|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 4:38:25 GMT
And will be used to try out new musicals according to Baz in his latest column.
Sounds like an awful name for a theatre to me, almost makes it sound cheap and insignificant
|
|
19,656 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 3, 2016 4:40:14 GMT
Even worse than "Trafalgar Studios".
Who signs this stuff off?
|
|
4,955 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Jun 3, 2016 6:30:52 GMT
Terrible name
|
|
2,741 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Jun 3, 2016 6:38:24 GMT
Bizarre. I understand from previous posts that it's coming under ALW ownership/control, so this might have made sense if the Palace was an ALW theatre, as in the sense of "this is where musicals grow up before they go to the Palace"... But no, I can't even make that weak logic stick.
|
|
571 posts
|
Post by westendwendy on Jun 3, 2016 6:44:42 GMT
AWFUL!!!!
|
|
543 posts
|
Post by freckles on Jun 3, 2016 7:08:19 GMT
Yuk!
Bit like The Other Place in Stratford upon Avon, I suppose?
I'm still going to call it St James.
|
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jun 3, 2016 7:13:25 GMT
Hm, bad bad bad !  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 8:09:26 GMT
It's a stupid name for a theatre. I like visiting it, but I honestly don't fancy the sound of Andrew Lloyd Webber's plans for the place, and it really is a STUPID name for a theatre. He should at least have the word "theatre" in there somewhere, like, say, the Victoria Palace Theatre.  |
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jun 3, 2016 8:32:03 GMT
Well one possible positive would be if they installed comfortable seating....
|
|
2,741 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Jun 3, 2016 8:36:19 GMT
Well one possible positive would be if they installed comfortable seating.... I'd love them to reconfigure the main auditorium but it seems to me that the seating follows the architecture so it would be very difficult to reconfigure without a major rebuild or reduction in capacity. |
|
197 posts
|
Post by dan on Jun 3, 2016 8:56:13 GMT
I think they're avoiding the word "theatre" so 'The Other Palace' can refer to the OTHER Victoria Palace and the OTHER Buckingham Palace, both around the corner.
|
|
840 posts
|
Post by Steffi on Jun 3, 2016 9:05:47 GMT
Don't like it. It'll still be The St. James for me.
|
|
430 posts
|
Post by alison on Jun 3, 2016 9:12:24 GMT
Good grief, when I read this on Twitter I thought it was a joke. Seriously?
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jun 3, 2016 9:16:44 GMT
Agree this sounds bad! Of course, the St James Theatre is not actually in St James (there used to be a St James Theatre in St James) and is on Palace Street. But 'The Other' seems to imply an existence in relation to something else, whereas I would want a name emphasising its existence in its own right.
|
|
209 posts
|
Post by Flim Flam on Jun 3, 2016 9:32:53 GMT
Yes, and I don't think most people booking a ticket would have a clue as to which palace the 'other' is referencing.
And too similar sounding, as mentioned, to 'The Other Place'.
I wish I could get a job where I sat around all day making up daft names for things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 9:34:15 GMT
I think they're avoiding the word "theatre" so 'The Other Palace' can refer to the OTHER Victoria Palace and the OTHER Buckingham Palace, both around the corner. Yep, I imagine that's exactly the reasoning, and it's still a really stupid name. |
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jun 3, 2016 9:35:27 GMT
From leftfield, how about the Westminster Theatre !
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 10:47:12 GMT
How about the Duchess Victoria Theatre, or DVT for short since that's what you'll get if you sit there
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 10:48:49 GMT
How about - and I know this is going to sound really stupid but give it some thought - how about calling it the St James Theatre? So its name gives a rough idea of its location, a clear idea of what kind of building it is, and allows people who've been there in the past to easily recognise it as the same place they've been to before?
|
|
2,741 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Jun 3, 2016 11:39:45 GMT
No. The auditorium is wooden steps within the concrete box of the walls. To rip out all the planks the seats rest on and re-configure so that people with legs are comfortable would be simple, if they were willing to pay for it. Thanks, that's good to know, Monkey. So I can hope that at some point in the future if someone with money and ambition (perhaps someone who's made a fortune over the years from theatre, I dunno who) took over the theatre, they might turn it into a venue suitable for adult human beings. Fingers crossed. |
|
1,476 posts
|
Post by Steve on Jun 3, 2016 13:47:02 GMT
"The Other Palace" will simply cause mass confusion (just as "Apollo / Apollo Victoria" / "Hammersmith Apollo" and "Lyric / Lyric Hammersmith" do) with the Palace and (if Cam Mac doesn't re-name it, the Victoria Palace) in due course, I'm sure. I imagine that is the intention. I mean, to me, I get my Chinese food at the Palace Restaurant, so "The Other Palace" is an alternate food source. But for most people, the St. James Theatre is simply not on their radar, a small boutique operation for theatre fanatics. Now that the most confusing name in the world has been chosen, everyone will soon know about it's existence. The cheekiest thing about the name is the way it abuses the fact that the word "Palace" is too generic to be trademarked. It is obvious that calling the theatre "The Other Palace" dilutes the branding of "The Palace Theatre," and piggybacks away some of it's glory. It also dilutes the branding of the "Victoria Palace," as it is so close to Victoria. Psychologically, the grandeur of the word "Palace," coupled with the deliberate confusion with two great West End theatres, means that it will henceforth carry West End associations in the minds of people who think about the name. And of course, for tourists in particular, it is a cheeky joke that also piggybacks some of the grandeur from it's Buckingham Palace neighbour. Plainly, the marketing gurus have come up with a name that can thrust and steal this theatre into the front ranks of people's thoughts. If it's first Lloyd Webber productions turn out to be good, that will be a big success, a new birth for the theatre. If they turn out to be bad, the word "other" will come to mean "rubbish," and the theatre might as well start serving Chinese food. |
|
345 posts
|
Post by johartuk on Jun 3, 2016 14:30:55 GMT
Why did it have to be renamed? It seems a bit redundant to me. The original name is fine. The new name sounds like something they came up with as a stop-gap until they thought of a new name!
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Jun 3, 2016 15:23:02 GMT
How about - and I know this is going to sound really stupid but give it some thought - how about calling it the St James Theatre? So its name gives a rough idea of its location, a clear idea of what kind of building it is, and allows people who've been there in the past to easily recognise it as the same place they've been to before? Quite! It's off the radar of any casual theatre goer as it is. They may as well call it The Theatre with No Name! |
|
4,970 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 3, 2016 15:28:13 GMT
Name doesn't make much sense.
How about calling it the lab.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 16:43:03 GMT
There's a fish and chip shop in Frinton-on-Sea called the Other Plaice.
|
|
