1,052 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by David J on Sept 16, 2024 18:18:57 GMT
I've seen this "I can do whatever I want" attitude for years in media. Especially when it comes to established properties
So suddenly you find real world politics hamfisted into escapist fantasy where it has no business being. It turns into badly writen wish fulfilment for the writers and a minority of people
Which tends to mean the general public are turned off and won't pay for such rubbish. And companies are now starting to feel the pinch when their target customers walk away
Whether they are aware what the creators they hire are doing or support it, they're now realising that these people are a detriment.
|
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Sept 16, 2024 18:25:38 GMT
It's a bit strange to include stuff that's not relevant to the text in the first place. A Midsummer's Night Dream is a comedy not social commentary.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 16, 2024 18:31:58 GMT
Directors have the right to direct as they see fit.
But venues also have the right to draw lines in the sand.
I very much doubt that the venue management have acted without good reason as they are the ones who will face the financial cost of this disaster.
If the creative team did include material that was not highlighted earlier in the process then the fault lies entirely with them.
No theatre boss is going to stifle artistic expression unless they had no other choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 16, 2024 18:48:40 GMT
The conflict is referenced in a rap that one of the rude mechanicals performed as part of the ‘play within the play’ in A Midsummer Night’s Dream. A rap ? Ha ha. How old fashioned. That used to be a feature of Shakespeare productions in the 1990s when middle-aged middle-class directors wanted to appear down with the kids. Setting the play within a drug culture like the Manchester club scene is an interesting idea, there has been a production before set in the San Francisco 1967 Summer of Love which also sounds appropriate. But I've no interest in hearing the creatives view on the Gaza conflict because I 100% know what that is already. I was recently at a play reading at the Globe where the actors treated us to their own personal views on Critical Race Theory (again 100% predictable) - there was quite an exodus at the interval. |
|
19,650 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Sept 16, 2024 18:53:02 GMT
I’m pleased it got cancelled. Not for the theatre but just for the sake of your normal ticket buying punter. The stretch of the director to assume that this was ok is beyond belief. Manchester has a huge Jewish community. What were audience members from that community supposed to think and feel when unexpectedly lambasted by this political opinion at what they thought was a Shakespeare play about fairies? Disgusting. Whatever your opinion of the conflict it’s disgusting, just as it would have been if it had a pro Israel message.
|
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Sept 16, 2024 19:20:12 GMT
I’m pleased it got cancelled. Not for the theatre but just for the sake of your normal ticket buying punter. The stretch of the director to assume that this was ok is beyond belief. Manchester has a huge Jewish community. What were audience members from that community supposed to think and feel when unexpectedly lambasted by this political opinion at what they thought was a Shakespeare play? Disgusting. Whatever your opinion of the conflict it’s disgusting. I'm all for theatre with social commentary, some of the best plays feature it but I do think it has to be in the right context. Something like The Merchant of Venice 1936 for example sets the play to the Battle of Cable Street but it's communicated very clearly to anyone thinking of booking that this isn't the original staging. |
|
2,476 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Sept 16, 2024 19:46:54 GMT
Article is behind a paywall. You can access 3 articles a month free by signing up. Main points: Multiple sources close to the production say issues were related to references to the Israel-Gaza war that had been inserted into this new version of Shakespeare’s play, which relocated the story to Manchester’s clubbing scene. Inclusion of "Free Palestine" graffiti, daubed on a piece of set. The conflict is referenced in a rap that one of the rude mechanicals performed as part of the ‘play within the play’ in A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Above are not confirmed by the theatre and Stef O’Driscol was not reachable. REX spokesperson “ At the Royal Exchange Theatre we want to work with artists who address complex issues. Sadly, in A Midsummer Night’s Dream a number of challenges occurred which led to a decision to cancel the production – including injuries, a delayed technical week and changes late in the process. Despite our best efforts we were unable to get the show on as planned and took the difficult decision to cancel the production. Every effort was made to get the production on stage," O’Driscoll and many of the cast members were keen to stand by the content of the production, causing a dispute between the company and management: the "disagreement" referenced earlier this week by union Equity. Equity also confirmed its members would be paid and would not be "out of pocket" following the cancellation of the show. Quote: ”Equity has contacted the theatre requesting an urgent meeting to discuss the reasons for cancellation, the impact on our members and the steps being taken now. We remain very concerned about this situation and its impact on our members." Hmmmm. Sounds like it was multiple issues. But a reference in a rap and a piece of graffiti isn't massively excessive and I'd be surprised of it was just that which got it cancelled |
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Sept 16, 2024 20:03:50 GMT
"Don't Mention The War!" Fawlty Towers
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Sept 16, 2024 20:04:22 GMT
When I first heard of the cancellation, I thought, oh no, all those disappointed school groups, which given the text and timing made sense to me. Then I read about the production and ended up confused about who it was meant to appeal to. Really surprising that the content of the show wasn't known until the internal preview and that both sides were willing to pull the plug rather than fix it. I picture all those actors who were probably excited when they got the job, trudging home.
Financially what a disaster for the Manchester Royal Exchange, especially when they cancelled very late on their production of Red Velvet two years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by marob on Sept 16, 2024 21:19:43 GMT
Much as I had reservations about this production, I was looking to book one of the banquette tickets to give it a go. It was clear from the beginning that this wasn’t your typical Dream, followed by some non-traditional casting and a rather long list of content warnings.
But I think the theatre should shoulder the lion’s share of the blame here. We’re regularly told how expensive theatre is to produce, so how do you commission - and fund - a radical reinterpretation yet apparently not know what the content is going to be until a first preview? If they truly didn’t know the content then that’s negligence on their part.
I don’t think a play should be pulled because it might cause offence. Ever.
So now they’ll be dark for most of the autumn, with a Bruntwood play they’re only staging for three days followed by the pools winner musical at the end of November that looks like it’s selling even worse that Dream did. Looks like a colossal balls up all round.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 16, 2024 21:33:20 GMT
We don't know that it was cancelled because it might have caused offence.
Nor do we know when the material said to be at the heart of the issue was made part of the production.
Theatres don't cancel whole productions lightly.
It comes with a financial and reputational cost.
There have been many radical versions of Dreams over the years. There will be more in the future.
But it is not the play to use as a platform for the sort of political grandstanding that is alleged to be at the root of this. Artistically it makes no sense. It has no connection to the text.
If the problematic content was not signposted from the outset then the theatre had every right to ask questions and ask for changes. They won't have done so lightly.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigsymalone on Sept 16, 2024 21:33:40 GMT
The director was contracted to do a production of A Midsummer Nights Dream by William Shakespeare and that’s the play that the management sold to the public. If she delivered a different text with provocative political content she has broken the terms of her contract. To go ahead would put the management in bad faith with their ticket buyers. They had every right to ask for changes and she was contractually bound to make them. She is entirely responsible for this situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by marob on Sept 16, 2024 22:28:39 GMT
Some of the marketing is in the very first post of this thread. It was absolutely not sold as your typical AMSND, probably why it hadn’t sold very well.
The last MEN article richey posted says that the director’s interpretation was clear from the outset and they’d followed it all the way through the process. So how does it get to the point where actors are stood on stage in costumes before someone at the theatre questions it.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 16, 2024 22:31:23 GMT
Because they placed too much trust in the creative team?
|
|
2,476 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Sept 16, 2024 22:58:31 GMT
Reading the MEN article, it seems the issue was that song referring to trans rights and the Palestine/Israel situation, and that bit of graffiti
The cast is said to be behind rhe director as well, so it sounds like there was a dispute between the whole creative production and the theatre.
I've seen several different interpretations of the 'play within a play' scene to end the play, so I wouldn't say it's massively change the text
I'm sure more will come out from it over the next few weeks. It seems really weird for the theatre to lose thousands of pounds over one song at the end of a 'radical ' reimagining of MSND
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 17, 2024 6:27:40 GMT
We’re regularly told how expensive theatre is to produce, so how do you commission - and fund - a radical reinterpretation It is odd though, pro-Gaza stuff isn't in the slightest bit radical, it's received high-status opinion more-or-less throughout the arts establishment and it's hard to imagine the theatre producers objecting to it. A pro-Israel production on the other hand would be genuinely radical and cause all sorts of problems for them. This situation reminds me of when Emma Rice was fired by the Globe - they employ someone whose style of work is very well known and they get the cache of employing someone "edgy" and then after they deliver something entirely in line with their past work it turns out they don't like it after all. |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Sept 17, 2024 12:28:10 GMT
A few posts back someone mentioned 'Red Velvet'. I'd been looking forward to that - it sounded interesting. What happened there leading to it's cancellation? As I remember during the very first season, they pulled a play, or at least postponed it - was it Gilbert Penfold? But in this instance there was plenty of notice. Oh how exciting was that first season! I was lucky to be part of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Sept 17, 2024 12:53:45 GMT
It's ironic that an early announcement about the season called the Dream a 'gentle comedy'.
|
|
3,426 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Sept 17, 2024 16:04:02 GMT
The conflict is referenced in a rap that one of the rude mechanicals performed as part of the ‘play within the play’ in A Midsummer Night’s Dream. A rap ? Ha ha. How old fashioned. That used to be a feature of Shakespeare productions in the 1990s when middle-aged middle-class directors wanted to appear down with the kids. Setting the play within a drug culture like the Manchester club scene is an interesting idea, there has been a production before set in the San Francisco 1967 Summer of Love which also sounds appropriate. But I've no interest in hearing the creatives view on the Gaza conflict because I 100% know what that is already. I was recently at a play reading at the Globe where the actors treated us to their own personal views on Critical Race Theory (again 100% predictable) - there was quite an exodus at the interval. I've never really understood why some actors feel they need to lecture the rest of us on their views anyway. |
|
2,241 posts
|
Post by richey on Sept 17, 2024 16:44:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 17, 2024 18:01:35 GMT
We are only getting one side of all of this so far.
There is clearly a lot more to this. It could well be that the relationship between director and management had fractured over a long period of time and this final row broke it completely.
I am glad that everyone is being paid for the run.
I genuinely don't believe that the theatre would have taken such a dramatic step without thinking it through and seeing no other alternative.
|
|
75 posts
|
Post by claireyfairy1 on Sept 17, 2024 19:15:24 GMT
I actually think it’s abhorrent to cancel an entire production because a director wouldn’t capitulate to your censorship. God forbid we support trans or Palestinian people in our art. Perhaps they’ll walk their decision back like Home had to after they cancelled their event earlier this year.
|
|
2,476 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Sept 17, 2024 19:19:15 GMT
We are only getting one side of all of this so far. There is clearly a lot more to this. It could well be that the relationship between director and management had fractured over a long period of time and this final row broke it completely. I am glad that everyone is being paid for the run. I genuinely don't believe that the theatre would have taken such a dramatic step without thinking it through and seeing no other alternative. The theatre have been approached for comment It was a first time production from the director for the theatre so hard to see it being a long term fracture! |
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Sept 17, 2024 19:48:01 GMT
A bit more information, including quote from Salo: www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/sep/17/manchester-theatre-cancels-shows-entire-run-over-gaza-and-trans-rights-referencesFrom this it sounds like they were clear from the get go what they would be including in the show. In this respect it sounds like members of the audience (or those hearing about the production from others; we've seen this happen in other theatres since the latest Israel/Gaza conflict began) decided to complain/get the production censored. Hats off to the cast/creatives for sticking by their creation. And to Equity for making sure they got paid. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 17, 2024 20:02:40 GMT
We are only getting one side of all of this so far. There is clearly a lot more to this. It could well be that the relationship between director and management had fractured over a long period of time and this final row broke it completely. I am glad that everyone is being paid for the run. I genuinely don't believe that the theatre would have taken such a dramatic step without thinking it through and seeing no other alternative. The theatre have been approached for comment It was a first time production from the director for the theatre so hard to see it being a long term fracture! I meant through the production period. Not over years. |
|
