|
|
Post by craig on Dec 13, 2021 15:41:16 GMT
Considering very little is selling at the moment plus sondheim is not the 'housewifes choice' good luck to them. Does anyone know how Company is selling on Broadway? I remember it being quite a hot ticket in London, though certainly possible to get tickets to most performances quite easily. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 13, 2021 16:15:48 GMT
There will be pushback. The movement supporting a need for cultural change has done, overall, a huge net good. Criminals have been brought to justice and hearts and minds are being won. As with anything good, there are those who damage the message, either intentionally through sabotage or accidentally through becoming a zealot for the cause, leading to increasingly extreme actions/views. Just look at religion. Social justice is no different. What was initially about righting obvious wrongs and imbalances in society is being overtaken by a culture of a need to look for - or even create wrongs that need to be "fixed". People who are beginning to realise that anyone, anytime, can become a target if their views don't perfectly match the consensus - especially the social media consensus. In short, it has become everything it is fighting against. Inevitably, what happens is the (quiet) sensible middle pushes back against it, and so much great work is undone. I've said before, whilst I personally don't agree with Gilliam's views, he has said and done nothing illegal, he hasn't incited hatred, he has just given his opinion in the same way that lots of people who feel the opposite have given theirs. This culture of "everyone who disagrees with my extreme liberal views is evil" has to stop, or there will be a big swing back the other way when people rebel against it. Spoken as a mixed race liberal. What an intelligent and marvellously worded post. People only know what they have lived or been exposed too. Whilst ignorance is no defence or excuse for outdated & problematic opinions they should be given a chance to educate themselves before being struck off! |
|
|
|
Post by apubleed on Dec 13, 2021 19:46:47 GMT
Considering very little is selling at the moment plus sondheim is not the 'housewifes choice' good luck to them. Does anyone know how Company is selling on Broadway? I remember it being quite a hot ticket in London, though certainly possible to get tickets to most performances quite easily. Yes, very well. |
|
5,799 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Dec 13, 2021 20:19:12 GMT
I hope the poster image on Baths website is a placeholder. Completely uninspired
|
|
4,975 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Dec 13, 2021 21:31:57 GMT
We need to park up what Terry Gilliam said and accept he lives in some Jurassic 1022 period, with his fellow cavemen. If you thought that was bad, then don’t watch Fawlty Towers ‘the Germans’ episode, I mention that as John Cleese and Terry Gilliam are closely associated. I was shocked the BBC recently screened that again, but omitted what I am talking about, there should have been a massive stink over that. We now need to get behind the theatre and the cast and now support them, by god they will need it, after a terrible two years.
|
|
898 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Dec 13, 2021 22:46:06 GMT
We need to park up what Terry Gilliam said and accept he lives in some Jurassic 1022 period, with his fellow cavemen. If you thought that was bad, then don’t watch Fawlty Towers ‘the Germans’ episode, I mention that as John Cleese and Terry Gilliam are closely associated. I was shocked the BBC recently screened that again, but omitted what I am talking about, there should have been a massive stink over that. We now need to get behind the theatre and the cast and now support them, by god they will need it, after a terrible two years. Of course what is shocking about that episode, which I watched again last year with my ghoulishly fascinated teenage daughters, is the conversation about cricket and the terms applied by the Major to various groups. The bit about the Germans, it was even clear at the time to this 13-year-old, was mocking the British obsession with the war and our crass way of talking about it. The German characters come out of it rather well. |
|
4,959 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Dec 14, 2021 7:28:01 GMT
We need to park up what Terry Gilliam said and accept he lives in some Jurassic 1022 period, with his fellow cavemen. If you thought that was bad, then don’t watch Fawlty Towers ‘the Germans’ episode, I mention that as John Cleese and Terry Gilliam are closely associated. I was shocked the BBC recently screened that again, but omitted what I am talking about, there should have been a massive stink over that. We now need to get behind the theatre and the cast and now support them, by god they will need it, after a terrible two years. Putting his views aside, based on what I've seen him direct in the last 10 years I'm not going to be travelling to Bath. I love Sondheim but I will be supporting better directors who do not have the views of a Daily Mail column. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 14, 2021 7:59:04 GMT
There is a co-director who could perhaps temper some of his more unusual flights of fantasy. Not going based on not liking their previous work is a completely legitimate reason. Not going because you’ve seen something on the internet about something someone has said (perhaps totally out of context) and because a cabal of woke theatre staff have got their knickers in a twist about it. Not cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Dec 14, 2021 10:56:42 GMT
There is a co-director who could perhaps temper some of his more unusual flights of fantasy. Not going based on not liking their previous work is a completely legitimate reason. Not going because you’ve seen something on the internet about something someone has said (perhaps totally out of context) and because a cabal of woke theatre staff have got their knickers in a twist about it. Not cool. Not financially supporting someone whose views you disagree with is also a perfectly legitimate reason? It's like literally the only power you have as an individual to have your voice heard in a capitalist society because unfortunately only money talks at the end of the day. If you think people trying to get his shows cancelled and stifle his ability to work at all is wrong then fair enough I guess (I don't necessarily fully agree but I can see how that sets a dangerous precedent), but expecting individuals to still pay to go and see his show even if they don't want to support him because that's supposedly not a legitimate reason is ridiculous - that's just supply and demand, the markets at work, whether we like it or not. Also his words are out there and I don't see what apparent missing context they can be put into that will suddenly make them acceptable to people who disagree with them. I'm not gonna get into his comments on race, gender and sexuality because they're confused and stupid and purposefully provacative, but they're not directly related to his position as director. However, he also thinks that a lot of the women who had sex with higher ups in Hollywood did so through their own choice to get ahead and they should be held more responsible, and the higher ups who abused their positions of power to obtain consent under duress are facing too much of the brunt of the blame, and that we should just apparently accept the reality that people with power will abuse it. Maybe again he's just being contrarian and provacative, but even if he is I don't want to support someone who espouses those views when he is himself in a position of power over actors in the entertainment industry, and therefore I won't be seeing this show with him involved. Is that not a legitimate reason? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 14, 2021 11:44:30 GMT
There is a co-director who could perhaps temper some of his more unusual flights of fantasy. Not going based on not liking their previous work is a completely legitimate reason. Not going because you’ve seen something on the internet about something someone has said (perhaps totally out of context) and because a cabal of woke theatre staff have got their knickers in a twist about it. Not cool. Not financially supporting someone whose views you disagree with is also a perfectly legitimate reason? It's like literally the only power you have as an individual to have your voice heard in a capitalist society because unfortunately only money talks at the end of the day. If you think people trying to get his shows cancelled and stifle his ability to work at all is wrong then fair enough I guess (I don't necessarily fully agree but I can see how that sets a dangerous precedent), but expecting individuals to still pay to go and see his show even if they don't want to support him because that's supposedly not a legitimate reason is ridiculous - that's just supply and demand, the markets at work, whether we like it or not. Also his words are out there and I don't see what apparent missing context they can be put into that will suddenly make them acceptable to people who disagree with them. I'm not gonna get into his comments on race, gender and sexuality because they're confused and stupid and purposefully provacative, but they're not directly related to his position as director. However, he also thinks that a lot of the women who had sex with higher ups in Hollywood did so through their own choice to get ahead and they should be held more responsible, and the higher ups who abused their positions of power to obtain consent under duress are facing too much of the brunt of the blame, and that we should just apparently accept the reality that people with power will abuse it. Maybe again he's just being contrarian and provacative, but even if he is I don't want to support someone who espouses those views when he is himself in a position of power over actors in the entertainment industry, and therefore I won't be seeing this show with him involved. Is that not a legitimate reason? My point was that for every well informed person like yourself, there will be a hundred witch hunters with no idea why they are not meant to like Gilliam. |
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Dec 14, 2021 11:58:02 GMT
Not financially supporting someone whose views you disagree with is also a perfectly legitimate reason? It's like literally the only power you have as an individual to have your voice heard in a capitalist society because unfortunately only money talks at the end of the day. If you think people trying to get his shows cancelled and stifle his ability to work at all is wrong then fair enough I guess (I don't necessarily fully agree but I can see how that sets a dangerous precedent), but expecting individuals to still pay to go and see his show even if they don't want to support him because that's supposedly not a legitimate reason is ridiculous - that's just supply and demand, the markets at work, whether we like it or not. Also his words are out there and I don't see what apparent missing context they can be put into that will suddenly make them acceptable to people who disagree with them. I'm not gonna get into his comments on race, gender and sexuality because they're confused and stupid and purposefully provacative, but they're not directly related to his position as director. However, he also thinks that a lot of the women who had sex with higher ups in Hollywood did so through their own choice to get ahead and they should be held more responsible, and the higher ups who abused their positions of power to obtain consent under duress are facing too much of the brunt of the blame, and that we should just apparently accept the reality that people with power will abuse it. Maybe again he's just being contrarian and provacative, but even if he is I don't want to support someone who espouses those views when he is himself in a position of power over actors in the entertainment industry, and therefore I won't be seeing this show with him involved. Is that not a legitimate reason? My point was that for every well informed person like yourself, there will be a hundred witch hunters with no idea why they are not meant to like Gilliam. So you've created a hypothetical person to be annoyed about for what? And if we do take it to be true that there will be uninformed people out there swept up in the woke frenzy against Gilliam or whatever, will there not also be equally uninformed people swept up in support of Gilliam against the supposed rise of the woke brigade? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 14, 2021 12:16:30 GMT
Who’s annoyed? I’m trying my best to have an adult conversation about it. Many creators of classic art forms have had dubious opinions/habits/peccadilloes. If not giving someone your money because you disagree with them is a thing, go for it. But I’d never have seen a Hitchcock film, listened to a Phil Collins song (no biggie!) or watched a Piers Morgan documentary about women on death row or a single mornings GMB.
|
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Dec 14, 2021 12:32:30 GMT
Who’s annoyed? I’m trying my best to have an adult conversation about it. Many creators of classic art forms have had dubious opinions/habits/peccadilloes. If not giving someone your money because you disagree with them is a thing, go for it. But I’d never have seen a Hitchcock film, listened to a Phil Collins song (no biggie!) or watched a Piers Morgan documentary about women on death row or a single mornings GMB. Maybe annoyed was the wrong wording but I don't think you bring up these imagined people if they didn't bother you in some way. And Hitchcock is dead so it wouldn't really matter if I paid for one of his films, but I haven't paid to see a Roman Polanski film for example because for me that would go against my morals. I'm not gonna say that people who do go and see his films aren't justified in doing so though. I just think it's silly to judge why people don't spend their money on something because at the end of the day it doesn't affect you. Like, why care? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 14, 2021 12:50:30 GMT
Because I don’t think art stops being interesting or engaging just because the person who created it is a Pr**k. I might not want to give them my money any more eg Weinstein, but I don’t think people should be cancelled without very good reason. There are much more positive things you could do with the column inches and money generated.
|
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Dec 14, 2021 13:03:39 GMT
Because I don’t think art stops bring interesting or engaging just because the person who created it is a Pr**k. I might not want to give them my money any more eg Weinstein, but I don’t think people should be cancelled without very good reason. There are much more positive things you could do with the column inches and money generated. I just don't think it's worth being partially responsible for the success of a person with whom I cannot agree on fundamental issues just because I might find something worthwhile in their art, and I think that's true of pretty much everyone, we just have different boundaries of what we think is acceptable before we're willing not to support someone's work financially. And if I continue to support someone I disagree with then someone who may create equally interesting art who doesn't hold what I consider abhorrent views/hasn't committed horrible acts is potentially not getting those same opportunities. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 14, 2021 16:34:01 GMT
Too many double negatives and word salad for me I’m afraid.
I’d be interested in seeing ITW whether it is in town or much nearer to me in Bath, mostly for it not to have James Corden in and for the music to thrill again. The elements of visual design that Gilliam might bring are of secondary appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2021 21:27:50 GMT
danb lovely use of the word 'peccadilloes' It not used nearly enough these days. The only place i hear it now is on the 'Chess - Danish Tour' recording.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Dec 14, 2021 21:34:02 GMT
I didn’t want it to sound flippant. It’s a thoroughly unpleasant business.
|
|
|
|
Post by FrontroverPaul on Dec 30, 2021 3:23:41 GMT
Now on general sale at the Theatre Royal Bath. Most seats £40 - £47. Running from 19 August until 10 September.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattnyc on Mar 3, 2022 16:43:33 GMT
Is this production still only scheduled to play Theatre Royal Bath?
|
|
5,140 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Mar 3, 2022 16:45:41 GMT
Is this production still only scheduled to play Theatre Royal Bath? Yes |
|
5,799 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Mar 3, 2022 19:20:00 GMT
It is lining up a west end transfer, so expect it to arrive in London (unless it’s an absolute disaster)
|
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Mar 3, 2022 22:15:02 GMT
It is lining up a west end transfer, so expect it to arrive in London (unless it’s an absolute disaster) Only Fools will have to kart it soon |
|
|
|
Post by ladidah on Mar 4, 2022 9:34:45 GMT
Would LOVE to see this live.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Mar 4, 2022 16:44:22 GMT
It is lining up a west end transfer, so expect it to arrive in London (unless it’s an absolute disaster) Only Fools will have to kart it soon Unlikely, it is doing phenomenally well. I'm hearing it is set to extend until next year. |
|
