751 posts
|
Post by horton on May 1, 2016 18:09:13 GMT
Do we really think people wouldn't understand "the moving stage broke" or "the speakers on stage broke" or "the music technology computers broke"? Bull!
Most contracts these days have a confidentiality clause for anything that happens in the rehearsal room or backstage. I imagine cast have to keep their mouths shut, but if some nonsense story was put out, there would probably be some staff who would reveal that a lie had been told. By saying nothing, at least they can't be accused of lying.
But it maes the truth a little more apparent...
|
|
3,057 posts
|
Post by ali973 on May 1, 2016 18:37:33 GMT
Do we really think people wouldn't understand "the moving stage broke" or "the speakers on stage broke" or "the music technology computers broke"? Bull! Most contracts these days have a confidentiality clause for anything that happens in the rehearsal room or backstage. I imagine cast have to keep their mouths shut, but if some nonsense story was put out, there would probably be some staff who would reveal that a lie had been told. By saying nothing, at least they can't be accused of lying. But it maes the truth a little more apparent... Agreed. That is to say if the cast knows at all. Whatever happened could have happened behind closed doors. All of us who have jobs know that there's sh*t going on at the workplace that we are not aware of. I'm sure similar rules could be applied to an acting company. Some might know, some might not. |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on May 1, 2016 18:40:52 GMT
How would the cast not know? They were on stage with her.
|
|
|
|
Post by d'James on May 1, 2016 18:41:22 GMT
You only seem to be seeing it from your point of view and what you would do. I honestly believe a lot of people would rather have the refund than see the show regardless of how far they'd travelled, and yes without Sheridan I'm sure some people would rather go and find a posh restaurant or a luxury cinema than sit through the show. Some people would give it a go, others would not. I'm basing my opinion on the results of surveys into theatregoing behaviour. Most people go to the theatre once a year or less frequently, and do it for special occasions. They're not going to have an attitude of "Never mind that the show we've been looking forward to for months has been cancelled. We'll just have to try to find something else to do, even though we have no idea what else there is to do because we hadn't planned for this." It easy to sit there and say "they could just do something else", but do you really believe that people who are making their one trip to the theatre that year will accept a cinema or a when-they-can-be-squeezed-in table at a restaurant as a substitute, even if they can find one? Apparently you do, but I don't personally know of anyone who thinks that way. Almost all of my theatregoing is based on going to see people rather than shows. Not celebrities, because I've never believed that fame is related to talent or ability, but that doesn't lessen the disappointment when things don't work out as I'd hoped. And yes, sometimes I am disappointed. The difference between you and me is that I don't believe that what I want gives me an entitlement to demand anything more from the producers than they're actually selling. If I don't get exactly the cast I want I shrug it off and see what the cast I get can do. I don't storm off in a fit of pique. Please don't put words in my mouth or insinuate how I would act. I have never believed I'm 'entitled to demand' anything from anyone and I'm not to 'storm off'. However, if I was offered a refund when I expressed my disappointment I would seriously consider it if I was in a town with lots to offer. Yes I do believe people might make that choice. I would certainly consider it. If I'd paid £150 a ticket for two of us to see Glenn Close or Sheridan Smith or whoever, and they weren't on and I was offered a refund it would be very appealing. We could have a slap up meal with champagne and still have money left over. Yes, they may have been looking forward to the show, or they may only have been looking forward to seeing the star. That is their choice to do with their money as they will and if they were offered a refund and chose to accept it, I certainly would not judge them. I'm trying to think of an example of a show where I would take the refund but no recent ones spring to mind. Let's say Funny Girl had had an actress in the lead role who I was desperate to see in Manchester where I'd booked a hotel. If that actress was off and I was offered a refund, I would take it because I really don't want to see the show and there's tonnes to do there. I would absolutely have the same attitude whether it was my one trip a year or one of many. Actually I've thought of another one. I split my time between Dorset and London. A few weeks ago I drove from Dorset to Oxford to see an actress I'm a big fan of. Luckily she was on, but if she hadn't been and I'd been offered a refund, I would've definitely taken it (even moreso after knowing what the play was like in the end haha) because there's so much to do. These are extremely rare situations because more often than not, people will go to see the show rather than a particular performer. For example a family outing to a show is likely to be a specific show rather than a person. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 18:58:52 GMT
Has anyone else here ever seen an actor drunk on stage? I have. She eventually passed out on stage and brought the show to an early end. (There was only the finale left, and by the time she'd been rescued from the place where she'd fallen over it was too late to continue.) But given that I don't think I'd ever seen her sober there wasn't any difference in her performance to spot. Hearing bumps and crashes from backstage as she walked into things was par for the course. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 1, 2016 19:41:28 GMT
Other people who have been have never said she plays the first bit drunk or stumbles over the lines. I think if there are a few who feel the same , something must have been up. The poster on here said they felt like it, then heard the people at the back shout 'put the understudy on', so without sharing and talking to them, the other people felt it too. I think the lack of support from her co-stars speaks volumes too, along with the producers. If it were all made up, you could bet that they would be quick to jump to her defence. Wouldn't they at least disclose the problem, say Darius, wouldn't he put it out there that the safety curtain was acting up? The poster also said they spoke to front of house and they said that's how she always plays it! She was back on the next day, with nothing out of the ordinary. I doubt it occurred to anyone at the time that it would be interpreted this way and picked up by the press, which is why they didn't provide more details in order to forestall it. It's pretty pointless now as people will believe what they want. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 20:17:15 GMT
Once went onstage with someone so drunk that they could barely move. The performance they gave that night was much better than usual.
Go figure....
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 23:10:42 GMT
Mail Online now quoting unnamed theatre sources who, if what they're saying is true, appear to have broken ranks...
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on May 1, 2016 23:23:10 GMT
link?
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on May 1, 2016 23:27:42 GMT
Just go to Mail Online. They must feel pretty secure about what they're saying.
|
|
19,797 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 1, 2016 23:32:49 GMT
Wow. Damning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 23:45:19 GMT
I don't know what is more hilarious
People paying £123 for stalls to see this show
Or her picture from her 30th birthday which she posted with her baps out
You just cannot buy elegance and grace and class
Can you?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2016 23:48:51 GMT
Given the problems the producers faced at Menier when Sheridan had to pull out and the offer to provide transfer tickets, they may have decided it simpler and ultimately less painful to pull the performance than go with an understudy part way through if that was the alternate solution. If there was a casting problem then, whilst unusual, they have opted for what is potential the least damaging outcome. No one knows what actually happened (yet). With around £12-14m in advance bookings you do all you can to avoid losing the main star for more than one night if that was the problem. Hopefully lessons learnt by all and we now see 6 months of happy customers. Please PLEASE 12-14 million in advance booking Unlikely Halve that At least |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 4:29:16 GMT
The recent Daily Mail article about what "allegedly" happened backstage annoyed me. Especially when an audience member said that she was drunk because she grabbed a dancer's groin during the Cornet song even though she did that on Tuesday and has done it before when I asked friends so clearly it is an acting choice for her and the dancers. Also, the fact that whomever this source is backstage, they claim Sheridan physically tried and struggled to lift the curtain to get onstage again, well that is a load of rubbish. Anyone who has seen the show will know that the curtain is quite literally a very thin, flowing bit of mesh, even if hammered, she wouldn't of struggled to get that curtain up. And Parsley is right, reportedly it is sold around £5 Millon -£6 Million in advance bookings, which is amazing considering it is basically being sold on Sheridan's name and it is not a hugely expensive show to run compared to many other musicals in London right now.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 6:47:27 GMT
It makes upsetting reading... I have always enjoyed her performances on stage. For me she has that special star quality that's quite rare. I imagine she is finding things difficult at the moment- her father's health, her own personal problems, and possibly finding herself caught in a contract she doesn't feel 100% happy about. It's no wonder she feels everything and everyone is against her. I hope she is soon feeling better.
(I took the lifting of the curtain story- if true- to mean the heavy stage curtains which were presumably lowered once the decision had been made to halt the performance.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 7:26:53 GMT
I was a bit reluctant to post it as I know some people are hugely offended by the Mail in general, and by stories about this in particular. Plus if it's true, I too think it's a sad story and wouldn't want to be seen to be gloating in any way. On the other hand, if the theatregoing world is being spun a line and audience members who reported their experiences that night were wrongly taking a kicking, then it's fair to report the other side. So it's a difficult situation. But yes, as mallardo says, can be found online relatively easily. (It was their top story around midnight.) And for what it's worth, I wish Sheridan Smith nothing but the best in having to deal with all this publicity. Whatever the truth is - libel or health issue - having a story like this hit the news right now must be devastating. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 8:38:01 GMT
Other people who have been have never said she plays the first bit drunk or stumbles over the lines. I think if there are a few who feel the same , something must have been up. The poster on here said they felt like it, then heard the people at the back shout 'put the understudy on', so without sharing and talking to them, the other people felt it too. I think the lack of support from her co-stars speaks volumes too, along with the producers. If it were all made up, you could bet that they would be quick to jump to her defence. Wouldn't they at least disclose the problem, say Darius, wouldn't he put it out there that the safety curtain was acting up? The poster also said they spoke to front of house and they said that's how she always plays it! She was back on the next day, with nothing out of the ordinary. I doubt it occurred to anyone at the time that it would be interpreted this way and picked up by the press, which is why they didn't provide more details in order to forestall it. It's pretty pointless now as people will believe what they want. I think this is a very valid point. To someone who has never seen the show before, they might misinterpret Fanny's tom-foolery for something else. She fails to keep in time with the other dancers and accidentally walks into the wall after auditioning for Flo Ziegfeld. As for an Irish accent, I've never tried to maintain a Jewish American accent for up to three hours every night, eight shows a week: I imagine it's not always easy. I know she's an actress and it's her job to be able to do it, but she is still a person, and humans do make mistakes (the horror!) nobody was accusing Catherine Tate of unprofessionalism when her accent twanged with Australian. The trouble with these things is that all it takes is one disgruntled and usually extremely negative audience member to get irate and blame this on what they think they've heard. The seed is planted. Then another one begins to sprout by agreeing. Then shoots appear. And before you know it, bam. A smear campaign is born. |
|
16 posts
|
Post by artemis on May 2, 2016 8:52:57 GMT
I heard from insiders there was a hushed up incident during the Menier run. A very sad situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 8:57:15 GMT
That's the odd thing, I didn't think it was that hushed up. I remember comments at the time that people thought she was drunk at a menier performance.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on May 2, 2016 9:01:30 GMT
It is upsetting but exactly as I called it earlier- the show couldn't continue because she was causing such disturbance and would not let the understudy go on. Probably threats of agents getting involved, too.
The curtain business could just mean she tried to do it but was prevented by cast and/ or crew.
There is bound to be some exaggeration in the way the Mail describes it, but the seed of the truth is there. So to all those who sniffily insist it was just a technical hitch and nothing to do with the actor- well, the story is bound to come out...
|
|
4 posts
|
Post by naomi1248 on May 2, 2016 9:03:11 GMT
After seeing the show on Saturday night, I find it such a shame that this is the type of press surrounding Sheridan. I have no idea what went on on Thursday, but on Saturday night she gave the best performance I have ever seen on stage (on a par with Imelda). She has got charisma and stage presence in bucket loads, delivered every line to perfection and you could tell the whole audience fell in love with her.
Whatever happened on Thursday, I hope she is ok and knows that despite this negative press, her performances are still appreciated and adored by the audience.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on May 2, 2016 9:03:30 GMT
Whatever happens I think this may be the last time for a while she has a west end role. Once you get known as unreliable you tend not work.
|
|
16 posts
|
Post by artemis on May 2, 2016 9:05:39 GMT
That's the odd thing, I didn't think it was that hushed up. I remember comments at the time that people thought she was drunk at a menier performance. It was hushed in the sense that the wider public never found out ,but yes the audience knew |
|
19,797 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 2, 2016 10:00:01 GMT
The Mirror are reporting that she's made her Twitter account private on Friday following the previous nights incident which we all know is rubbish. She did that months ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on May 2, 2016 11:09:02 GMT
Back in the old days (as in the old forum), I commented on Ms Smith's behaviour at a big theatrical event at which I was working and she was performing which makes it all too easy for me to believe what has been reported.
|
|
