the issues are still the same - like the lack of musical theatre training. But I'm sure it's not so bad if they're able to put on Billy Elliot, that would never happen here. According to a news article on it- they had a talent search for a few years before they found two boys who could dance the part. But I haven't seen it so I can't comment on the actual quality of the production/actors..
|
|
83 posts
|
Post by missbabs on Jun 18, 2016 17:04:16 GMT
I feel slightly guilty for writing this but...
I dislike the passion and over-enthusiasm shown by some theatregoers. I'm all for showing your appreciation and love of a performance and performers but an example of this would be Parade the other week. A group of fans would scream and clap wildly after every number and it jarred with the often harrowing nature of the production we were watching.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 17:36:18 GMT
I feel slightly guilty for writing this but... I dislike the passion and over-enthusiasm shown by some theatregoers. I'm all for showing your appreciation and love of a performance and performers but an example of this would be Parade the other week. A group of fans would scream and clap wildly after every number and it jarred with the often harrowing nature of the production we were watching. I completely agree with you on this one. Really annoys me.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Jun 18, 2016 22:25:48 GMT
I can to some extent understand the increase in the occurrence of standing ovations- when people are paying £80+ per ticket they want to feel they have seen something exceptional even when it is in reality quite mediocre.
|
|
2,051 posts
|
Post by infofreako on Jun 18, 2016 22:30:32 GMT
I can to some extent understand the increase in the occurrence of standing ovations- when people are paying £80+ per ticket they want to feel they have seen something exceptional even when it is in reality quite mediocre. But then the mediocre becomes ingrained as acceptable because its rewarded in such a way.
|
|