3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 18, 2017 16:21:06 GMT
but then again.. it's accessibility in question. I think a lot of theatremakers live in a bubble of likeminded people from similar backgrounds - more so these days than in the mid to late 20thc, when many actors and writers came from regional/grammar school backgrounds. Of my large friend group (Facebook etc), it is only the London-based Oxbridge-educated ones who work in the media / arts who regularly go to the theatre or (in the case of the one who moved out of London) NT Live broadcasts. The others only go if there's someone from Dr Who or Sherlock involved (I know that sounds like a cliche but it's true) - and I do pester them to go (the Royal Exchange studio theatre is only £12 full price, Liverpool's Playhouse studio not much more). TV or DVD availability would do so much to reach out to people - as it did to me when I was young and there were RSC plays on the BBC - and I don't know why some seem to dig their heels in about this. I know there have been a handful of plays on TV but it's mostly Shakespeare/Elizabethan (two Lears in two years, with the upcoming Hopkins one!) rather than something more modern. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 18, 2017 16:25:49 GMT
It's not fair but life isn't Stonkingly unfair! From the Guardian in 2014: "Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Arts Council England spending amounts to £68.99 per head of population in London and £4.58 in the rest of England. In terms of lottery spending on the arts between 1995 and 2013 the figure was £165 per head in London and £46.77 outside London. It also points out that the population of Westminster has contributed £14.5m to the arts lottery and received a benefit of £408m; while people in County Durham have given £34m and the area has received just £12m." |
|
|
|
NT Live
Aug 18, 2017 17:08:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2017 17:08:40 GMT
It's not fair but life isn't Stonkingly unfair! From the Guardian in 2014: "Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Arts Council England spending amounts to £68.99 per head of population in London and £4.58 in the rest of England. In terms of lottery spending on the arts between 1995 and 2013 the figure was £165 per head in London and £46.77 outside London. It also points out that the population of Westminster has contributed £14.5m to the arts lottery and received a benefit of £408m; while people in County Durham have given £34m and the area has received just £12m." Sure. But there's a critical mass of theatre in London that there isn't elsewhere in the country and it inevitably feeds into each other and creates something dynamic that you can't replicate just because you want to. Britain is unhealthy in having a capital city that sucks everything into it (and is too expensive for people to live on an average salary) but it's going to take serious political will and long term planning to turn that around. A bit of ACE redistribution won't do anything. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 18, 2017 17:29:20 GMT
there's a critical mass of theatre in London There used to be in the regions, too, but many of the theatre spaces closed down and those that survived don't really have much in the way of ambitious programming - I was looking at a tweet this week about Gary Oldman being spotted by Max Stafford-Clark while appearing in a regional production of an Edward Bond play. Comments about it were can you imagine a regional theatre putting on Edward Bond these days? My home town (Liverpool) used to produce and nurture many famous actors (I wish I had a time machine to se the Everyman rep in the 70s!) but in the 80s there was a sense of everything being sucked down to London and a lot of the good stuff I've seen up here recently - mainly in Manchester - is by visiting/touring companies on flying visits or Royal Court co-productions like the Bruntwood Prize plays. Ironically I think what may change things is that London is pricing out all but the very richest young people - if the Guardian and Channel Four also (as rumoured) move to Manchester then I expect to see more emphasis on regional arts! |
|
4,164 posts
|
NT Live
Aug 18, 2017 18:44:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by kathryn on Aug 18, 2017 18:44:02 GMT
Stonkingly unfair! From the Guardian in 2014: "Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Arts Council England spending amounts to £68.99 per head of population in London and £4.58 in the rest of England. In terms of lottery spending on the arts between 1995 and 2013 the figure was £165 per head in London and £46.77 outside London. It also points out that the population of Westminster has contributed £14.5m to the arts lottery and received a benefit of £408m; while people in County Durham have given £34m and the area has received just £12m." Sure. But there's a critical mass of theatre in London that there isn't elsewhere in the country and it inevitably feeds into each other and creates something dynamic that you can't replicate just because you want to. Britain is unhealthy in having a capital city that sucks everything into it (and is too expensive for people to live on an average salary) but it's going to take serious political will and long term planning to turn that around. A bit of ACE redistribution won't do anything. While this is very true, it does seem problematic to me that companies who specifically get 'regional' ACE funding still seem very focused on working in London. It seems like they've admitted defeat. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2017 21:24:16 GMT
Sure. But there's a critical mass of theatre in London that there isn't elsewhere in the country and it inevitably feeds into each other and creates something dynamic that you can't replicate just because you want to. Britain is unhealthy in having a capital city that sucks everything into it (and is too expensive for people to live on an average salary) but it's going to take serious political will and long term planning to turn that around. A bit of ACE redistribution won't do anything. While this is very true, it does seem problematic to me that companies who specifically get 'regional' ACE funding still seem very focused on working in London. It seems like they've admitted defeat. I don't have any evidence but I feel like the extent to which there's an arts-hungry audience outside of London gets massively under-estimated. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 19, 2017 10:56:36 GMT
Anecdotally (ok, based on me and a few I know), I live near Liverpool but most of my theatregoing is to London or Manchester because the sort of plays I Iike with casts I want to see are rarely put on locally, so I'm not really contributing much to the statistics in my native city! I have friends who will make the effort to travel to see a well-publicised play with a big name star in London but don't see much up here. When I was a teenager there did seem to be more stuff on up here with names I recognised as a draw. |
|
4,164 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Aug 19, 2017 20:29:09 GMT
Same here, really - I live 10 minutes away from the local theatre in Southend and have been there all of twice in 8 years. It's mainly used for am-dram and the odd tour from London. I say that but I don't actually get the newsletter so I guess I could be missing fantastic local work with the stars of tomorrow - but I really doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 5:08:41 GMT
Manchester is arguably England's second theatre city. Just take a look at the autumn programmes at the Royal Exchange, Home and Contact. Then, there's the Lowry, Palace and Opera House, Hope Mill, and nearby Octagon in Bolton and Oldham Coliseum. And Manchester International Festival, which will have a new, year-round, venue, The Factory, in a couple of years or so.
Liverpool Everyman & Playhouse is also good, but the quantity and range is greater in Manchester.
I'm out of touch but Glasgow used to have the best theatre in the UK with the Citizens and Tramway - more exciting in the 90s than the London theatre scene. And Edinburgh's Lyceum Theatre under David Greig is rated as probably having the best programme of any single theatre now.
London has the quantity so people can pick and choose from the offers of an abundance of theatres and ignore the duds. But the theatres outside London have to hit the mark with every show because each production is so much more prominent in the local theatre scene.
|
|
3,615 posts
|
NT Live
Apr 14, 2018 8:00:45 GMT
via mobile
Post by Rory on Apr 14, 2018 8:00:45 GMT
Output has been very disappointing recently. They are showing Ant & Cleo from the Nash later in the year but the only formally announced show remaining is the panned NT Macbeth. There is so much good stuff they could be showing at the minute or lining up to show but not a dickie bird.
|
|
19,856 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 14, 2018 8:10:42 GMT
Merged
|
|
3,615 posts
|
NT Live
Apr 14, 2018 8:26:06 GMT
via mobile
Post by Rory on Apr 14, 2018 8:26:06 GMT
Sorry - the topic search function on the mobile has failed me again!
|
|
5,716 posts
|
Post by lynette on Apr 14, 2018 9:47:56 GMT
Interesting about the nether regions..oops sorry ..I mean outside London. I was brung up in Birmingham and we had a Rep! Saw brilliant stuff there. I think the variety of work and the high quality set the standard for me. And an Alec ( Alexandra ) for the stock drawing room comedies and I suppose touring stuff though I didn’t know how things work then as I was taken by parents and then the Hippodrome for the Pantos. And a decent 'amateur' The Crescent. Then other local stuff started up as I left. So not bad. I first went to Stratford aged 14. Again taken by parents ( who hadn’t a clue about Shakespeare but enjoyed a good play) and then I went on the bus, When I passed driving test drove mum's car. So I think I had a good shot at seeing Theatre and I reckon I was hooked early on. Catch em young. Nothing fills my heart with joy more than seeing kids in an audience!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2018 9:56:37 GMT
I would like there to be a few more NT lives or cinema broadcast of shows on Broadway or maybe just not so London centric. We can all agree NT live does a great job as spreading London theatre around the country and world. Maybe I am being a bit selfish being London based but I would love more cinema broadcasts from else where ( there are also some shows I would love to see but don't think I will be able to)
|
|
3,615 posts
|
NT Live
Apr 20, 2018 8:27:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by Rory on Apr 20, 2018 8:27:34 GMT
Surprised and very disappointed that no screening was announced yesterday for The Lehman Trilogy. I'd love to know how they select the shows.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 8:43:51 GMT
Surprised and very disappointed that no screening was announced yesterday for The Lehman Trilogy. I'd love to know how they select the shows. I think it's a combination of firstly what will 'sell' as a cinema screening (so the Shakespeares are a good bet, as is anything with Sherlock in it) and a complicated process of those involved agreeing to sign over the rights to their 'bit'. Possibly Lehman being an adaptation has complicated it? possibly they think it won't sell as well. |
|
3,615 posts
|
NT Live
Apr 20, 2018 8:50:33 GMT
via mobile
Post by Rory on Apr 20, 2018 8:50:33 GMT
I thought this would have been a banker bet (groan) with SRB involved as nearly everything else he's done recently at the NT has been shown. Sam Mendes would be a major draw too especially after the Bond movies and The Ferryman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 8:57:05 GMT
I thought this would have been a banker bet (groan) with SRB involved as nearly everything else he's done recently at the NT has been shown. Sam Mendes would be a major draw too especially after the Bond movies and The Ferryman. I mean who knows (not even the NT live coordinators I bet haha) I mean I say 'bankable' but they also filmed that dire "comedy" with John Lithgow as well...so maybe they just throw darts at a board?! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 8:59:42 GMT
My suspicion is that they're gearing up to transfer Lehman so will be focusing on widening the audience by selling more theatre tickets rather than by screening methods.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 9:05:18 GMT
My suspicion is that they're gearing up to transfer Lehman so will be focusing on widening the audience by selling more theatre tickets rather than by screening methods. This was another thought I had. Most of the NT lives are the truly limited runs that people wouldn't otherwise be able to see. Recent exceptions of Macbeth (but not with the star leads) and Angels being the only things I can think of with transfers and broadcasts...I'm sure someone will correct me though. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 9:08:34 GMT
Yeah, you're right, they're not absolute in that a show is screened by NT Live *or* transferred. In fact, if I were a betting woman, I'd put 50p on them getting a transfer sorted first and then NT Living that.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 9:09:38 GMT
Yeah, you're right, they're not absolute in that a show is screened by NT Live *or* transferred. In fact, if I were a betting woman, I'd put 50p on them getting a transfer sorted first and then NT Living that. oof I reckon you're safe with at least a quid on that |
|
77 posts
|
Post by adolphus on Apr 29, 2018 22:52:35 GMT
In September NT's Julie and McKellan in Lear. In November first broadcast from Nottingham is Madness of George III with Mark Gatiss
|
|
4,164 posts
|
NT Live
Apr 30, 2018 7:41:09 GMT
via mobile
Post by kathryn on Apr 30, 2018 7:41:09 GMT
Really? That would be genuinely lovely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 8:03:28 GMT
No need to doubt, NT Live already announced all three of those on 19th April.
|
|
