587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Jan 31, 2018 0:17:35 GMT
I hope duncan doesnt mind me quoting him from the Follies thread but this is absolutely what I was thinking: "Without getting into the in and outs of the quality of Follies and Amadeus, this to me just highlights the current paucity of ideas at the National. If you want to revive a show for an extended run bung it in the West End like War Horse - the National stages should be for new productions and innovation. I know some will say that by bringing in money from near sell outs with these productions that it will help fund lesser shows but it just doesn't sit right with me. Its trading on past glories when that's not what the National is to me." Add the transfer in of An Octaroon too. I don't want this to turn into another Rufus-bashing thread but I can't ever remember the NT bringing back shows in quick succession like this (no doubt someone will give examples to prove me wtong). There seems to be fewer productions on at any one time and, as has been mentioned previously, barely 'in rep' at all but scheduled in blocks. It's very disappointing. |
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jan 31, 2018 0:29:50 GMT
The National do bring back productions, This House and War Horse both had return engagements for example as did The History Boys. It's no different to them transferring shows to the West End.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Jan 31, 2018 7:09:26 GMT
Absolutely right. Going further back, David Hare's stunning RACING DEMON in its day played all three of the NT's spaces and never transferred to the West End -- it was more useful for the Nash to keep it in house. Not the end of the world especially in today's parlous financial times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 7:44:20 GMT
I suppose the difference is that the previous returns were of new plays that turned out to be more popular than expected when originally programmed and for which there was still a big audience who hadn't been able to get a ticket. Whereas this is a return of new productions of old favourites. I see the economic argument for it but it does feel a bit tired and safe, and perhaps like a lack of confidence in programming new stuff.
|
|
378 posts
|
Post by Ade on Jan 31, 2018 8:15:54 GMT
I can’t say I have too much of a problem with it as long as it doesn’t get out of hand, but I think a single revival of an earlier production during this time of year when people need dragging out of their homes isn’t a bad idea if it then helps fund new works at other points.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 8:20:23 GMT
It's show *business*; if revisiting Amadeus and Follies can make up for the Salome/Common/George triple-failure, then by all means GO for it. I appreciate there might be a middle-ground, but honestly it just feels like we moan when RuNo does something risky, and we moan when he does something safe. Another NT show that returned to the stage of the Southbank rather than transferring to the West End: London Road.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 10:05:01 GMT
His Dark Materials, Coram Boy etc., there was a time under Hytner when it seemed as though they were going to squeeze every last drop out of productions.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jan 31, 2018 10:14:56 GMT
It's show *business*; if revisiting Amadeus and Follies can make up for the Salome/Common/George triple-failure, then by all means GO for it. Steady on! I'm not sure we should let them off that easily. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 10:36:24 GMT
Haha! I meant financially, not necessarily emotionally or artistically.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 10:39:59 GMT
His Dark Materials, Coram Boy etc., there was a time under Hytner when it seemed as though they were going to squeeze every last drop out of productions. Still squeezing every drop out of new works though - I dunno, that just feels different to me than bringing back revivals for a second bite of the cherry. Obvs I see the financial argument for it though - if they are good productions and there's an audience there, why not? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 11:20:38 GMT
“It will come back to the National, and hopefully beyond the National, but we haven’t got any concrete plans. We haven’t got any dates yet but it will probably be this time next year,” Dominic Cooke told The Stage.
"and hopefully beyond the National" - doesn't necessarily mean the West End.
|
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jan 31, 2018 11:20:56 GMT
An Octoroon having a further life at the Dorfman doesn’t bother me either as it would have been seen by a limited number of people at the Orange Tree so this transfer means more people can see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 11:44:23 GMT
I think it's two different things anyway- things like An Octoroon or say stuff that went in the Shed like Iphigenia in Splott were hugely successful, but due to where they were staged (smaller fringe venue/regionally) only seen by a handful of people. Bringing things like them into the NT is to my mind something the NT SHOULD be doing- pulling in the best of elsewhere and putting in (literally, figuraritvely) on the National Stage(s). To my mind also it's an artistic choice of 'we want these pieces of work to be listed in NT history' etc etc
Meanwhile chucking a War Horse, or a History boy or an Imelda back on stage for a bit brings in the money and the audiences. And if that finances the artistic remit, and makes up for some erm shortcomings why the hell not. Also, what's so bad about 'giving them what they want' either in the sense of repeat audiences, or people who didn't make it the first time.
|
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 31, 2018 15:15:11 GMT
They brought back the wonderful Guys and Dolls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 15:32:32 GMT
And the wonderful Sweeney Todd. Yes, it’s been done before...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jan 31, 2018 15:41:32 GMT
They brought back the wonderful Guys and Dolls. They brought back The Mysteries in 2000 and Jack Shepherd said appearing in it felt like one of those Legends soccer games where old players appear in exhibition matches. I wonder how ticket sales are for the returning Amadeus ? I mean I wonder how many performances they can do before everyone who really wanted to see last time has seen it this time and audiences drop off. What they used to do quite a lot under previous AD’s was take Cottesloe hit shows and transfer them to the bigger spaces. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 15:56:02 GMT
I wonder how ticket sales are for the returning Amadeus ? I mean I wonder how many performances they can do before everyone who really wanted to see last time has seen it this time and audiences drop off. For the random dates I looked at just now, the central block in the stalls has sold well but there is lots of availability in the side blocks of the stalls and in the circle. Includes good availability for this week so this is not the sell-out it was last time. I would expect offers to start popping up. So the answer to "how many performances" is however many they did last time round. I don't have a problem with them reviving their own shows - particularly this and Follies where the resources and staging would make it difficult for a West End theatre. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 17:13:31 GMT
His Dark Materials, Coram Boy etc., there was a time under Hytner when it seemed as though they were going to squeeze every last drop out of productions. Still squeezing every drop out of new works though - I dunno, that just feels different to me than bringing back revivals for a second bite of the cherry. Obvs I see the financial argument for it though - if they are good productions and there's an audience there, why not? They’re both adaptations though (as are War Horse and Network), which is a quicker way of getting yourself a hit new play from scratch. I’d put them with revivals as having a better chance of success. Yes, they fail at times but the odds are more favourable. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 17:19:05 GMT
They brought back the wonderful Guys and Dolls. They brought back The Mysteries in 2000 and Jack Shepherd said appearing in it felt like one of those Legends soccer games where old players appear in exhibition matches. I wonder how ticket sales are for the returning Amadeus ? I mean I wonder how many performances they can do before everyone who really wanted to see last time has seen it this time and audiences drop off. What they used to do quite a lot under previous AD’s was take Cottesloe hit shows and transfer them to the bigger spaces. I was very grateful for the returning Mysteries as I’d seen it on Channel Four (yes, there was a time when TV would broadcast eight hours of actual theatre!) whilst a student and thought I’d never get the chance to see it live. Mixed views on on trying to upscale Cottesloe productions though; This House worked great but something like Sweeney Todd was totally lost in the Lyttelton when I saw the transfer. |
|
378 posts
|
Post by Ade on Jan 31, 2018 18:09:23 GMT
I wonder how ticket sales are for the returning Amadeus ? I mean I wonder how many performances they can do before everyone who really wanted to see last time has seen it this time and audiences drop off. For the random dates I looked at just now, the central block in the stalls has sold well but there is lots of availability in the side blocks of the stalls and in the circle. Includes good availability for this week so this is not the sell-out it was last time. I would expect offers to start popping up. So the answer to "how many performances" is however many they did last time round. I don't have a problem with them reviving their own shows - particularly this and Follies where the resources and staging would make it difficult for a West End theatre. While I did say I agree with it earlier, the only thing I would say is that I don’t necessarily agree with it something being a Travelex production one year and then coming back the following year at non-Travelex prices, as has been the case for Amadeus (and probably the reason seats are still available). Presumably (particularly for both Amadeus and Follies which had appeals for extra funding) most of that investment was recouped in that initial run and therefore they don’t have the added expense of set builds etc second time around, and have even less of an excuse of putting up the prices. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2018 18:51:49 GMT
For the random dates I looked at just now, the central block in the stalls has sold well but there is lots of availability in the side blocks of the stalls and in the circle. Includes good availability for this week so this is not the sell-out it was last time. I would expect offers to start popping up. So the answer to "how many performances" is however many they did last time round. I don't have a problem with them reviving their own shows - particularly this and Follies where the resources and staging would make it difficult for a West End theatre. While I did say I agree with it earlier, the only thing I would say is that I don’t necessarily agree with it something being a Travelex production one year and then coming back the following year at non-Travelex prices, as has been the case for Amadeus (and probably the reason seats are still available). Presumably (particularly for both Amadeus and Follies which had appeals for extra funding) most of that investment was recouped in that initial run and therefore they don’t have the added expense of set builds etc second time around, and have even less of an excuse of putting up the prices. For context I believe there's been some loss/reduction in the Travelex funding- and I don't know exactly how that system works, but obviously it would be the sponsors deciding some of that not just the NT they're still fairly expensive to run week on week even without the production costs etc. |
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jan 31, 2018 22:47:07 GMT
Quite interestingly, "Guys and Dolls" in particular was revived each time to save the National's finances. Times don't change. Nothing wrong with doing it either - rather see them help themselves out of trouble then begging for handouts they won't get. Plus I get to see Follies again. Win-win. It's no different to a West End transfer, letting audiences who didn't see it the first time and fill the coffers. Do other theatres ever bring back successful productions if they don't transfer, The Brothers Size, Happy Days and Yerma at the Young Vic comes to mind as well as Di and Viv and Rose which started at the Hampstead Downstairs then moved upstairs a year later plus The Lorax at the Old Vic. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2018 0:47:03 GMT
the only thing I would say is that I don’t necessarily agree with it something being a Travelex production one year and then coming back the following year at non-Travelex prices, as has been the case for Amadeus Why not? I prefer Travelex to sponsor four new productions each year. I don't want them to sponsor just three new productions and a revival of Amadeus. |
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Feb 1, 2018 2:47:08 GMT
Given their recent run of form on new material, I have no problem with Follies coming back.
|
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Feb 1, 2018 5:22:49 GMT
I still really wish that, rather than reviving recent or past successes and only touring occasionally - or now, as is more often the case, doing live relays to cinemas nationwide - the NT would act as a receiving house for at least some of all the many deserving regional revivals and new productions. I'm not, of course, claiming that those in London and the south-east aren't already spoilt for choice but wouldn't far more two-way traffic work for everyone, and on both sides of the curtain?
|
|
