How long should a run be?
Mon, 13 Sept 2010, 04:01 pmGordon the Optom10 posts in thread
How long should a run be?
Mon, 13 Sept 2010, 04:01 pm There was a show a few weeks ago that I had seen, which had odd faults that I thought would sort themselves as the season went on, however they didn’t, and the show was later described as ‘dire’. Recently a couple whose opinion I respect told me, that another comedy that I had really enjoyed and highly recommended was awful. This presentation was by a well-established and respected company. On the night that I saw this play it was at it’s best for timing, pace, interaction, visuals etc, yet according to my friends, with their performance nothing worked. Even the story was hard to follow, and the cast appeared to be floundering - there was certainly no magic there.
Every company has the odd bad performance, but what I am wondering is, with community theatre especially, does ennui set in towards the final show?
In the UK the pantomime season runs for up to three months, even the Curtin pantomimes used to run for 32 shows, by the end of which the cast were exhausted – now it is around only 12 shows. Recently ‘King Lear’ was on a long national tour, but the cast still kept up the quality. Should the audience, or the producer, be prepared to accept large variations in the nightly standard of amateur theatre?
Because a play or its writer is well known, or the show has a famous TV background, does this mean that the number of performances should be increased to meet public demand? Should the season be set at what the cast are capable of handling? Or are some runs simply too long?
Every company has the odd bad performance, but what I am wondering is, with community theatre especially, does ennui set in towards the final show?
In the UK the pantomime season runs for up to three months, even the Curtin pantomimes used to run for 32 shows, by the end of which the cast were exhausted – now it is around only 12 shows. Recently ‘King Lear’ was on a long national tour, but the cast still kept up the quality. Should the audience, or the producer, be prepared to accept large variations in the nightly standard of amateur theatre?
Because a play or its writer is well known, or the show has a famous TV background, does this mean that the number of performances should be increased to meet public demand? Should the season be set at what the cast are capable of handling? Or are some runs simply too long?
I think Logos brings up
Wed, 15 Sept 2010, 12:27 pmI think Logos brings up some good points. Community theatre actors do have day jobs, and I give them so much credit for doing the standard three week run (which is only standard from my involvement in Perth community theatre, I could be mistaken).
Also in Perth, WAAPA students perform for around 8 show runs while also attending uni from 9-5. I know these students are all totally invested in performing and are almost professionals, and not concerned at all with making money from the production, however their performances are usually of a high standard for all 8 shows. Could community theatre take a page out of the WAAPA manual and reduce their seasons from 12-14 shows to 8 shows? Food for thought perhaps?
But in a more general answer to the questions:
Because a play or its writer is well known, or the show has a famous TV background, does this mean that the number of performances should be increased to meet public demand?
From a management/producer point of view, yes. Because that means you make more money.
From a community theatre point of view, (IMHO) No. I have heard in the community theatre circuit, that getting an audience for any play is difficult, no matter whether it's well known or not. Therefore I think to extend the season would just drain the actors (especially if there is no audience to play to, which in itself can drain you in one night).
Should the season be set at what the cast are capable of handling? Or are some runs simply too long?
In the professional sector this question would be void in my opinion. IMHO if you are a professional actor and have signed on to do 8 shows a week for 3 months, then you should be eternally thankful that you have that opportunity! Also in this scenario, no run would be too long - Just look at Broadway or the West End.
In community theatre, I think everyone above have good points. There is a limit to the number of performances an amateur actor can do, and this should be taken into consideration by the director/theatre company. I also agree with Tom Camp, especially if it is 4-5 near capacity shows vs. 12-14 half capacity or less shows. It's much more fun for everyone involved to be performing to a full audience!