We really don't care about theatre do we?

After reading quite a lot of plays this year I've just been reading a review of 'The Norman Conquests' and thinking about catching at least one of them for a first outing ever ever at a theatre:

http://www.oldvictheatre.com/whatson.php

(good luck jed)

cheers j.

btw, i am coming to london in november to see this:

http://www.forcedentertainment.com/?lid=1081

come and see it, i can't guarantee it will be good but i'm making the 400 mile trip to see it so you can tell i'm a fan.

Ah, Riverside Studios, keep meaning to go to their cinema.

Not knowing whether it will be good is the best recommendation, in my book. I'll be there (not sure which day)

i'm there on saturday. it would be great to see you (this time).

let me confirm that though, i didn't buy the tickets but i'm pretty sure they were for sat.

Yeah, same here - let me know..

anyone interested in seeing lucia di lamermoor tomorrow night, i can get you tix. email me.

that's lucia di lammermoor tomorrow night. lol.

I would if I didn't already have plans... next time?

I didn't know about that Norman Conquests happening at the Old Vic -- looks great.

The epic I'm working on is overwhelming at times, but it's coming together well. Main thing I've learned is that Ayckbourn knows exactly what he's doing with his stage directions, even if it's not until tech that they make perfect sense instead of just being a moment of color.

Yesterday, I saw a run-through of a stage adaptation of George Saunders's short story Jon at a theater here in Chicago. Opens in a few weeks, and it was really extrordinary.

i would have liked to see this new seagull, and also dr. atomic, but of course i'm not going to becz they're expensive and i never have any time anyway. :(
living in new york can be frustrating.

Eazy, what did you say about Dr. Atomic screenings (I think this was on a Facebook status update or something)?

I crashed Dr. Atomic at intermission in Chicago, and loved it. I figured some folks would be leaving at intermission, especially season ticket holders, and ended up getting an eleventh-row seat. That was the Peter Sellars production. The new one looks good if a bit more obvious -- I'm planning to see the live screening of it in November.

xpost!

Yeah, I would go see that with you.

Noon on the 8th in Evanston could work fine for me.

will keep you in mind, forks! i can't go tomorrow night (stupid class), but i saw this production last year and it was great. i can also attest that diana damrau sounds AMAZING. am going to doctor atomic on 10/25 (not free but whatever) and i can not wait!!!! the music is niccce.

gabb, sorry bout rock of ages! i didn't see your msg on the thread... that's why i initially said interested parties should email me (webmail me if you don't know address) so i could forward along the ticket acquiring info.

it was a pretty hilarious show in that there was a silly girl-meets-boy story line thrown together so that at key moments of heartbreak they could burst into 80s song. finally won me over about halfway through the first act with foreigner's "i want to know what love is." also, they let you drink in the theater. that helped. don't see it running too incredibly long, but former american idol contestant constantine was not bad.

also, for major lols, i am seeing mary poppins on sunday! was considering the language of trees as well, but i need more time not spent in dark rooms, i think. especially before weather is bad.

also tipsy - they have added more rush tix for all perfs of atomic (not just weeknights), so you could get orch seating for $20 or $30 if you luck out.

new production is supposedly pretty static as far as staging, but i think the music may make up for it. it is so gorgeous. the director is super nice, though! (not that that makes up for weird staging, but i think this is also her first foray into opera, having previously worked in film, so i can see how it might be easy to fall in the trap of being too static in staging if you're used to working with a camera). finley and cooke sound really great, though!

Theater folks have been e-mailing around this article from The Stranger: "Ten Things Theaters Need to Do Right Now to Save Themselves. The "they let you drink in the theater" above reminded me of this.

yeah, my colleagues and i keep coming back to the conversation of making theater-going an "experience" as a means to attract audiences. the babysitting idea also falls into this. Arena Stage in DC is a good example - their new facility will be much more of a 'community' w the surrounding waterfront shops, etc. some places do a 7pm "rush hour" show to get you in and out earlier on a weeknight, too.

i guess the rush hour deal is kind of the opposite of creating an "experience" but both ideas make things more accessible.

rock of ages again... email me.

Julio, saturday for definite.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/theater/29arts-LAURENGRAHAM_BRF.html?em

this is not necessarily looking promising

saw atomic last weekend. loved it. it IS kind static in the 2nd act, but i think that it sort of fits the "hurry up and wait" feel of what was happening. still gets a little difficult to watch sometimes but i kind of like the idea that it makes you uncomfortable. it's really an uncomfortable subject. anyway, i think that the music more than makes up for it, especially oppenheimer's aria at the end of act 1 (almost like baroque sighing... so f***ing gorgeous!) and the scenes with kitty (just learned the woman playing her is younger than i am, which makes me want to go jump out a window or something).

Timely revival - just this very minute off to the Old Vic to see 'Table Manners' from Ayckbourn's Norman Conquests.

hey jaymc and eazy, what is it about doctor atomic that has inspired you to commit to going to see it in the movie theater? john adams? atomic bomb? anything to do with seeing opera in the movies? i am curious... i can't get any of my friends to go see anything.

Let us know how it goes.

I thought I'd heard of Ayckbourn's name before and it finally hit this week that it was in connection to Alain Resnais, he adapted one of his plays to his last film Private Fears in Public Places. Really liked it myself but its lodged in my memory as the last time I heard a random punter act all angry at a film at the end of its screening. xp

hey jaymc and eazy, what is it about doctor atomic that has inspired you to commit to going to see it in the movie theater?

It came out of being a huge admirer of Peter Sellars, who directed the pre-Met productions of Doctor Atomic. Until the NYTimes articles a few weeks ago, I had assumed this would be his production. So that's what drew me in, but I'm still interested in seeing this new version.

Sellars understands as much as anyone alive about the fundamental nature of live theater. I heard him give a talk at the University of Chicago earlier this year and scribbled down everything I could -- typed up my notes in two parts: here and here.

Here's a camera-phone still from my current production of The Revengers Comedies:
http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z128/ericzieg/revengers4.jpg?t=1225481168

Well finally got to the theatre this evening for one of the 3 Ayckbourn Norman Conquests plays, which are being revived in London after 34 years apparently).

(Struck down by norovirus just as reached Old Vic theatre last week. Messy)

Pretty good...the first half dragged slightly, but the second half was excellent. It was impressively funny and cynical about the emptiness of middle-class life.

The eponymous anti-hero (?) Norman is a librarian - so it should be an ILX friendly.

Have now booked to see the two remaining plays of the trilogy.

i could go and see these for a fiver a time, being a local resident. the seats you get are really shit though, apparently.

I think they're definitely worth a fiver - even in Upper Circle restricted view seats.

I'd forgotten that the main problem with theatre as an art form is the rest of the audience - which tonight triggered all my prejudices of the upper middle classes - and included my pet hate, over-assertive/loud laughers.

anyone excited about the bridge project?

ooooh boy: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/arts/music/08oper.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

xp - yeah, but not sure if I should subscribe

hey jaymc and eazy, what is it about doctor atomic that has inspired you to commit to going to see it in the movie theater? john adams? atomic bomb? anything to do with seeing opera in the movies? i am curious... i can't get any of my friends to go see anything.

A big part of it for me is the desire to see contemporary theater (which includes new operas) without paying contemporary theater prices. Also a mild interest in John Adams (I've only heard Nixon in China -- on CD, 10 years ago -- but seeing as how I'm a big Glass/Reich fan, I've always wanted to get into his stuff more) and dramatic treatments of American history.

without paying contemporary theater prices

Apparently it still costs $24 to see the opera in the movie theater. I didn't go.

a decent seat at the real thing starts at $80

Yesterday, I saw a run-through of a stage adaptation of George Saunders's short story Jon at a theater here in Chicago. Opens in a few weeks, and it was really extrordinary.

WOW

xp I'll wait for the DVD.

have an extra for On the Town tomorrow

i saw dividing the estate last week and it was offensively bad. going to pal joey next friday and i'm psyched!

i could have predicted the first part. i wouldn't mind seeing martha plimpton, but i think i'll probably pass on that one.

i saw a great on the town just a few years ago in LA. i only got the tix really so my friend could see it.

Apparently, my parents went last night and say it's great, so I'm definitely going. Free ticket if you want to come too.

great I don't know about, but I had a great time on the whole. the LA show I saw (by the Reprise company, now run by Jason Alexander) was a lower-budget production, but with more heart and probably better, in no small part because everyone in the cast was a real actor, singer, and (most importantly) dancer, whereas some of the leads here obviously didn't have a lot of dance experience (maybe it was supposed to be part of the character, but i don't think so), and the choreography wasn't as fresh. and while i don't know how much time these guys took to rehearse, they needed books for dialogue, whereas the LA people did without after two weeks. and the production was a little awkward, at least at first - acting/singing in front of the orchestra, dancing on a riser behind it (at least everyone could see the latter well). the worst part was the totally, well, milquetoast Gabey (who the NYT liked). i mean, i guess he was touching in a moment or two and i know the character isn't supposed to be a stud or anything, but once you've gone Gene Kelly, you better be good in going back. and the Chip was simply boring. but the Ozzie was great, and the chemistry with Claire - the best voice in the house (per usual?) - was wonderful. the Hildy was a little broadway-brassy for my taste, but pretty good, and the Ivy, while adequate otherwise, was an accomplished dancer. i don't know whether to excuse dropping the midwestern-background-exposition with Ivy and Gabey (was that not in the play? don't remember), but the Madame Dilly, while going a little overboard on your standard-Broadway-all-broad-sex-references-are-obviously-hilarious brought the house down. and Michael Cumpsty (! - I had no idea) was great as Pitkin, of course. as was the orchestra, and ultimately you can't really fuck with that music/story.

or maybe i just had better seats in LA and have been ruined by seeing a lot of serious dance since that show

no, i think it was better

almost $300 for Guys 'n Dolls?! seriously?!

my professional opinion on pal joey: if you are going to charge $100 for a broadway ticket, pls to be getting actors who can SING on pitch and with some level of dynamic variance. i think it is bull that the "best" stages in the country put mediocre talent up. who is doing this casting? stockard channing can't sing - this i understand, and that is fine, because it's stockard channing in yr show and she's a sassy broad, etc. however, the rest of the cast should be GOOD. admittedly understudy for joey (last min fill-in) is new to it, but he just does not have the vocal chops, and i don't think he will grow into the role. linda english character: nice acting, but her top end sucked in the songs, and she had no sense of phrasing or artistry. it's really a shame because the throwback stuff is really fun to watch, and the production value was great, but i spent the whole time being pissed that they didn't cast the thing better and that i could think of a handful of people i know who could have done a better job in most of the roles. this is basically why i have a hard time liking most broadway stuff, not just this show, but man, is it frustrating to watch!

nb i didn't pay $100, but people do!!