4,790 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Mark on Nov 22, 2019 23:39:07 GMT
Very tricky for a show like this when it’s so heavily reliant on its names - a concert of Les Mis would not have sold for as high a price or sold out without those billed names.
Whilst star casting has always been around, more and more shows are relying on this star casting to sell tickets at vastly inflated prices and a large percentage of premium tickets. Just looking ahead we have Sara Bareilles in Waitress, Michael Ball in Hairspray, Whoopi Goldberg in Sister Act, Imelda Staunton in Hello, Dolly!
The shows you’ll find understudies more “celebrated” are shows like Six, Come From Away, Dear Evan Hansen - no mention of any casting on their posters etc. That’s when you’re buying “the show”. If you advertise it so prominently with specific performers then prepare for disappointed customers.
I remember buying tickets for “Promises, Promises” on Broadway and I was worried all week that Chenoweth would be out - she wasn’t and it was a big relief, but I can just imagine my disappointment if she had been out.
I was raging when I went to see “Speed the Plow” and both Richard Schiff and Lindsay Lohan were out. Sure the understudies were good (in an awful play), but i wouldn’t have booked the play without the casting.
(this in no way excuses the twitter attacks)
|
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on Nov 23, 2019 0:05:02 GMT
There must be a better way to display the news than this. It looks pretty terrible!
|
|
|
|
Post by craig on Nov 23, 2019 0:14:21 GMT
I've missed plenty of stars over the years and it's, naturally, disappointing. I think the difference these days, as Mark has noted, is that star casting generally equals premium pricing. Whilst bashing a sick star on Twitter is clearly a moronic move, I do think punters have a right to be furious at the lack of options available.
|
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Nov 23, 2019 2:09:20 GMT
Geez this show really brings out the worst in a certain demographic of theatregoers! Sure I get it you're disappointed because you paid "£100s and come specially from wherever for my Mums 50th!! angryface", but it's already wrong to complain to the theatre staff who literally cannot do anything about it. Complaining directly to the actors themselves on social media is next level idiocy.
Go yell at Cammack instead, he's the one who started this. And he's the one who needs to know the consequences of hyping productions up leading to unrealistic expectations.
|
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Nov 23, 2019 2:12:27 GMT
There must be a better way to display the news than this. It looks pretty terrible! I mean, it's cheap, legible and states the situation as it is. What more could you want? 😂 (though I generally have to agree, from a graphic design/visual communications perspective, these notices/understudy leaflets usually look pretty terrible and haphazardly done) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 9:09:49 GMT
Oh dear - once again Carrie wades in as a victim.
I have a lot of sympathy for these people on Twitter this week. If I'd travelled across the country (continent), paid for hotels and transport on top of an already inflated ticket price, I'd be angry if ALL the billed names in the "All-Star Concert" were out. For a lot of people, this was a special one-time event, and they never got what they booked for (despite how good the understudies are). Illness is unavoidable, but people still have a right to be upset.
Obviously I don't agree with verbal abuse in any situation, but Twitter has become the go-to place to have your voice heard. I would never @ someone who is off sick, but actors should be prepared for it and appreciate (whether it's justified or not) people are going to be upset/angry. Also, Cammack is not on hand to take complaints in the theatre, so people have a right to say something to FOH staff. Again there is a way to do that without abuse, but it's then for the theatre to feedback to the producers. The producers themselves are not accessible at the time, so Twitter and the FOH staff are the only option people have there and then.
I think people who go and see a West End show every other week, or the same show multiple times, seem to forget how special an event it is for others who have maybe never even seen a show in London before.
|
|
19,685 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 23, 2019 9:24:59 GMT
What’s wrong with them all anyway? Have they got colds? Tired? or what?
Interesting to note how the sickness has spread through all of the main cast now. You see this a lot in the workplace, if the boss is continually off sick it creates a culture of “oh well they’re always off so it’s ok for me to be off” then before you know it you have a major attendance problem. I’m not saying that’s what’s going on here but you have to be really careful about examples being set in any industry.
I do think that at this point the customers are not getting what they paid for. Regardless of disclaimers about guaranteeing performers, this is a mess now and the producers should be making a gesture. They must have generated millions in sales on this show, not to mention the cinema screenings and CD sales, for the nights where more than one of the leads has been off refund 50% of the face value. That would be fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by clair on Nov 23, 2019 9:38:13 GMT
If they have the cold that I had a few weeks ago they have my full sympathy - I couldn't even speak without coughing like mad for ages so how they would attempt to sing is beyond me. Colds spread quickly too so not surprising they're all going down with it. In an ideal world it would spread gradually so only one of them was off at a time, however we don't live in that world.
I do feel for those who have travelled, booked hotels etc - been there myself when the person performing has had to cancel and it's horrible. However I knew that person would only cancel if absolutely necessary so accepted it even though disappointed. From all I gather Michael Ball rarely cancels so must be feeling rotten, I don't know about the others.
It's a risk we take when booking tickets for a performer rather than a performance. If we're not prepared to take the risk we shouldn't book - and we certainly shouldn't take our disappointment out on the front of house staff who are probably dreading going into work as it is knowing there's a high chance of abuse from someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Nov 23, 2019 9:59:07 GMT
I’m not sure that there is an answer; not one that will please everyone. Some sort of gesture would be welcome but that’s a massive admin headache. Free cinema tickets might be a way to go then at least people get to see the show in its intended state and will have at least experienced its noise in person. But it is a lot of money and people are right but misguided to be angry at the performers. I’m not sure that I would have run it quite so far into flu season just to keep hold of some meaningless record.
|
|
7,066 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Nov 23, 2019 13:19:22 GMT
Cameron offering any sort of gesture is very unlikely,
|
|
241 posts
|
Post by justafan on Nov 23, 2019 13:28:01 GMT
Last Monday there was a couple selling tickets to the returns queue as they thought they’d booked a full musical and hadn’t realised it was a concert version. 🤪
Quite possibly I’m the only theatre goer who silently cheered when she saw the notice in the foyer that Earl Carpenter was Javert. Not that I wish Michael Ball to be ill but just to have the choice to see/hear Earl Carpenter in the role again
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 13:32:32 GMT
I'm probably going to be completely slated for this opinion. When there is a star casting (ie. Les Mis Concert, Light in the Piazza, Sister Act, even 9 to 5 and Waitress) and one of the stars is off sick or takes unscheduled leave that wasn't made clear when they bought the ticket, I do think the customer should be entitled to a refund or exchange. It's good customer service, putting the customer first! Audience members travel miles and miles, sometimes across oceans, to see advertised stars and it doesn't seem fair that they shouldn't get something as it was sold. Its deceit, possibly fraud.
I know they cover themselves with all these clauses but if I've paid the extortionate prices which alot of these star cast shows are, I want to see that star or stars. I'm sure the understudies are wonderful, but when the ticket prices are as astronomical as they are. It's only fair. Not everyone would take the refund or exchange, but the small amount of people that would, it would save alot of grief and make those people happier.
|
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on Nov 23, 2019 13:57:07 GMT
It is hard to know what the answer is.
If it was a normal performance then no cause for complaint but it has been billed as the "all star Les Mis".
|
|
1,736 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Nov 23, 2019 14:05:08 GMT
Just got to the matinee and Earl is on for Javert.
I love that last time I got John and Michael now I have Alfie and Earl.
Live theatre for you
|
|
7,066 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Nov 23, 2019 14:09:32 GMT
I'm probably going to be completely slated for this opinion. When there is a star casting (ie. Les Mis Concert, Light in the Piazza, Sister Act, even 9 to 5 and Waitress) and one of the stars is off sick or takes unscheduled leave that wasn't made clear when they bought the ticket, I do think the customer should be entitled to a refund or exchange. It's good customer service, putting the customer first! Audience members travel miles and miles, sometimes across oceans, to see advertised stars and it doesn't seem fair that they shouldn't get something as it was sold. Its deceit, possibly fraud. I know they cover themselves with all these clauses but if I've paid the extortionate prices which alot of these star cast shows are, I want to see that star or stars. I'm sure the understudies are wonderful, but when the ticket prices are as astronomical as they are. It's only fair. Not everyone would take the refund or exchange, but the small amount of people that would, it would save alot of grief and make those people happier. So you think the lady that was abusive to the cast and FOH should have been entitled to an exchange or refund then? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 14:18:37 GMT
I'm probably going to be completely slated for this opinion. When there is a star casting (ie. Les Mis Concert, Light in the Piazza, Sister Act, even 9 to 5 and Waitress) and one of the stars is off sick or takes unscheduled leave that wasn't made clear when they bought the ticket, I do think the customer should be entitled to a refund or exchange. It's good customer service, putting the customer first! Audience members travel miles and miles, sometimes across oceans, to see advertised stars and it doesn't seem fair that they shouldn't get something as it was sold. Its deceit, possibly fraud. I know they cover themselves with all these clauses but if I've paid the extortionate prices which alot of these star cast shows are, I want to see that star or stars. I'm sure the understudies are wonderful, but when the ticket prices are as astronomical as they are. It's only fair. Not everyone would take the refund or exchange, but the small amount of people that would, it would save alot of grief and make those people happier. So you think the lady that was drunk and abusive should have been entitled to an exchange or refund then? Yes, before she had the chance to get drunk and abusive. As soon as the theatre know that someone isn't going to be on, they should be informing people at the box office or just buy putting up those posters. That's fine too. But giving people that option is far better. She probably would have been happier with a refund or she might have been able to come further along in the run. But telling people they have to pay up and shut up is awful. |
|
2,850 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Nov 23, 2019 14:27:30 GMT
I'm sure no one here is justifying abusive behaviour, but if a production is entirely advertised and sold on the strength of a name (and this is even more the case for shows like Funny Girl, Sunset Boulevard or Killer Joe in the past few years) people should totally be allowed exchanges or refund. On Broadway if the stars whose names are above the title are absent you are entitled to a refund, and that's a very fair policy.
When Glenn Close missed one performance during the recent run of Sunset Boulevard on Broadway audience members who didn't want to see the show without her got a refund, while people who went to ENO to see the same show because they were promised "Sunset Boulevard with Glenn Close" didn't get any, even if they got to see only one of the two things advertised. And that's unfair.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 14:31:11 GMT
So you think the lady that was drunk and abusive should have been entitled to an exchange or refund then? Yes, before she had the chance to get drunk and abusive. As soon as the theatre know that someone isn't going to be on, they should be informing people at the box office or just buy putting up those posters. That's fine too. But giving people that option is far better. She probably would have been happier with a refund or she might have been able to come further along in the run. But telling people they have to pay up and shut up is awful. I completely agree. People shrugging their shoulders and saying, "You booked to see Les Mis", is what allowed the situation to escalate. Alfie's attendance has become dreadful, and people are aware of this and have run out of understanding. So I think the producers should definitely be acting now. While the other illnesses this week are unfortunate, the producers are not delivering what has been advertised. If the lady behaved like that after being offered a refund, then that should be dealt with separately. |
|
879 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Nov 23, 2019 14:45:25 GMT
I think refunds would be fair, especially when both leads are off. When Matt Cardle dropped out of Falsettos I was immediately given a refund. He was a name attached to the show and what I booked for and they recognised that. However if they hadn't offered it I would have accepted that, but I think it was fair that they did. And let's be honest, it's not like Les Mis isn't making enough dosh.
|
|
19,685 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 23, 2019 14:46:28 GMT
I’m reminded of that episode of Judge Judy when a woman bought what she thought was a mobile phone on eBay and received an envelope with a printed photo of the mobile phone. The defence was that the plaintiff saw a photo of a mobile phone, bid for it and got exactly what she paid for.
You can imagine how that went down with Judy... 😱
|
|
7,066 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Nov 23, 2019 14:49:56 GMT
I think refunds would be fair, especially when both leads are off. When Matt Cardle dropped out of Falsettos I was immediately given a refund. He was a name attached to the show and what I booked for and they recognised that. However if they hadn't offered it I would have accepted that, but I think it was fair that they did. And let's be honest, it's not like Les Mis isn't making enough dosh. That’s a very different situation to someone being ill. |
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Nov 23, 2019 15:27:24 GMT
So you think the lady that was drunk and abusive should have been entitled to an exchange or refund then? Yes, before she had the chance to get drunk and abusive. As soon as the theatre know that someone isn't going to be on, they should be informing people at the box office or just buy putting up those posters. That's fine too. But giving people that option is far better. She probably would have been happier with a refund or she might have been able to come further along in the run. But telling people they have to pay up and shut up is awful. "Pay up and shut up" sounds inaccurate because from my personal experience Gielgud staff have been nothing but accommodating, I feel this lady must've been given the option to be refunded if she was already that upset and making a scene before the show started, but she chose to go in and sit through the entire show. If she didn't properly check the cast board or the notices up in the foyer before going in, then got surprised it wasn't Alfie, well... I have no sympathies. The moment you hand over your ticket and step through into the auditorium, all accountability is yours. |
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Nov 23, 2019 15:36:03 GMT
Last Monday there was a couple selling tickets to the returns queue as they thought they’d booked a full musical and hadn’t realised it was a concert version. 🤪 Quite possibly I’m the only theatre goer who silently cheered when she saw the notice in the foyer that Earl Carpenter was Javert. Not that I wish Michael Ball to be ill but just to have the choice to see/hear Earl Carpenter in the role again You and me both! Ended up seeing this concert multiple times this week because of the unexpected reunion of my dream cast. Legs are still sore from standing... but so worth it. The chemistry between John and Earl is unparalleled and their voices blend together so well. John is reliably wonderful every night whether his own or replacing Alfie, but pair him with Earl (who has got even better since his Broadway and International Tour runs), the tension in their Confrontation scene was real and jaw-dropping. John also gives a fantastic and emotional beginning to Javert's Suicide, which Earl does brilliantly and devastatingly... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2019 18:11:17 GMT
I think refunds would be fair, especially when both leads are off. When Matt Cardle dropped out of Falsettos I was immediately given a refund. He was a name attached to the show and what I booked for and they recognised that. However if they hadn't offered it I would have accepted that, but I think it was fair that they did. And let's be honest, it's not like Les Mis isn't making enough dosh. That’s a very different situation to someone being ill. It's a different situation but they should both be treated in the same way. Its all about putting the customer before money, in my opinion. As I have said, not everyone will be bothered about seeing a star in a show but for the people that are, that option should be freely available to them. The Other Palace did very well in that situation for the above member, let's see more of it. |
|
|
|
Post by stagebyte on Nov 23, 2019 18:17:47 GMT
The level of outrage on Twitter from actors and regular theatregoers and of course ‘voice of the industry’ CHF towards people who are disappointed not to see their favourite is so privileged and condescending. To the regular, yes seeing the show ‘for the show’ is something we’re happy to do. Lots of regulars love to play understudy bingo for example. However CM has deliberately billed this as ‘All Star Les Mis BOE BALL FLETCHER LUCAS - their names ARE the selling point or they wouldn’t be mentioned? They are designed to draw a crowd. Lots of these people have booked specifically to see Boe or the guy off Little Britain.
No one is disputing understudies are wonderful or that actors are deliberately ill but please twitter and the likes of CHF allow these people to voice their disappointment without encouraging a pile on. The level of hypocrisy of Miss Fletcher is quite astounding given that not a day goes past when she’s not tagging in Costa on Twitter because her coffee has been made wrongly or ASOS because a dress hasn’t turned up. Think she even tagged in Kilworth House Theatre and the stage manager at one point as a gift for her bf had gone astray.
While I agree that tagging in actors is unfair. The producers need to look at the ethical implications of star billing and refund accordingly if the actors name is over the title of the show as is the case here. 100 a ticket plus hotel and travel isn’t cheap - punters have a right to voice their disappointment.
|
|
