2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 30, 2020 11:56:07 GMT
I cannot believe this would ever be part of a wider PR stunt. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing!
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 28, 2020 12:48:38 GMT
I am so confused. How was this decision arrived at?!?
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 26, 2020 16:41:56 GMT
The Best of the West End concert from the Royal Albert Hall in March is being broadcast on BBC Radio 2 tonight at 7pm! Layton Williams, Ben Forster, Ramin Karimloo, Ruthie Henshall, Marisha Wallace, Lauren Samuels, Mazz Murray, Matthew Croke and more backed by the LMTO!
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 17, 2020 11:58:39 GMT
If you are living alone or are a single parent with children under 18, you can form a bubble with one other household and you do not have to social distance from them.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 17, 2020 11:50:07 GMT
As wonderful as it is to have some more positive news, I don't think this is as cut and dry as some forum members are making it out to be. Don’t get me wrong, my first thought was OMG are we getting theatre back this year?!?! But then you see COVID secure and social distancing. Theatres have told us over and over again that putting on shows with social distancing is not financially viable. Obviously it is for some (Mousetrap and Regent's Park), but realistically, how many theatres in England can actually reopen under this model? Next....as I’ve always worried about with this government, is it actually safe? Are these COVID secure measures and socially distancing enough? There is no cure, no vaccine. We are repeatedly told how much more of a risk it is indoors than outdoors. Why does this suddenly change in 2 weeks? With the news that outdoor drive-in events getting cancelled all over the place - HOW is allowing indoor performances in 2 weeks even imaginable?! Even with social distancing. Insurance obviously plays a big part here but so does ticket sales. Will there be enough people (this board excluded) that feel safe enough to sit in a theatre, even at a distance? Other questions: does the social distancing also apply to cast/crew/orchestra? Is singing still a high risk? A glimmer of hope is not to be sniffed at but this is why I’ve always thought that FINANCIAL SUPPORT is far more important than dates with models that are not financially viable. However, if there are theatres out there that CAN put on socially distanced, covid safe performances, they must be jumping for joy right now. Let's just hope there is an audience.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 9, 2020 13:41:11 GMT
Hello fellow theatre-lovers! I've been coming to this page for years and finally thought I'd join you all. I'm looking for some advice and insider knowledge if possible. As I approach my mid-forties, I'm looking to get back into singing once safe to do so. As a former costume lady, I miss working on the big shows and I am desperately keen to join an MT orchestra. There are two options for me: Northern Musical Theatre Orchestra or London Musical Theatre Orchestra. I live in Kettering so I'm right between the two of them. However, I have some questions and hoping someone here can help me understand just how these companies work and operate - mainly out of curiosity. - Does anyone here have any experience of either NMTO or LMTO? If so, what is the process? - Just how do these companies go about their practice? I know that they don't advertise what show they are going to be looking at, but do they get the rights to hold these private rehearsals? Or don't they need to acquire the rights as they are not performing and it's a private 'rehearsal'? Very curious about the legalities of all this stuff. Hope someone can help. Pat 🎭 I can very much help with info on LMTO! If you sign up to their mailing list, you get an email detailing what the next sitzprobe will be. They take place on the first Sunday of every month (obviously not during corona!), and then you receive another email where you can sign up to take part. Chorus parts are assigned on a first-come-first-serve basis. Principals parts are chosen by the team based on who applies for each part. Either way, it costs £20 to take part. All parts are open to anyone, professional, in training or amateur. The day is long but amazing. Usually starts around 10am, everyone is taught the material. Then after lunch, principals and chorus come together to sing through the show with the assistant MD for the day, with just piano. Then another break, then everyone comes together early evening for the play-through. Around 60 singers and 60 musicians just go for it! All private so no audience, any mistakes just stop and start again but they genuinely hardly happen. It starts and off you go until it ends! It's the most amazing experience. As for legalities, obviously I don't know the exact ins and outs. But they do acquire the rights for the shows. The cost to take part covers the rights and usage of the building we do it in. I don't know why the rule is in place, but the rule of never sharing what show is being done (even vague references, related emoji's or “witty” puns are not allowed - rule of thumb is if you think you're being funny you're not!) is *because* they have the rights to do the show as a private sitz. If the shows started getting shared, it would make it impossible for LMTO to acquire the rights to the shows that they do! If you want any more info, please feel free to PM me!
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 7, 2020 13:48:45 GMT
I thought this thread was going to be a discussion on something extremely different
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 1, 2020 18:39:11 GMT
Oh yes, I can't even begin to imagine. Are the originals available anywhere, do you know? The DVD is the best way to watch them but if you happen upon Dailymotion they're on there as well. For anyone wanting to watch the originals, the above helped me out considerably..... cc: distantcousin
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 1, 2020 12:14:24 GMT
New production of SFANW being filmed in isolation starring
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 28, 2020 17:56:28 GMT
Alexander Armstrong as Higgins, Richard Osman as Pickering and Bradley Walsh as Doolittle 👌🏻
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 28, 2020 14:10:26 GMT
Sheen as Higgins and David Tennant as Pickering 👌🏻
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 27, 2020 11:42:31 GMT
Is the cast recording not on Spotify? I can’t see it but desperate to hear it! You can watch it if you want! Bristol Old Vic YouTube until next Friday
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 22:03:10 GMT
I came here to post this article! So thank you for doing so - I agree, it's excellent.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 17:45:42 GMT
Funny how people only report the death toll when it's an increase over the day before, isn't it? Days in June when the death toll averaged over the preceding week was lower than the day before: 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th 22nd 23rd 24th Days when it was higher: 1st 2nd 21st 25th Days when the number of new cases averaged over the preceding week was lower than the day before: 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th 11th 12th 13th 15th 16th 18th 19th 20th 21st 22nd 23rd 24th 25th Days when it was higher: 9th 14th 17th Fair enough. Wasn’t doing it as some kind of “gotcha!” thing, I was just posting them because the reported deaths have been higher than the same day last week 2 days in a row, with positive cases seeming to be dropping. Though the government still aren't releasing the figures for the number of people *actually* tested as opposed to the number of tests available. We should be expecting/hoping the numbers will be falling so I guess when they don't, I think it's important to note. As an example, Professor Karol Sikora with 299k followers tends to tweet the figures every day with comparisons to the same day on previous weeks. Today, even though the figure was higher, he passed it off as being lower by stopping at 373 from a previous Friday. He may do this with all tweets when the figures *are* actually lower, but when they're not, it should be said not turned a blind eye to. So whilst this doesn’t mean “2nd wave as of tomorrow!!”, it's still worth acknowledging. That's all!
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 16:28:39 GMT
149 deaths reported yesterday with 1118 positive tests (135 last Thursday, 1218 positive tests), 186 deaths reported today with 1006 positive tests (173 last Friday, 1346 positive tests)
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 12:23:16 GMT
But that's the thing. People think they're making an argument with that statement. You're not. No one is saying attacking Israel is anti-Semitic (one of the threads I posted which you will get to explains this). Posting unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about Israeli police teaching US police the specific techniques used to murder George Floyd, whilst playing on anti-Semitic tropes that Jews are to blame for disasters, but using the Israeli police as a scapegoat to perpetuate those rumors is not ok. These things are too important to just throw into an article and be wrong about and just say “oops, sorry”. Retweeting those articles with no caveat or apology is also not ok. Didn't like the second link, that was why article was false. I want why it is anti-Semitic, looking forward to the third article. Never said I would have used that article, used it in the piece she wrote or of any need to bring Israel into that discussion. But Sarah Gibbs uses that phrase. It's really not anti-Semitic to attack Israel. Anyway, onto post 3 now. Think this is the one I want. I hope that thread on the 2016 Amnesty article helps. May I suggest this paragraph from the second link which you didn’t like, really does get to the nub of the anti-semitism point: “Those who find this allegation anti-Semitic do not dispute that international police forces share training in a manner of deep concern to international human rights watchdogs. What they do object to is the singling out of Israel in this allegation, when there is nothing to suggest that Israel played any greater part in Floyd’s death than the many other countries that share training with the US, and which also use aggressive restraining techniques. Why is the tragic killing of a black man at the hands of the police, in a country with a long history of racial discrimination and excessive force in policing, now being blamed on the world’s only Jewish-majority state, they ask?”
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 12:10:23 GMT
First sentence says why I feel it is not as cut and dried as you are previously saying. It's not anti-Semitic to attack Israel But that's the thing. People think they're making an argument with that statement. You're not. No one is saying attacking Israel is anti-Semitic (one of the threads I posted which you will get to explains this). Posting unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about Israeli police teaching US police the specific techniques used to murder George Floyd, whilst playing on anti-Semitic tropes that Jews are to blame for disasters, but using the Israeli police as a scapegoat to perpetuate those rumors is not ok. These things are too important to just throw into an article and be wrong about and just say “oops, sorry”. Retweeting those articles with no caveat or apology is also not ok.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 12:04:49 GMT
The thing is, RLB read the article, right? She saw that line and either agreed with it or thought it so insignificant that she didn't need to caveat her tweet when posting that Maxine Peake was a “diamond”. Whatever she felt, that was a mistake, given her history and the recent history of the party. She should have known better. She was asked to remove the tweet and apologise. She chose not to remove the tweet, and no apology featured in her follow up tweet, some half-arsed “it wasn’t intended to be an endorsement of all aspects of the article”. That's it. And not good enough. At this point, her intent is clear. Starmer has issued a zero-tolerance policy on anti-semitism. With, as I say, RLB's history and the party history, to not even acknowledge or apologise when she was given the chance? She made her bed. Starmer did what he had to do. What else was he supposed to do? We may not be used to it currently - but he showed real leadership. I never said I excuse her, but that I accepted her explanation. The article in question is so much more than that one comment within it - a comment the journalist confirms in the very next sentence is incorrect. I don’t disagree with anything that has happened as a result of all this and as I said, I think Starmer has turned this into an absolute win for himself politically - got rid of a Corbynist, his biggest competition to his leadership and shown the world he meant business when it comes to anti-Seminism. I don’t fault him at all. All I said in my original post is that I believe Rebecca’s explanation for re-tweeting the article. I stand by that and have since said that I don’t believe Maxine or Rebecca acted with any sort of malice and it was simply a case of using an incorrect fact - a fact confirmed as incorrect by the journalist in very next sentence at the point of publication. Of course it wasn’t acceptable to some users here that I accept Rebecca’s explanation which is a shame, because I’m actually not a fan of her at all. But what is her explanation, exactly? She retweeted the article but later clarified that “it wasn't intended to be an endorsement of all aspects of the article”? Is that it? After 4 years of the Labour Party being embroiled in anti-semitism rows and RLB's previous history of being blind to anti-Semitic comments, that is why I don't buy it at all. Her thread explains how she was asked to remove the tweets but she decided not to. This article delves a little deeper into RLB's behavior on this issue and Starmer's actions: www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-rebecca-long-bailey_uk_5ef50f91c5b6acab283efcb2?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANzG1vxVIT89zoek4kyeMv3Jp8GXEbwpHX5IXOj9NK7FzA0BY1rjurm2zfiWFmUQ5csoHHYwHoac8giiHyXPpTXTYXv8welQSWsyZNzFNJ3TrNCQvZkJfPGJd4QyeR19mqLcIs-Va6lK562ovDCwN1wHrUpBemzJSs3WLkr0UT-DI completely understand and appreciate that you agree with the actions taken and I completely understand you are not disputing the issue at all, but from where I’m standing I just can't buy her “explanation”. She was either ignorant to it or believed it. Neither is good enough for a politician. On the point of the Independent correcting the false statement at the point of publication, I’m afraid that just isn't true. The next sentence of the original article, they reference a “2016 Amnesty International report” (I’ve posted a thread above why that article should not be used an as official source), but once the criticism emerged, it was swiftly removed to whatever it says now about no tactic about putting pressure on the neck or airway.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 11:50:00 GMT
Well, there's an abundance of information on this thread that clearly, and in detail, explains this particular situation and the context surrounding it which makes this case different from others. If you can't see it, you either don't want to or maybe haven't read as thoroughly as is needed. I want the information, I want more than just here. Following up SF's piece elsewhere. Give me the pertinent bits. I'm not there yet. That is appreciated, I assure you. The thing is, the pertinent bits aren't necessarily little nuggets of information, easily digested. This is a very nuanced situation that does require a degree of further reading and understanding. On the previous page, I posted a thread in full about how this situation may not seem anti-Semitic on the face of it, but a deeper context is needed if you wish to understand why it is. Here's the thread on twitter: The original Independent interview included a link to an “Amnesty International report” about Israeli Police officers teaching US polices officers techniques that were used in the murder of George Floyd. That reference has since been removed from the Independent interview. Amnesty made a statement here: www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/06/amnesty-international-we-never-reported-neck-kneeling-taught-israelis-usThis thread explains how the “report” that the Independent originally linked to should not be used as some sort of official source: This is a thread (if a little flippant) on examples of how wording and phrasing is used that makes some criticisms *not* anti-Semitic and some criticisms anti-Semitic: This is an article I’ve seen today regarding the non-apology and sacking of RLB. Obviously this is not set in stone that this report is the gospel on what happened, but it's further reading none-the-less: www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-rebecca-long-bailey_uk_5ef50f91c5b6acab283efcb2?5hx&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvL0xWVzdaT2VFZGo_YW1wPTE&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAADxKQTZQUY1aUIzTjiEWDLr-FxhgoEm4Y1W0IFlZVLeioWhAmmlZ9u0IP1mciLa__ncXL8UItJMwSUrn_j-ph-F_yulWDOh6Xbt45Z5xHPBceuehGlqUwnAGUiTEuHmiOOPe3Mzu5fsmNaKC8VJ319nQ6cCClkuTr3OEVtFCN0Rn
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 10:47:43 GMT
Clearly you need to read more carefully. That's not anything close to what I said. Please try to engage with the argument I actually made instead of deliberately misrepresenting it. Thank you. Respectfully you opt to pick and chose certain parts of my posts in order to push your own agenda. You claim it doesn’t matter whether Maxine or Rebecca acted maliciously or not - a very dangerous view point as intent is everything. If people aren’t allowed to make mistakes and are condemned for doing things they did not know were mistakes, it’s a very scary world. The thing is, RLB read the article, right? She saw that line and either agreed with it or thought it so insignificant that she didn't need to caveat her tweet when posting that Maxine Peake was a “diamond”. Whatever she felt, that was a mistake, given her history and the recent history of the party. She should have known better. She was asked to remove the tweet and apologise. She chose not to remove the tweet, and no apology featured in her follow up tweet, some half-arsed “it wasn’t intended to be an endorsement of all aspects of the article”. That's it. And not good enough. At this point, her intent is clear. Starmer has issued a zero-tolerance policy on anti-semitism. With, as I say, RLB's history and the party history, to not even acknowledge or apologise when she was given the chance? She made her bed. Starmer did what he had to do. What else was he supposed to do? We may not be used to it currently - but he showed real leadership.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 26, 2020 10:38:25 GMT
Have you read anything in this thread? I read the thread also and am asking the same question? Is Maxine Peake getting kicked out of the party now for anti-semetism? Well, there's an abundance of information on this thread that clearly, and in detail, explains this particular situation and the context surrounding it which makes this case different from others. If you can't see it, you either don't want to or maybe haven't read as thoroughly as is needed.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 25, 2020 23:22:24 GMT
I wonder if the BBC will pull Maxine Peakes episode from BBC1 after her antisemitic comments. She didn't make an antisemitic comment. Apologies for derailing the thread but I have to reply (and I didn't bring it up!). Then why have Amnesty International released a statement that they never reported that kneeling on someone's neck, as in the case of the murder of George Floyd, was taught to the US police by the Israeli police as a result of Maxine Peake's comments. Maxine says she “was inaccurate in my assumption of American Police training & its sources” - so where is your proof please? Legitimate criticism of the Israeli police is not anti-Semitic. Perpetuating conspiracy theories based on anti-Semitic tropes (Jews being accused of secretly orchestrating disasters and starting race-wars) is, surprise surprise, anti-Semitic.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 25, 2020 23:15:10 GMT
When did any criticism of Israel start equalling "anti semetism" in this country? I'm mystified Have you read anything in this thread?
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 25, 2020 22:36:22 GMT
OK - I have to admit that, as a Jewish person who believes that legitimate criticism of Israel isn't anti-semitic but Maxine Peake's unsubstantiated conspiracy theory based on anti-semitic tropes IS anti-semitic and the decision to sack RLB based on her retweeting it with no initial clarification of her not supporting the claim, nor apologising for it when asked was a welcome one that showed impressive and strong leadership from Starmer, I was a bit cautious coming onto this thread based on what twitter has been largely filled with today. So I am genuinely thankful that this has been a factual, calm, thoughtful and reasonable discussion. AmnestyUSA (not Amnesty International) was cited as where the initial conspiracy that the technique used to murder George Floyd came from Israeli soldiers and has now been debunked by Amnesty International: t.co/BOxYLPHDihThe original article itself is no more than a blogpost, with no interviews, sources, graphs, etc. This twitter thread from @sara_Rose_G goes some way to explaining the context of why this is an anti-semitism issue and why those involved, especially RLB, should know better: “I think the RLB thing is incredibly hard to unpick & you need a sh*t tonne of context to understand why it was dodgy, which is why most people won’t. And it’s so effing hot, I don’t want to have to explain it, but I fear I must & bear with me, will do my best. This is a classic situation where someone has, on the surface of things, criticised the actions of the Israeli state. That in itself is not antisemitic, of course. It is also something where a bit of it is true & a bit of it isn’t. The important bit isn’t. Now - is it inherently antisemitic to say something untrue about the state of Israel? By my measure, no. I feel where criticism of Israel becomes antisemitic is a) where they are held to a higher standard than other countries, probably not the case here and (don’t yell yet), B) where falsehoods about the state of Israel are rooted in long-held antisemitic tropes. Still with me? OK so here’s where we need some more context. There is an age-old blood libel trope where historically Jews have been accused of secretly orchestrating disasters. I think, given that the accusation is demonstrably false, given that there is a widespread far-right conspiracy theory that Jews are trying to start a race war & given that there have been multiple incidents of Jews as a collective being blamed for anti-Black racism that the surrounding context makes a conspiracy theory which is on the surface of it about Israel much more likely to be rooted in antisemitic sentiment. Phew. So given that I just had to explain all of this, could RLB have been expected to know this? Well... yes, frankly. She has just experienced four years of people painstakingly explaining to her what antisemitic tropes look like. She was closely involved with a leadership that ultimately failed in part because of their poor record on antisemitism. At this point, there is no excuse for her not to know better. And yes, this decision is partly political, but it’s also of her own making. RLB was closely tied to the Corbyn project, which caused so much pain for so many Jewish people across the political spectrum. She should have known that a whiff of antisemitic conspiracy thinking would put Starmer in a very difficult position. He campaigned on a promise to stamp out antisemitism in the party. He can’t, in his first few months, have his front bench tainted with it. So in short, I think RLB demonstrated, sadly, that she had learned nothing from the mistakes of the last four years & that she is unable to hear the dog whistles that maybe ordinary people can’t be expected to detect, but at this point, she should. To summarise - criticising Israel = absolutely legitimate. Probably helpful if what you’re saying is true. Probably also helpful if what you’re saying doesn’t echo millennia of antisemitic tropes & current active antisemitic conspiracy theories. I can understand why someone looking at this with no other information might wonder what she did wrong, but the point is she had that information & still isn’t able to deploy it successfully. I think he had no choice but to let her go or be tainted by mistakes of the past”
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 25, 2020 13:59:38 GMT
Finished this last night as I watched when it was broadcast to savour it. One of the best things to come out of lockdown!! Didn't want it to end. Guest appearance in the final ep was a definite highlight.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 24, 2020 13:15:14 GMT
I thought it was more because they couldn't have any actors of that age range? Don't need to look 'too far', Stephanie Cole would be prefect No, I think talkingheads means actors of that age because of the pandemic we find ourselves in! When these were filmed, I don't think it would have been permitted to have an elderly person come and film in a studio.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 24, 2020 12:06:55 GMT
Thank you, both!
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 24, 2020 12:04:06 GMT
Is the government over there supporting Theatre in any way 49thand8th ??
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 24, 2020 11:01:27 GMT
An Ordinary Woman was seriously disturbing, wasn't it? But I could not take my eyes of the screen. Not seen the originals so can't compare (though we should be relishing we now have 2 performances to enjoy instead of pitting them against each other - but that's human nature), but I thought Imelda Staunton was simply outstanding, too. I was completely enthralled. Real stars here are the scripts. Seriously incredible work. You're actually lucky to be seeing these ones first, without the absolute behemoth performances that came before to compare it to. Oh yes, I can't even begin to imagine. Are the originals available anywhere, do you know?
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 23, 2020 22:46:42 GMT
An Ordinary Woman was seriously disturbing, wasn't it? But I could not take my eyes of the screen. Not seen the originals so can't compare (though we should be relishing we now have 2 performances to enjoy instead of pitting them against each other - but that's human nature), but I thought Imelda Staunton was simply outstanding, too. I was completely enthralled. Real stars here are the scripts. Seriously incredible work.
|
|