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?

Thread (10 posts)

Threaded Flat

Gordon the OptomMon, 13 Sept 2010, 04:01 pm

Walter PlingeMon, 13 Sept 2010, 06:18 pm

IMHO, I think three weeks

IMHO, I think three weeks is long enough. But it depends on your cast. Those working long hours for their day jobs or with families that need attention may be too exhausted to be involved in productions with long seasons.

LogosMon, 13 Sept 2010, 09:59 pm

Good question

I admire community theatre actors but the problem is that they have day jobs.I mean if you are a pro you don't suddenly remember that you hadn't returned that phone call you should have and you aren't standing on stage thinking about how you have to get up at 6am to go to work. The very fact that so many actors in community theatre manage to hold down a day job and yet still put in fantastic performances every night leaves me stunned. There is bound to be some variation in performance when you have to cope with two full time lives. I realise that too short a season can leave you feeling that there is more to be explored but too long and exhaustion takes over. Three weeks is probably a good choice. I've worked English Panto 40 - 50 shows in a run. 3 show days when you can't remember whether its the 2nd act of the first show or the first act of the second show and whether the break you just had was lunch or tea. (I was a technician.) I can remember one show where I was giving the cast their half hour call as they came off stage from the previous show. What price lunch? With semi-pro casts in the Adelaide Fringe I usually run my shows for between 14 and 18 performances over three weeks. Depends how many matinees we do for schools. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Tom CampMon, 13 Sept 2010, 10:53 pm

Hmmmmm

I personally think many runs go for too long. Sure it may seem a waste to rehearse for months and to only do 4-5 shows but sometimes it works out better for all involved. It's not a Wolf, It's an Alaskan Malamute.

JoeMcTue, 14 Sept 2010, 04:21 pm

I feel it is more with the

I feel it is more with the logistics of the ameatre season slots of upto 6 shows/year, with little thought, consultation or input by the directors/production team. Especialy with different type & needs of the shows, as to any preplan reqirements or rehearsal time required, beyond the restrictions of the set 2 months time slot period & the same 10 or so hours rehearsal/wek.

Like Logos I did the pohmy panto circuit back in the 50"s, doing about 14 or more shows per/week & yes it was very hard at times to work out what time or even what day it was.

TaylorMWed, 15 Sept 2010, 12:27 pm

I think Logos brings up

I 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!

LabrugWed, 15 Sept 2010, 12:51 pm

Competition

There is another aspect to consider - the competition and the fortnightly salary. First the Competition. The number of Community Theatres (particularly in Perth) vastly out-number the professional ones, while the audience demographic is only impacted by the cost of the tickets. Percentage base, there is marginal demographic difference. We are all trying to attract the same people.

As far as I am aware (I may be wrong) the professional theatre companies do not see themselves as competing with Community theatre for market share. They have the capacity for stronger marketing and are far better recognised by the general public. On the other hand, many Com Theatres suffer from being too small to notice except within the Community Theatre Scene itself. Other Community Group have a good rep but nothing that compares with the high budget promotions of Black Swon or PTA.

This means that Community Theatre Productions are in competition with both Professional and each other for Audience Numbers. The timing of the shows can be near impossible to plan and as many would no doubt recall, there have been many occurrences were two theatre companies have put on the very same show within a month of each other. By spreading the season a little thinner, you can hopefully increase the appeal of attending one show over another or fall into a period where there is little competition and increase your turnover.

Now the Fortnightly Salary.

Most people cannot afford to go to several nights theatre in a given fortnight so you have to hope that your season doesn't clash with a higher profile production or you extend your season to cover two standard pay periods - 3 to 4 weeks. While that may not be the thought that goes in to the planning these days, as it has become very much the norm, but it was the main reason why regional UK companies spread their shows across several weeks, to increase their ability to capture people with money. You saw this quite frequently in regional mining towns.

Today, it is almost habitual : 10 to 12 shows across three weeks. Occasionally you might see a forth week. So to restate the point, the spread helps ease the level of inter-theatre competition and ensures greater capture of paying audiences.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

jeffhansenWed, 15 Sept 2010, 12:56 pm

If you look at it purely

If you look at it purely from a monetary point, no club is going to do 12 half full shows if they can play to the same audience over 6 performances. Why pay the extra $1000 in rights? It's not quite that simple though. From my experience, audiences tend to avoid opening weekend, as they think in comm. theatre that the show will be underdone in the first weekend. I was recently involved in Away at Old Mill, where the first weekend played to half full houses, and the rest of the season was almost sold out, and people were turned away. Should they have come on opening weekend? Down the road at Melville, we are currently standardised on 9 performances over 3 weekends. This gives the actors a decent break to recharge, and gives our audience a fair chance of picking a night that suits them. Sometimes houses are full, sometimes not - it's hard to pick. Our current one act season is only 6 performances, as it tends to draw less numbers historically. Next year, our first season is Zastrozzi, which few people will be familiar with, so we have decided to run it for 7 performances over 2 weekends. Conversley, we think our final season for 2011, The Mousetrap, will draw good audience numbers, hence we have scheduled 12 performances over 4 weeks. If you take Tom's 4-5 performances, there is the risk that prospective audience members will miss it due to being unavailable at any time during a short run. Horses for courses. www.meltheco.org.au

LogosMon, 20 Sept 2010, 08:44 am

Just a minor point Jeff, at

Just a minor point Jeff, at the time I left 2003 comm theatre in the UK was pretty much settled to doing one week. The little Theatres who either own or have a long lease on their own venue are pretty much the same. 5 performances in one week. Sometimes if a show was expected to do very well it might run two weeks. Much of the selling of course is done through long mailing lists. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

LabrugMon, 20 Sept 2010, 09:30 am

I conceed

I admit to having little UK experience, apart from seeing some Com Theatre while there on holidays (which as I recall had the two/three week spread). In making my statements above, I am referring to my understanding of the history of theatre and in particular within mining towns were seasons were spread across two or three weeks to allow Mine-workers and their families better opportunities to see a show. Now this is going back a fair way I know, but I thought the point relevant in this discussion.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins

Looking for an Agent? Read this first!!

← Back to Billboard Bulletins