|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 11:45:18 GMT
Someone in Cate Blanchett's team should have known this would happen. An international star performing in a small arena with cheap tickets is a disaster. It's not a disaster. Well, not compared to the Brexit chaos, which is of a totally other order of Effed-Uppness but it's a major PR disaster for the National (and potentially as to how that impacts funding; exclusivity doesn't go down well). |
|
|
|
Post by shelbee on Jan 16, 2019 11:57:49 GMT
A lot of people outside the UK want to see Cate Blanchett live on stage, but are unable to get tickets. ….. and they're... going to die because of it? No, just disappointed they can't. It's not like she does a play every year. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:00:23 GMT
And I'm HELLA disappointed that I had to sit through Reeve Carney in Hadestown when the role has previously been played by Damon Daunno, but I'll get over it. It's still just a show and it's not causing me any harm.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 12:00:25 GMT
Well, not compared to the Brexit chaos, which is of a totally other order of Effed-Uppness but it's a major PR disaster for the National (and potentially as to how that impacts funding; exclusivity doesn't go down well). Out of interest, is it your take that the NT shouldn't put on big stars onto the Dorfman? I mean, the high proportion of disappointed customers would only be reduced by decreasing demand (e.g. smaller star, higher ticket prices, less publicity) or increasing supply (e.g. larger auditorium, longer run). Isn't the flipside of that argument that cultural venues and the creatives should be driven by artistic goals rather than financial/monetary factors? I mean, more people might have been able to see it on the Olivier but if the play was best suited to the smaller stage, shouldn't that be a driving force? Similarly, while Blanchett will no doubt bring huge publicity, the playwright & director will also (hopefully) be thinking about how she fits into their production... |
|
|
|
Post by shelbee on Jan 16, 2019 12:05:00 GMT
And I'm HELLA disappointed that I had to sit through Reeve Carney in Hadestown when the role has previously been played by Damon Daunno, but I'll get over it. It's still just a show and it's not causing me any harm. Damon Daunno is not Cate Blanchett. No one said it is causing harm, but your overreaction. People are disappointed they will not be able to see her on stage. If she did All About Eve, this would not be an issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:06:24 GMT
I think in general, as I've said earlier int his thread, you can either maintain your artistic integrity by doing the production in a small space, or cast an international star in the lead, but not both. Or aim for a transfer. Or do an NT Live screening. Or do an initial run with your star then recast. Or one of many other options.
|
|
4,155 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jan 16, 2019 12:08:46 GMT
Just NT Live the bugger!
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbee on Jan 16, 2019 12:11:44 GMT
I think in general, as I've said earlier int his thread, you can either maintain your artistic integrity by doing the production in a small space, or cast an international star in the lead, but not both. Or aim for a transfer. Or do an NT Live screening. Or do an initial run with your star then recast. Or one of many other options. I agree. If they want to use a star in a small arena, they have to price tickets accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:13:26 GMT
An idea that I've seen touted around recently is that the NT should offer public understudy runs for this production so that people who want to see the play for itself but don't give a single solitary hoot about Cate Blanchett can have a chance to see it and, honestly, that idea doesn't sit well with me. I understand where they're coming from, and I do love me an understudy situation, but theatre's so collaborative that it seems disrespectful to suggest that she's interchangeable and not a significant part of the piece. She's doing this play because, presumably, she wants to and has worked with Mitchell and Crimp and the rest of them to help shape the entire production, she's not just been parachuted in (*coughKMPahem*) for the hell of it.
I mean, I see where the people who suggest that the play should have gone on sale without announcing any of the cast, so that people who are interested in the play itself could have bought the first lot of tickets, are coming from, but it's got an unfortunate subtext of "if you want to see a play because of who's in it then you're not a 'real' theatre fan", and that kind of gatekeepery nonsense has never sat well with me. Everyone has an actor who they'd pay to see read the phone book, and it's kinda gross to think it's okay to judge people because of who "their" actor is. I'm not cooler because my phone book actor is Patsy Ferran, you're not an unworthy teenybopper if your phone book actor is Tom Hiddleston, you're just as valid as anyone if your phone book actor is Cate Blanchett.
Besides, have you met people? Just generally? If 80% of the seats sold out on the back of Katie Mitchell's name I'd laugh and then the remaining 20% disappeared within the first five minutes of Blanchett being announced, there'd still be hella complaining. The Dorfman is still a very small venue to put an internationally renowned performer in for a limited run, the National would be accused of duplicity for not announcing Blanchett sooner, the people who came in for the last 20% of the seats would be sitting in the worst seats in the Dorfman (a theatre which has very few good seats) and that would not go down well AT all. People always complain, and if you try to foresee one complaint, your action will probably lead to at least two others. The Nash don't make decisions willynilly, they've decided that Dorfman complaints and ballot complaints are what they're willing to live with. So there we are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:13:41 GMT
If she did All About Eve, this would not be an issue. If she isn't willing to commit to a longer run of this then she would never have committed to a longer run of All About Eve! And I'm rather glad she didn't, as I'm very much looking forward to seeing Gillian Anderson instead (and Lily James)! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:14:35 GMT
Well, not compared to the Brexit chaos, which is of a totally other order of Effed-Uppness but it's a major PR disaster for the National (and potentially as to how that impacts funding; exclusivity doesn't go down well). Out of interest, is it your take that the NT shouldn't put on big stars onto the Dorfman? I mean, the high proportion of disappointed customers would only be reduced by decreasing demand (e.g. smaller star, higher ticket prices, less publicity) or increasing supply (e.g. larger auditorium, longer run). Isn't the flipside of that argument that cultural venues and the creatives should be driven by artistic goals rather than financial/monetary factors? I mean, more people might have been able to see it on the Olivier but if the play was best suited to the smaller stage, shouldn't that be a driving force? Similarly, while Blanchett will no doubt bring huge publicity, the playwright & director will also (hopefully) be thinking about how she fits into their production... I said this earlier - if there is such an expectation, then they need to announce a broadcast at the outset, so that those who want to see it in the UK (and beyond) have a chance of seeing it, they could also announce an extension in the Dorfman due to public demand (with either that star or a different one) so that it takes the pressure off tickets/day seats etc.
We now have the means of reaching everyone who makes an effort to see something, exclusivity is no longer necessary.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 12:15:16 GMT
I think in general, as I've said earlier int his thread, you can either maintain your artistic integrity by doing the production in a small space, or cast an international star in the lead, but not both... That's fair enough from the NT perspective, but where does that leave the star? I mean, by that rationale once someone reaches a certain status they would effectively be forced into performing on the larger stages and, in turn, in plays that work on a big stage. ... Or aim for a transfer. Or do an NT Live screening. Or do an initial run with your star then recast. Or one of many other options. I agree about NT Live or a transfer (likely with a recast), but I don't think NT Live at the Dorfman has been done before (possibly mistaken but I think Mosquitoes for instance wasn't either?) so it might not be equipped, and we don't know yet that a transfer is off the cards.
In terms of music, it's far more accepted for big bands to occasionally play in tiny venues or on secret sets at festivals. Naturally this means that lots of people miss out, but the flipside is that for those that go it's a special experience and (I imagine) the musicians get a level of connection and artistry that might not exist once you're playing endless huge stadiums.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:16:31 GMT
(For the record, we don't know that there's no future life planned. It seems unlikely based on who's involved, but as far as I'm aware they haven't explicitly said "this will never return, this will never transfer, you must see it during this brief run or you will never get to see it ever ever ever".)
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbee on Jan 16, 2019 12:21:37 GMT
Out of interest, is it your take that the NT shouldn't put on big stars onto the Dorfman? I mean, the high proportion of disappointed customers would only be reduced by decreasing demand (e.g. smaller star, higher ticket prices, less publicity) or increasing supply (e.g. larger auditorium, longer run). Isn't the flipside of that argument that cultural venues and the creatives should be driven by artistic goals rather than financial/monetary factors? I mean, more people might have been able to see it on the Olivier but if the play was best suited to the smaller stage, shouldn't that be a driving force? Similarly, while Blanchett will no doubt bring huge publicity, the playwright & director will also (hopefully) be thinking about how she fits into their production... I said this earlier - if there is such an expectation, then they need to announce a broadcast at the outset, so that those who want to see it in the UK (and beyond) has a chance of seeing it, they could also announce an extension in the Dorfman due to public demand (with either that star or a different one) so that it takes the pressure off tickets/day seats etc.
We now have the means of reaching everyone who makes an effort to see something, exclusivity is no longer necessary.
NT said on twitter there was no plans to broadcast the play...which upset even more people. |
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 12:24:54 GMT
I see where the people who suggest that the play should have gone on sale without announcing any of the cast, so that people who are interested in the play itself could have bought the first lot of tickets, are coming from, but it's got an unfortunate subtext of "if you want to see a play because of who's in it then you're not a 'real' theatre fan", and that kind of gatekeepery nonsense has never sat well with me. Everyone has an actor who they'd pay to see read the phone book, and it's kinda gross to think it's okay to judge people because of who "their" actor is. I'm not cooler because my phone book actor is Patsy Ferran, you're not an unworthy teenybopper if your phone book actor is Tom Hiddleston, you're just as valid as anyone if your phone book actor is Cate Blanchett. I absolutely agree with this. It's one thing if the casting isn't fixed at the time of sale, but if a venue deliberately withheld that information, it would effectively be judging what constitutes a good or bad reason to go to the theatre. That is just incredibly elitist and especially inappropriate for a publicly funded venue in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:42:16 GMT
Damon Daunno is not Cate Blanchett. But have you ever seen them in the same place at the same time? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 12:56:22 GMT
They're certainly making good on that title aren't they?  |
|
4,986 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jan 16, 2019 12:56:55 GMT
If this was a Martin Crimp play with no name attached, I am sure availability would be very good across all price bands.
I find people who go to just see there favourite ‘star’, have an awful level of entitlement and behaviour to match, I remember all the people who went just to see Amy Schumer in Meteor Shower on Broadway were intolerable and when the cast did the announcement for Broadway Cares at the end, they just walked out whilst a cast member was asking for donations and the shocked cast member even said ‘don’t you care about HIV and Aids’. This is what you attract when you stunt cast and let the great unwashed in under the guise of being inclusive. They tend not to go back, unless to see the next stunt cast, so theatre doesn’t really benefit.
Any case I don’t understand why they didn’t put the play into the Lytterton and give everyone a reasonable chance of going.
|
|
|
|
Post by asfound on Jan 16, 2019 12:59:00 GMT
I mean, I see where the people who suggest that the play should have gone on sale without announcing any of the cast, so that people who are interested in the play itself could have bought the first lot of tickets, are coming from, but it's got an unfortunate subtext of "if you want to see a play because of who's in it then you're not a 'real' theatre fan", and that kind of gatekeepery nonsense has never sat well with me. Everyone has an actor who they'd pay to see read the phone book, and it's kinda gross to think it's okay to judge people because of who "their" actor is. I'm not cooler because my phone book actor is Patsy Ferran, you're not an unworthy teenybopper if your phone book actor is Tom Hiddleston, you're just as valid as anyone if your phone book actor is Cate Blanchett. This all sounds very right on but it is also unfortunately complete balls of the same variety as the "all art is subjective so all opinions are equal" school. When I went to see Killer Joe with Orlando Bloom, a play I've been wanting to see for years, I was sitting right next to a couple of tourists I ended up chatting to. All they knew about the whole thing is that Orlando Bloom was in it. The first thing they said to me as they took their seats was "Is Orlando Bloom going to be here? Can I take pictures?". I actually doubt they even knew it was a theatre production and after taking to them post show they gave the impression that they would be happy if they never saw another play again. Now we can pretend that those kinds of people are the same as somebody who has studied the play extensively, has seen several productions, and is a fan of Tracy Letts if it makes us feel better about ourselves, but beyond being courteous and accepting they have a right to be there, I am not going to pretend everybody that sees a production for whatever reason is the same. As such I will say that those who would see this for Martin Crimp or Katie Mitchell are actually different and leaning more towards being genuine theatre fans than those who are just celeb chasing, and I think they should have had a chance to book tickets before all the Blanchett hype began. This subtext is not "unfortunate", it's just the reality of the situation. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 13:11:44 GMT
I thought I read somewhere that the director specifically wanted the Dorfman or am I imagining that? Perhaps the production fits the Dorfman more than the Lyttleton? Aren't we always complaining about shows that go into inappropriate theatres for particular productions?
And are they really stunt casting here? Cate Blanchett has made a hugely successful film career from doing blockbusters and small independent arty projects which are never intended for large audiences. From looking at her stage career to date too, she's not exactly gone for the big blockbusting crowd pleasers there either so it's not altogether inconceivable that the idea of working with Martin Crimp, Katie Mitchell and Stephen Dillane ticked a lot of boxes for La Blanchett. And who are we to criticise an actor who wants to do a small scale piece of theatre that nourishes her creative instincts just because she has two Oscars and it means that there are people who might not get to see it? Should she just always be stuck doing long runners in bigger venues now?
And I dislike the great unwashed as much as the next snob but seriously, the majority of my theatre going adventures are related to either (a) someone I like off the telly or (b) someone I think is hot hot HOT. We all do it. Apart from showgirl.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 13:19:05 GMT
The bitterness which has arisen
As the start date of this production
Has come closer
Is quite astonishing
Let me remind you
The NT allowed all members at higher levels
To book 2 tickets on any date of their choice
This was BEFORE any ballots had been carried out
The reality is they don’t give a sh*t about empty sentiments or “I supported the theatre for years” (by always scrabbling for the cheapie tickets
What speaks to them is cold hard cash
They charge £160 per ticket for the annual supporters party which is in ADDITION to the membership costs
They are concerned with making money
Same as everyone else in this world
If you really wanted to buy tickets to this show
It really wasn’t hard
If you were expecting the NT to prioritise you due to your own deluded immense levels of loyalty and pander and beg after you
Then you are mistaken
|
|
943 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Jan 16, 2019 13:26:59 GMT
I think the ballot was over complicated but any way they sold the tickets they were going to get complaints as we can see on this thread!
As Ryan says the vast majority of us have booked something because we like one of the actors involved so arguing that people going for Cate or Orlando are somehow lesser is absurd. It's more casual theatre goers who are keeping the West End going not us on this board. And yes some may not like it and never come back but so what, they tried it and it didn't work for them. Again I'm sure we've all done that at some point.
And criticising artists for making decisions that don't work commercially is very dodgy ground.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 13:32:40 GMT
I mean, I see where the people who suggest that the play should have gone on sale without announcing any of the cast, so that people who are interested in the play itself could have bought the first lot of tickets, are coming from, but it's got an unfortunate subtext of "if you want to see a play because of who's in it then you're not a 'real' theatre fan", and that kind of gatekeepery nonsense has never sat well with me. Everyone has an actor who they'd pay to see read the phone book, and it's kinda gross to think it's okay to judge people because of who "their" actor is. I'm not cooler because my phone book actor is Patsy Ferran, you're not an unworthy teenybopper if your phone book actor is Tom Hiddleston, you're just as valid as anyone if your phone book actor is Cate Blanchett. This all sounds very right on but it is also unfortunately complete balls of the same variety as the "all art is subjective so all opinions are equal" school. When I went to see Killer Joe with Orlando Bloom, a play I've been wanting to see for years, I was sitting right next to a couple of tourists I ended up chatting to. All they knew about the whole thing is that Orlando Bloom was in it. The first thing they said to me as they took their seats was "Is Orlando Bloom going to be here? Can I take pictures?". I actually doubt they even knew it was a theatre production and after taking to them post show they gave the impression that they would be happy if they never saw another play again. Now we can pretend that those kinds of people are the same as somebody who has studied the play extensively, has seen several productions, and is a fan of Tracy Letts if it makes us feel better about ourselves, but beyond being courteous and accepting they have a right to be there, I am not going to pretend everybody that sees a production for whatever reason is the same. As such I will say that those who would see this for Martin Crimp or Katie Mitchell are actually different and leaning more towards being genuine theatre fans than those who are just celeb chasing, and I think they should have had a chance to book tickets before all the Blanchett hype began. This subtext is not "unfortunate", it's just the reality of the situation. The problem is that once you go down that route there's essentially no end. After all, for everyone you look to and think "meh, they're only here to see Orlando, I've been a fan of Tracy Letts for years" there'll be someone else who'll look to you and say "You can hardly call yourself a fan of Tracy Letts if you've not seen this yet. If you were a true fan you'd have flown to New York in 1999 and seen it then" or whatever. And why is going for Tracy Letts more 'true' than than going for the director, or the theatre itself?
Or extending that further, couldn't someone who considers themselves a lifelong Orlando Bloom fan turn to you and say "Why should you get priority tickets? You don't even care that Orlando Bloom is performing, I've supported him for years."
Naturally we all judge others based on our own (subjective) views, but it would be another thing entirely in my opinion if a publicly funded cultural centre started doing that. Not least because a (perhaps small) number of people who attend because "it has that guy from that thing in it" might actually find this to be their gateway into the artform. I dare say many boardmembers' first experiences of the theatre might also have 'less than pure' intentions (my parents forced me to go, I liked the movie, I had to for schoolwork, or whatever)...
|
|
2,681 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by viserys on Jan 16, 2019 13:35:28 GMT
I'm fine with everything here really - the choice of the small theatre if that's what works for this play, the ballot system and even the fact that foreigners like me were excluded from said ballot (although I wish they had clarified that early on).
What I don't get is, that they don't do a NT Live to satisfy all those who missed out on tickets for one reason or other. I'm sure many Cumberbatch/Hiddleston/name your superstar fans were very happy that NT Live allowed them to get a look at their fave's performances of Hamlet and Coriolanus after all, so why not do the same here?
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbee on Jan 16, 2019 13:43:00 GMT
Damon Daunno is not Cate Blanchett. But have you ever seen them in the same place at the same time? That's a good point. Cate has played men before. |
|
