under rehearsed
Tue, 24 Aug 2010, 01:43 pmGordon the Optom33 posts in thread
under rehearsed
Tue, 24 Aug 2010, 01:43 pmGenerally the standard of community theatre is excellent, each person pulls their weight and everyone has a good night, audience and cast together. However, recently, I have seen three shows which were well directed, had experienced actors and yet were struggling due to lack of rehearsal.
I have even seen a few veteran actors who do not seem to be tuned in – dare I even say disinterested? Possibly they think that they are there just to ‘fill in’, or capable of performing their part without any real effort.
Sadly, the result is that not only do they label themselves as second rate, but cause some amateur theatres to be constantly avoided by the public because ‘their shows are always very poor.’ It is very sad that the odd badly rehearsed show, or lazy actor, can put an unjustified bad label on future productions for that theatre or group for months to come.
To all those who bring my life so much pleasure, a very big thank you.
Some agreeance
Thu, 26 Aug 2010, 04:50 pmDEBATE!!! ;-)
"the director ... has the ultimate responsibility to claim."
That is true in a general sense and if I know (as a director) that if the cast have worked very hard, and I have done everything I can think of, and still there is something lacking, I can't help but feel responsible for that. As with any guide or rule there are exceptions - few though they may (or may not) be. Expecting a Director to be able to enforce additional rehearsals, or to have some sort of dominion over the time the actors have to rehearse I feel is asking just a little too much. The actor needs to take some responsibility for their own efforts and focus. They also need to balance family life, work, leasure, etc in the equation. Each will have their own priorities and they will never coincide.
So to take the stance that an apparently under-rehearsed play could have been avoided if the director had stepped up and taken more affirmative action is a little unrealistic. Certainly, a director needs to ensure that they have done all they can, their best effort, and they must be held accountable for that. An actor likewise must be accountable for their own performance and dedication beyond the scope of the direction.
I believe that a director can only ever be as good as their cast's full potential, yet a cast can surpass that of the director given the right motivation.
PS Life is interesting. Thanks for asking.
Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)
Jeff Watkins
Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!
- ···