3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 2, 2024 17:54:24 GMT
Thank you for explaining david . So it sounds as though the venue IS either accepting or at least accommodating the use of mobiles. Hope they don't all give up and go down this route. How does that suggest they're accommodating the use of phones, surely it's the exact opposite? It's a more strict measure than just sending out ushers before the show with signs saying photography/filming is not allowed. Well, not surprisingly I read this as the theatre accepting that people would leave their phones on but asking them not to take photos or film. After all, if that isn't what they mean, why not simply stick to the usual "phones off, please" request. |
|
172 posts
|
Post by Sean on Jul 2, 2024 19:01:34 GMT
How does that suggest they're accommodating the use of phones, surely it's the exact opposite? It's a more strict measure than just sending out ushers before the show with signs saying photography/filming is not allowed. Well, not surprisingly I read this as the theatre accepting that people would leave their phones on but asking them not to take photos or film. After all, if that isn't what they mean, why not simply stick to the usual "phones off, please" request. To play devils advoate for a second, As has been mentioned by other board members this play does feature full nudity so the stickers I assume are an additional step at protecting the actors involved which in my opionon seems very fair. As regular theatre goers I think we all can agree the usual "Phones off please" request is often ignored by some audience members so I say fair play to those behind this play in introducing an additional step to protect the actors involved. |
|
19,650 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 2, 2024 19:07:41 GMT
I think the use of stickers is a very clumsy and ineffective way of trying to control the audience. I said the same about Cabaret. Do they really think that people who are determined to take photos will be deterred by a sticker? It’s ridiculous and just another example of making (faking) the already compliant comply.
Focus your efforts on the difficult non compliant.
|
|
|
|
Post by kallyloo on Jul 2, 2024 19:19:47 GMT
I think the use of stickers is a very clumsy and ineffective way of trying to control the audience. I said the same about Cabaret. Do they really think that people who are determined to take photos will be deterred by a sticker? It’s ridiculous and just another example of making (faking) the already compliant comply. Focus your efforts on the difficult non compliant. I agree, and stickers aren’t very effective. At Cabaret mine fell off after about 20 mins as it wouldn’t stick properly to my case. |
|
|
|
Post by marob on Jul 2, 2024 19:23:19 GMT
The stickers seem to be a regular ATG thing now. They don’t want photos getting out there but are too cheap to get those lockable pouch things like they have in America.
They also had them at Cabaret, A Little Life, and Stranger Things. Cabaret to keep the Kit Kat Klub shrouded in secrecy, Stranger Things to avoid spoilers and A Little Life for the same reason as here: to try to stop anyone photographing the full frontal nudity from the cast.
Not sure how effective they are. Didn’t stop the Daily Mail publishing pictures of James Norton naked in A Little Life.
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Jul 2, 2024 19:25:17 GMT
Having a sticker to prevent taking images is one matter
I think taking unauthorised pics of naked actors
May fall into category of voyeurism
And prosecutable
It’s a pretty sad existence and intrusion of personal rights anyway
If nothing else
|
|
19,650 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 2, 2024 19:30:20 GMT
I think the use of stickers is a very clumsy and ineffective way of trying to control the audience. I said the same about Cabaret. Do they really think that people who are determined to take photos will be deterred by a sticker? It’s ridiculous and just another example of making (faking) the already compliant comply. Focus your efforts on the difficult non compliant. I agree, and stickers aren’t very effective. At Cabaret mine fell off after about 20 mins as it wouldn’t stick properly to my case. I wouldn’t even agree to put it on my phone. Get stuffed and get your nasty sticker off my expensive phone camera lens and do your actual job with FOH in stopping people taking photos. |
|
174 posts
|
Post by dillan on Jul 2, 2024 20:09:36 GMT
The stickers seem to be a regular ATG thing now. They don’t want photos getting out there but are too cheap to get those lockable pouch things like they have in America. They also had them at Cabaret, A Little Life, and Stranger Things. Cabaret to keep the Kit Kat Klub shrouded in secrecy, Stranger Things to avoid spoilers and A Little Life for the same reason as here: to try to stop anyone photographing the full frontal nudity from the cast. Not sure how effective they are. Didn’t stop the Daily Mail publishing pictures of James Norton naked in A Little Life. Stranger Things seemed to get rid of their stickers after previews. |
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Jul 2, 2024 20:49:16 GMT
I agree that peeling off a sticker is not beyond the skill of a keen photographer, but I think having them sends a clearer message to the audience that photography is not allowed than simple signs or announcements. At the very least it's harder to plead ignorance, and creates a mood within the audience and will put off at least some who might otherwise have attempted a sneaky snap.
Maybe not that big a deal when it's just a case of not spoiling the look of a new show, but there's more shame if you think your seat neighbours are going to judge you for taking a photo of an actor in a nude scene.
Failing that, it's a take home bit of show publicity.
|
|
235 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by jaggy on Jul 2, 2024 21:22:54 GMT
Anyone know when press night is?
|
|
|
|
Post by happysooz2 on Jul 3, 2024 10:41:30 GMT
Having a sticker to prevent taking images is one matter I think taking unauthorised pics of naked actors May fall into category of voyeurism And prosecutable It’s a pretty sad existence and intrusion of personal rights anyway If nothing else I believe they’re using the pouches at Mnemonic to prevent photos being taken. I think it’s pretty sad that we have to do this because of people’s obsessions of filming:photographing everything these days. I’m going to go and read more about the legal definition of voyeurism. I suspect (naively hope?) that more people are just so used to taking photos they don’t realise what an invasion of privacy it is, rather than horrible sexual intent. |
|
406 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Jul 3, 2024 14:26:16 GMT
(Unsurprisingly) I bumped into Jeremy O. Harris outside the theatre yesterday :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Jul 3, 2024 14:47:40 GMT
It's fun that the solution is as theatrical as the thing they are there to see; if someone was serious about photography they would offer a cheapo second phone for bagging or stickering. I suppose it gets the message across but there is only so much ..
|
|
6 posts
|
Post by theatreloser on Jul 3, 2024 22:19:40 GMT
So I went to see this tonight after being intrigued by the provocative marketing if I’m honest, and the casting of Kit. But, it was awful. I don’t really have much else to say besides it was awful. It was 2 hours 10 of my life I won’t be getting back. Everyone around me was absolutely baffled and it all felt as if we missed something. I’m really not sure how this has a place in the west end.
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Jul 3, 2024 22:43:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Jul 3, 2024 22:44:16 GMT
It has sold appalling badly so far
|
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 3, 2024 22:45:10 GMT
The ushers were pretty aggressive over the stickering when I went. Some girls asked if they had plain stickers as they objected to the Starbucks stickers (which is fair, since you don't know until after the play that there's a reason why the stickers are Starbucks, and they're not just making the audience to walk around with Starbucks plastered all over their phones as free advertising for Starbucks). They were frogmarched out of the queue and told to wait for the duty manager. I don't know if they were ultimately allowed in or not. Surely someone had an agenda to sneakily photograph the actors nude then they'd just accept the sticker then remove it once they got inside, not kick up a fuss asking for a plain sticker?
Choosing Starbucks for the stickers is such a weird choice. Starbucks isn't even a big part of the play, it's literally one line.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatauntedna on Jul 3, 2024 22:47:39 GMT
Choosing Starbucks for the stickers is such a weird choice. Starbucks isn't even a big part of the play, it's literally one line. It makes sense though! |
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 3, 2024 23:14:13 GMT
I didn't look up anything about the play ahead of time so I didn't know KH was in it, but I saw a cast list outside and got confused and somehow got it in my head that Kerry Washington was playing the female lead (because KW's most famous character is named Olivia), not a random nepobaby whose only theatre experience is playing a maid in a Shakespeare play. This was too challenging a character for someone with almost no stage experience and her lack of experience did show IMO.
Fisayo Akinade was amazing, and I really liked the actress playing the white woman. Though the other two couples felt underwritten next to the lead couple. It would have been more interesting as a proper ensemble piece.
|
|
|
|
Post by nancycunard on Jul 3, 2024 23:27:03 GMT
I have no skin in the game here but the only place offering £15 seats is the usual TodayTix offer for about 35000ft above the stage. |
|
|
|
Post by iwanttix on Jul 4, 2024 7:27:06 GMT
I have no skin in the game here but the only place offering £15 seats is the usual TodayTix offer for about 35000ft above the stage. That sun article is ridiculous. Lots of shows on todaytix have their prices slashed low - but you're right, the 'heavily discounted' tickets are the seats at the back nobody wants to sit in. I admit I'm waiting for a cheap ticket before I buy one, hoping for a day seat next week. But I'm like that with all tickets I buy, it's not just this play! |
|
3,528 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jul 4, 2024 7:29:34 GMT
The Sun are such lying grifters.
|
|
|
|
Post by fiyerorocher on Jul 4, 2024 8:49:05 GMT
The ushers were pretty aggressive over the stickering when I went. Some girls asked if they had plain stickers as they objected to the Starbucks stickers (which is fair, since you don't know until after the play that there's a reason why the stickers are Starbucks, and they're not just making the audience to walk around with Starbucks plastered all over their phones as free advertising for Starbucks). They were frogmarched out of the queue and told to wait for the duty manager. I don't know if they were ultimately allowed in or not. Surely someone had an agenda to sneakily photograph the actors nude then they'd just accept the sticker then remove it once they got inside, not kick up a fuss asking for a plain sticker? Choosing Starbucks for the stickers is such a weird choice. Starbucks isn't even a big part of the play, it's literally one line. Is there still a Starbucks boycott going on in support of Palestine? Might have been to do with that? |
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Jul 4, 2024 9:25:12 GMT
People have been avoiding/boycotting Starbucks for years because of the way the company is artificially structured to minimise tax. I'm in the avoiding category.
The summary version is that the UK part of the company would pay the Dutch part of the company very inflated prices for coffee beans and other supplies, to the point that the UK part made a loss and didn't pay tax. Meanwhile, the profit was made in the Netherlands where tax rates are/were lower. These sorts of practices were something the EU was supposed to be cracking down on, but we left.
Then there are the people who avoid chain coffee shops as they are the enemy of independent and small businesses etc. I recall when the tax scandal broke that Costa were paying a lot more tax than Starbucks for what is essentially the same business model, which is presumably why Starbucks gets the brunt of the 'anti-chain' hostility.
Picking Starbucks is sort-of clever after the event, but if I were them I'd be looking for alternatives.
|
|
546 posts
|
Post by drmaplewood on Jul 5, 2024 0:26:06 GMT
I enjoyed this though given how much build up there was with reports on how shocking it was, it was nowhere near as wild as I anticipated!
|
|
