642 posts
|
Post by Stasia on Mar 22, 2018 12:27:57 GMT
The difference is huge. The company has full rights to approve the quality and quantity of the images. As an ex-comms theatre person I really hated blurry images taken by the members of public that were not doing our show any justice and could only make people NOT want to see the show, not the other way round. So yes, I would like social media only to use the photos I carefully chose for that purpose. It still makes absolutely no sense to me, when this show is obviously struggling they are limiting the free marketing they can get. If poor quality images was that much of an issue, why would Hamilton actively encourage it? Hamilton's whole brand is centred around absolute excellence and the pinnacle of theatre, yet they allow photos from the public which they haven't vetted. Whenever someone's posted a photo of the Grinning Man set (which is encouraged by the producers) on the theatre Facebook groups I am a member of the reactions are always positive and you can see comments from people saying how it looks interesting and they might consider going. Surely the positive reactions would significantly outweigh the negative. Your idea of "free marketing" is a bit different from how others see it, I guess. While working in theatre comms I noticed, that people who are so sure that things they are posting on social media are definitely "free marketing" and "helping the show" - these very people are often the those who are not doing the show any justice by what they are posting. just saying. (I won't even going into the details of difference of what is allowed to post from Hamilton/Grinning Man etc...
|
|
614 posts
|
Post by jamb0r on Mar 22, 2018 12:52:20 GMT
It still makes absolutely no sense to me, when this show is obviously struggling they are limiting the free marketing they can get. If poor quality images was that much of an issue, why would Hamilton actively encourage it? Hamilton's whole brand is centred around absolute excellence and the pinnacle of theatre, yet they allow photos from the public which they haven't vetted. Whenever someone's posted a photo of the Grinning Man set (which is encouraged by the producers) on the theatre Facebook groups I am a member of the reactions are always positive and you can see comments from people saying how it looks interesting and they might consider going. Surely the positive reactions would significantly outweigh the negative. Your idea of "free marketing" is a bit different from how others see it, I guess. While working in theatre comms I noticed, that people who are so sure that things they are posting on social media are definitely "free marketing" and "helping the show" - these very people are often the those who are not doing the show any justice by what they are posting. just saying. (I won't even going into the details of difference of what is allowed to post from Hamilton/Grinning Man etc... I guess my idea of free marketing just comes from personal anecdotal experience. I remember seeing a photo posted by a friend of the Jesus Christ Superstar stage last year and booking a ticket off the back of it. And recently booking to see Witness for the Prosecution based on a photo from a friend of the inside of that beautiful chamber (the taking of photos again is encouraged here). I must have also seen at least 20 photos of the stage of Grinning Man on a theatre Facebook group, accompanied by hundreds of likes, comments saying how good the stage looked and how much they enjoyed the show or were now considering booking. I don't remember any of those photos being of poor quality or having anything negative associated with them. And even if 1 or 2 of them were of bad quality, the other 18 will reach thousands of potential ticket buyers that wouldn't otherwise have been exposed to this show, or even stopped to read the accompanying post if it didn't have a picture attached to it. I guess context also comes into play here - this show is struggling to sell tickets - they need to do something to get the word out there, and it just seems to me that this is such an easy way of doing it. It's a well designed stage! Show it off to as many people as possible! That one Ticketmaster photo isn't going to go very far - I haven't seen it come up on my Facebook yet and Im a member of every theatre group and page going! I'm not trying to have an argument or anything and am genuinely trying to learn if there is a valid reason I am missing as to why producers wouldn't want pictures of the stage shared on social media 😀 I hadn't considered a possible exclusivity deal with Ticketmaster - so I've learnt about that, but still can't see how this would be beneficial to the production at all (unless Ticketmaster paid them a hefty sum) Could you please share what the difference between this and Grinning Man would be? They are both similar size shows - at Grinning Man there was an announcement when I went that specifically asked people to take photos of the set and share them on social media. I am not sure why it would be impossible for Ruthless to do similar? Thank you 😀
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2018 12:54:50 GMT
It's not that it's impossible, it's that they have not given permission. It's literally just a matter of consent at this point - Grinning Man say it's fine, so do it. Ruthless do not, so don't. It doesn't really matter what their reasoning is, or if you think the Ruthless producers/Arts Theatre are doing themselves out of an absolute ton of publicity, it's simply the polite thing to do to adhere to what the individual shows/theatres have asked you to do or not do. I know that "because I said so" is an infuriating response to receive to a "why" question, but sometimes that's all there is to it.
|
|
3,762 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Mar 22, 2018 12:55:35 GMT
For those of us who haven’t seen the show and may be considering doing so, is it possible to get the discussion back on track?
|
|
614 posts
|
Post by jamb0r on Mar 22, 2018 13:02:30 GMT
It's not that it's impossible, it's that they have not given permission. It's literally just a matter of consent at this point - Grinning Man say it's fine, so do it. Ruthless do not, so don't. It doesn't really matter what their reasoning is, or if you think the Ruthless producers/Arts Theatre are doing themselves out of an absolute ton of publicity, it's simply the polite thing to do to adhere to what the individual shows/theatres have asked you to do or not do. I know that "because I said so" is an infuriating response to receive to a "why" question, but sometimes that's all there is to it. OK yeah I know the response at this moment is 'because I said so', was just trying to find out if there was a valid reason this the the answer, and it looks like there isn't one that I can see. So I've got my answer, I just think it's an absolutely crazy one that makes no sense to me 😀 Sorry for diverting the conversation, though it was somewhat relevant.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 23, 2018 1:20:50 GMT
For those of us who haven’t seen the show and may be considering doing so, is it possible to get the discussion back on track? Yes, happy to get the discussion back on track! I saw this on Thursday afternoon and enjoyed it. It is performed by a very talented cast of 6 with tons of energy, camp and hugely over the top which suited the piece. All the roles were performed with gusto. Jason Gardiner especially impressive - good to see he can "deliver" the performance that he was expecting the Dancing On Ice contestants to do! The child I saw was excellent ( I usually hate child performers) but the girl I saw was fabulous and managed to be awful without being obnoxious! Tracie Bennett of course (almost ) steals the show with an hilarious number in the first act called "I hate musicals" which (almost) stops the show! But unfortunately does not have a great deal of stage time! All the cast appear to be having a huge amount of fun with it. Great fun for fans of musical theatre as the whole thing is a send up of the ruthless show biz mother and ambitious child, containing lots of lines, lyrics and musical motives from numerous other shows. It is quite fun to see how many you can spot. The show is very camp and funny and hurtles towards a funny and suitably over the top climax. The only issue I had with the show really is that it is very niche and fringe - with just two sets (although effective) and a cast of 6, and in this awful venue, the show really cannot justify the prices! So I would say it is only worth seeing at a discount - not worth £50 plus! If you can see it with a deal on the prices - go!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2018 9:16:34 GMT
Well. I just loved it. Loved loved loved it. It still makes me laugh out loud now thinking about it. I think the kids nowadays call it 'LOL'. It's a campalicious, frothy delight. In a strange way it reminds me of a slightly lighter showbiz mother/child version of the film 'Serial Mom'. The songs are catchy, the jokes come thick and fast and I just loved all the references to old films and Broadway musicals and the cast are sensational PLUS there's some tap dancing. Jason Gardiner camps it up a storm (as do they all) and has a strange look of Dame Diana Rigg in the second act (AND there's a turban!) and Kim Maresca who plays the mother is simply fabulous. Tracie Bennett pretty much steals the show with her drunk acting and big 'I Hate Musicals' number but she's challenged pretty strongly in the second act by Lara Denning as the assistant Eve who . . {SPOILER!! DONT DO IT!!} . . . has quite possibly one of the best on stage deaths I have seen in a long time. The image of her grabbing the curtains still makes me scream.
It's OTT and has all the subtlety and depth of the cast of TOWIE in a puddle but oh, it's a joy. I will definitely go back again. If they charged me £75 to see it, I wouldn't begrudge a single pound of it. Even if the theatre needs burning down and starting again. I knew God would punish me for panning 'Fiddler'!
|
|
540 posts
|
Post by freckles on Mar 23, 2018 10:30:07 GMT
I LOVED this and would happily watch it again. As others have said it's silly, funny and camp - and the humour and musical/film references add to the fun. The performances are brilliantly over the top, and I enjoyed myself immensely.
|
|
4,159 posts
|
Post by HereForTheatre on Mar 23, 2018 10:39:13 GMT
Is The Arts that bad? I have only been once but thought it wasn't that bad apart from the very crappy seats. That to me is the only issue. I don't mind if it's a bit grungy as long as it's comfortable. So yeh the seating should be fixed but other than that i don't mind the building.
Mind you i didn't use the loo's. Which i imagine could be problematic.
|
|
7,510 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 23, 2018 10:53:32 GMT
Is The Arts that bad? I have only been once but thought it wasn't that bad apart from the very crappy seats. That to me is the only issue. I don't mind if it's a bit grungy as long as it's comfortable. So yeh the seating should be fixed but other than that i don't mind the building. Mind you i didn't use the loo's. Which i imagine could be problematic. Well the bar area is very nice now but as soon as you go downstairs to enter the theatre its a bit grubby. Black painted walls and it reminds me of going into a seedy gay club in the 80s! If you sit at the back of the stalls you also get to hear the noise coming from a bar/club/whatever it is next door. Just needs a bit of TLC but aren't there plans for the building to be re-developed?
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 23, 2018 11:33:25 GMT
The floor of the stalls appears to be crumbling away and patched with black tape. The gents toilets (for the whole theatre!) must be the smallest anywhere! They must measure about 9'x 6' containing 2 miniature cubicles, a urinal and washbasin.
I dread to think what the backstage conditions are like!
|
|
540 posts
|
Post by freckles on Mar 23, 2018 12:09:07 GMT
Is The Arts that bad? I have only been once but thought it wasn't that bad apart from the very crappy seats. That to me is the only issue. I don't mind if it's a bit grungy as long as it's comfortable. So yeh the seating should be fixed but other than that i don't mind the building. Mind you i didn't use the loo's. Which i imagine could be problematic. It's a bit shabby and the loos arent great (the nearby pubs must get so many people "just seeing if my friend is here"), but I like being in a theatre that size, and the bar/cafe area is nice. However, I agree that the pricing seems very warm for such a venue.
|
|
4,962 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Mar 23, 2018 13:53:12 GMT
Jason and Tracie will be on Graham Norton's Radio 2 show tomorrow. Guests are usually on after 11.30am.
|
|
151 posts
|
Post by gra on Mar 25, 2018 0:26:49 GMT
Saw this tonight and enjoyed it a lot. Excellent performances from all the cast including the young girl.
My only reservation was the sound. Maybe it was where I was sitting (front row circle) but it was extremely difficult to make out the song words in the more heavily orchestrated numbers. Unfortunately this included the 'I hate musicals' number which I'm sure contains some very entertaining lyrics which sadly largely passed me by.
Anyone else think the same?
......could be the age thing I suppose!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2018 12:05:55 GMT
Am booked in for this Wednesday! I've always been curious about this musical so I'm excited to finally see it, especially with Tracie! Went for a front row £21 seat. The stage doesn't look as high as some shows so I'll be fine with that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 21:11:44 GMT
|
|
2,379 posts
|
Post by robertb213 on Mar 27, 2018 21:14:22 GMT
Does he like anything??
|
|
158 posts
|
Post by broadwaylover99 on Mar 27, 2018 21:15:34 GMT
Only one thing... himself!
|
|
4,564 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Mark on Mar 27, 2018 21:15:35 GMT
I think he’s missing the point with this one
|
|
3,762 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Mar 27, 2018 21:19:10 GMT
I've actually met him on (at least) three occasion- once with his husband- and whilst on each occasion the conversation was brief, he now recognises me by face.
He even gave me his theatre programme once, which I later sold on eBay.
|
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on Mar 27, 2018 21:42:35 GMT
I think any splinters the audience get are more likely to be from the decaying building rather than the show!
|
|
4,564 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Mark on Mar 27, 2018 22:07:08 GMT
He even gave me his theatre programme once, which I later sold on eBay. Funny that! He once gave me a programme too at the opening of a big musical.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 6:16:51 GMT
|
|
540 posts
|
Post by freckles on Mar 28, 2018 6:47:28 GMT
Shenton has become ridiculous; I no longer respect his opinion. Ever since he branched out with the aptly named Theatre Mates website, his partisan tendencies have become ever more pronounced. “Mates” (whether they be performers, creatives, management or website advertisers) will get a fantastic review whatever they do, with any failings glossed over, while “non-mates” (an ever increasing circle, it would seem) will be pilloried out of little more than petty spite. Comments such as those about Ruthless on Twitter, and the totally unprofessional quote yesterday of a random Facebook comment about Chicago, show just how low he has sunk - maybe he’s paid by clicks now and needs to generate them? Of course the performances in Ruthless are “broad”; that’s the whole point. It’s supposed to be over the top and silly; did Shenton seriously go into that expecting subtle nuances? And who is he to say that a revival is pointless? We don’t all jet constantly between London and NYC (moaning about how tired we are from all the theatre we’ve GOT to see) - I, for one, was delighted for the opportunity to see Ruthless, and I really enjoyed it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2018 21:59:13 GMT
So I loved this, and clearly the audience did too! Firstly front row is a steal. At just £21, there is zero restriction. An eye height stage and a metre of legroom. If you wanna see this cheap, don't miss out those seats! Cast wete all around great. Jason surprised me alot, he was fabulous. Also shoutout to Kim who was brilliant too, as was Lara. Now, I know some are over the Tracie stealing the show news, but that is just what happens, in Act 1 at least. She is only in one scene and two cameos in Act 2, but my god, when she is on she nakes the impact. And it was very obvious audience members were eagerly waiting, shs received entrance applause and cheers from some. She really was fabulous, as was the whole cast, no complaints! Its alot of fun, slapstick humour, its worth a trip!
|
|
7,510 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 29, 2018 8:58:51 GMT
So I loved this, and clearly the audience did too! Firstly front row is a steal. At just £21, there is zero restriction. An eye height stage and a metre of legroom. If you wanna see this cheap, don't miss out those seats! Cast wete all around great. Jason surprised me alot, he was fabulous. Also shoutout to Kim who was brilliant too, as was Lara. Now, I know some are over the Tracie stealing the show news, but that is just what happens, in Act 1 at least. She is only in one scene and two cameos in Act 2, but my god, when she is on she nakes the impact. And it was very obvious audience members were eagerly waiting, shs received entrance applause and cheers from some. She really was fabulous, as was the whole cast, no complaints! Its alot of fun, slapstick humour, its worth a trip! Clearly The Times didn't see the same show that we all did. Gave it 2 stars and didn't like Tracie Bennett. They seem incapable of giving any musical more than 2 stars.
|
|
3,762 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Mar 30, 2018 14:13:01 GMT
I have a question. I haven't seen the show (still contemplating) however I saw Jason Gardiner being interviewed and his stated categorically that his character is a woman- not a drag queen or a transexual- but a woman.
So, no disrespect to his acting abilities, stage presence or sexuality, but if the character is a woman, why not cast a woman?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2018 15:13:07 GMT
I have a question. I haven't seen the show (still contemplating) however I saw Jason Gardiner being interviewed and his stated categorically that his character is a woman- not a drag queen or a transexual- but a woman. So, no disrespect to his acting abilities, stage presence or sexuality, but if the character is a woman, why not cast a woman? It's just become tradition with that role for it to be played by a man. It started back in the original priduction, because I read a story somewhere a while ago now, saying that the original actor showed up to the audition and simply gave the best audition of anybody else and was cast. From there, it has just stuck. Jason gives a great performance here, he really is fabulous and knows exactly what he is doing, so I can see why he was cast. Its not just star casting, it really does work!
|
|
2,379 posts
|
Post by robertb213 on Mar 30, 2018 15:26:58 GMT
Guess it's just the same as Edna Turnblad in Hairspray and Mary Sunshine in stage versions of Chicago 😁
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2018 15:40:12 GMT
Guess it's just the same as Edna Turnblad in Hairspray and Mary Sunshine in stage versions of Chicago 😁 And the same arguement can be made for old women always being cast as a 12 year old boy in Peter Pan. 😂😂
|
|