Names changed to protect the innocent

This should possibly go in the 'Theatre Reviews' section, but I can't actually bring myself to write a review about what I saw tonight. It was, in all probability, the single worst piece of theatre I've ever seen. The writing, characters, production, directing, and acting were all atrocious. I actually enjoyed myself immensely, but for all the wrong reasons. Also it helped a fair bit that I was fairly well inebriated.

I don't have the heart to mention any details. But it's certainly made me feel more tolerant to a lot of other shows with only half the talent.


Craig
somewhere in NSW

Oh, come on, Craig - you can't say that and not tell us what show it was!!!




Thou gorbellied fool-born bladder!

What, worse then 'Woman in Mind' at the Harbour Theatre perhaps?

A tale is told of an amateur bearded cove,
Who fled in horror from HarbourÂ’s Ackbourne episode.
Rumour has it the actorÂ’s now been told
HeÂ’s no longer welcome in that theatreÂ’s fold.

Of course, heÂ’s far too busy fending off Mr Plod
And achieving fame and notoriety as a marketing sod
He swears heÂ’s still welcome at Stirling Players and the Old Mill
And says that Black Yak and Vagabond bear no sign of ill will

Although he was shaken and toyed with leaving the stage
His nerves have now steadied, heÂ’s forgotten the divaÂ’s rage
So although heÂ’s been cast as unreliable and unfit
HeÂ’ll shortly start auditioning wherever heÂ’s welcome to sit.

[%sig%]

And of course the non-actor who dropped everyone in the @!#$ is none other then (drum roll please...) GREG ROSS!

Well done Greg!

Better stick to the marketing, eh mate...



Thou errant tickle-brained nut-hook!

Mea Culpa.
Happy to accept the non actor barb
But the mud?
Oh no dear Tom.
If youÂ’re going to be up close and personal,
be very, very sure of your facts.
TÂ’was not I who did the dropping.
But I certainly climbed out

Tom wrote:
>
> And of course the non-actor who dropped everyone in the @!#$
> is none other then (drum roll please...) GREG ROSS!
>

Nothing like rash, ill-considered, uninformed comment is there? Sort of the communicative equivalent of brute force and ignorance.

Remember there are two sides to every story.

Unless you are involved in a theatre company. Then there are sixteen sides, fourty seven sub-sides, a hundred and eighty two variations on each version and an inifinite number of heros, villains and opinions to every story.

Leah

M wrote:
> Nothing like rash, ill-considered, uninformed comment is
> there? Sort of the communicative equivalent of brute force
> and ignorance.
>
> Remember there are two sides to every story.
>
> Unless you are involved in a theatre company. Then there are
> sixteen sides, fourty seven sub-sides, a hundred and eighty
> two variations on each version and an inifinite number of
> heros, villains and opinions to every story.
>
> Leah

What were you there, Leah?

Greg (Lord Byron) Ross dropped out (or climbed out) two weeks before the show, because he didn't (or couldn't) get his lines down and blamed the leading lady.

Enuff said...

Tom wrote:
>

> Greg (Lord Byron) Ross dropped out (or climbed out) two weeks
> before the show, because he didn't (or couldn't) get his
> lines down and blamed the leading lady.
>
> Enuff said...


Congratulations on being the first completely correct and justified human being ever. (Apart, of course, from me.)

I do point out though, that isn't the version of the story I heard, or the story that came directly out of the horse (ie the Dark Poet)'s own mouth on this page. I assume he WAS there. Guess you'll just have to agree to disagree in terms of your two sides of the story.

A quote; gossip is the most destructive force in the universe. Escpecially when it aims to frustrate anyone's pursuit of their hobby, dream or livelyhood.

My suggestion; if you object to someone, don't cast them. Let the rest of us make our own minds up.

Leah

Tom

I don't think I know you, or have met you, but perhaps I have.
Be that as it may, if I could offer some advice.
You should, I think, be more fiscally responsible to yourself.

However, I will allow you the one mistake.

Let me put you right.

Leading lady problems yes.
Getting lines down. No.
Words are my game.
Do not again write a slur on my craft

Greg Ross

Leah M wrote:

> Guess you'll just have to agree to disagree in terms
> of your two sides of the story.


You said it and I couldn't agree more. There are two sides to every story.

Dear Tom

There may yet be another angle, another point of view, a third side!
That of someone who was not there!

Tell me Tom:
Have we met?
Do you, like Leah and myself have a surname?

Greetings Greg,

How are you? You are inquiring about my point of view on this matter regarding 'Woman in Mind'. Well, I think I do know something about what happened Greg because I was there. However, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Yep... I'm Tom or Cary Hudson who took over from Rob (Whyte?) to play Rick in 'Woman in Mind'.

I came to the conclusion about why you pulled out because, if memory serves me well you were walking around with a script in your hand right up until the around the time you left, two weeks before opening night. You seemed to miss cues and your performance generally wasn't up to scratch, but bearing in mind that I came in late on the scene I can't afford to be too critical about that.

However I do take issue with your view of the leading lady as being a 'Prima Donna' or 'Diva', was frankly a little bit harsh and a bit unfair. True she was a bit difficult, but most people are when they are under pressure, let's face it - but she really wasn't that bad. She was after all the main character and so much was at stake for her. To call her that in that way was not really justified. I've certainly worked with a lot worse.

However if you feel that your lines (or words) weren't the problem, who can really argue with you? If you had your lines down then I guess you had them down. I can't get inside your head. And of course we all knew that you didn't have a lot of experience and I guess Fred Lawson and Joan for that matter should have been a bit easy on you. The overall production suffered at the end of the day. It was certainly the weakest production of the year thus far. One of the weakest I've done and certainly the last play I'll ever do at Harbour Theatre that's for sure. I'm sure you feel vindicated about the rather dismal results.

However, that is not why I posted this email.

I sincerely and profoundly apologise for any offence you may have taken as far as the previous email was concerned. Whatever your reason was for pulling out, it was up to you and you alone. You had absolutely every right to quit that production or any production, regardless of the reasons you put forward. We aren't all professional actors so in the end we can pretty much do what we like. Your decision to do so was regretable, but understandable seeing how the production was progressing. However, you didn't need to make any excuses for doing so (or blaming anyone else for that matter as you did on this website) as no one is under contract.

We can all remember when Dr Geoff Gibbs pulled out of a professional production and nobody seemed to worry about that (although I seemed to recall you did). I wish I had the courage to do so myself, but I felt I should 'soldier on' for the sake of it, lost cause though it was.

Anyway Greg, I wish you the best of luck with your next production, and maybe you can let us know when that is.

kind regards,

Cary (Tom) Hudson

Tom wrote:
> There are two sides to every story.




Stories are made of words; and ewe no sum thymes words have too meanings.

Like carparks, some storeys are multi-level.

If every mere few words can be red and interpreted in a completely different whey, then it probably follows that there are much moor than two sides to every story.

And then of course the written whirred must be interpreted without the emphasis or inflection of speech, which severely limits hour chances of receiving the story as it was intended when scent.


It's really not that easy to get your story strait.


Cheers
Craig

[%sig%]

'Tom' wrote:

> I sincerely and profoundly apologise for any offence you may
> have taken as far as the previous email was concerned.
> Whatever your reason was for pulling out, it was up to you
> and you alone......

>Anyway Greg, I wish you the best of luck with your next
> production, and maybe you can let us know when that is.
>
> kind regards,
>
> Cary (Tom) Hudson


Geez. Nothing like an actual well written and obviously sincere apology to make a girl feel bad. I think you've just pushed the bar for maturity and grace on this Site up several notches Cary, (not that it was particularly high to begin with mind you).

Well done.

Leah Maher

Guys,

seriously....get over it!!

It happens!

Yes...the show must go on (within reasonable limits)...but sometimes for various reasons people have to say "Sorry, I cant do this."

I think I've had to drop out of a production about 3 times in a period of 17 years covering about 40-50 productions...NEVER for anything less than having good reasons for doing so.

The current production I am in has had the lead actor miss two shows due to health reasons...luckily our director was able to step in and...kudos to him...had learnt the lines by the second night.

Theatre, like anything has its ups and downs, and like any field of endeavour...personalities clash...which is what occurred in this case.

But aside from that....I read Gregs postings regarding his departure
and I support his decision...If you are in a situation that is to your detriment on any level, you have only two options..do something about it...or remove yourself from it. Greg chose the latter and it is a valid choice regardless of what others may think.

Stop the slanging match guys...the show is over and in a couple of months no-one will give a damn anyway,they will be getting stressed over the next crisis of the next show.

Sometimes I think some shows should never open in the first place...but remember...we learn more from our failures than our successes.

I am sorry it was such an unpleasant experience for both of you but lets
stop playing the blame game, eh?

All the best

Robert. :-)

Salutations Tom

Thank you. It takes courage to write as you have and I'm sure you have gained far more than just my respect.

For the record, when you arrived, I quietly thought, (in relation to the situation), "He seems like a nice bloke, poor bastard." I still do.
Cheers
Greg

And it is that very attitude that makes you unprofessional.

Pulling out of productions, prima donnas and 'we can do what we like'. What about all those paying members and that loyal audience base that has supported Harbour over the years.

'The last play I'll ever do at Harbour Theatre that's for sure!!'
What kind of statement is that.?

'Greg, I sincerely and profoundly apologise for any offence you may have taken??? Who cares. Where is his apologies to each and every member of Harbour.? The git pulled out of a production and left the club to deal with the bollocks.

Tom stand up for your self stop saying one thing to one person and one thing to another. Stop apologising for yourself.

Greg, stay out of the theatre. You have let people down. And it was down to your lines, mate. Be honest and move on.

Stop letting people down.

Old friend.

Gday guys,

I am that guy that Rob is talking about that had to pull out of Brimstone and Treacle for 2 nights due to health problems.Fortunately I had the support of a great cast and crew, that did what they needed to do to keep things going. I only hope that I can repay the favour one day. Sooking and whinging isnt going to make the production go any smoother.Look, when you do a production for a community theatre you realise theres a commitment level there, but at the end of the day - your not getting paid!

Once again Id just like to thank Eliot, Joy, Rob, Rayann, Stephan, Brian and KADS for understanding and being so supportive.They didnt bitch and moan and the production went on very well.

Cheers
Alex

Before we get more righteous about who knows better than who, can I just point out the fact that the decision to air personal grudges on a public forum like this is unprofessional in any case.

Please stop this thread.


Crispy.

thankyou.....
G

This thread began with me not wishing to expose details which, although I felt were accurate, I also felt would ultimately be more hurtful than helpful to the party under review.

So how did we wind up here?

You can see how people get upset, and some respond badly, to harsh criticism. And others are quite willing to make personal attacks, regardless of the hurtfulness or accuracy of their information. Given the opportunity, it seems people are fairly willing to stick the boot in.

I think I'm glad I chose not to review this particular show. The repercussions could have been devastating.


Cheers,
Craig

I see what you mean, Craig. It's easy for people to lash out behind an alias. I am now glad we chose to ignore all the slagging off one of our productions got on this site last year. It's funny how positive comments are usually associated with the writer's real name and negative ones are not.

On the other hand, it's just as well I don't know who some of these authors of nasty comments really are - I would have to think twice about employing them in my company.

Yeah, I know I am going under "Angelique" here - but I am sure everyone knows who I am - there is only one Angelique in the Perth theatre scene to my knowledge!



Thou pox-marked fool-born foot-licker!

I couldn't agree with you both by the way. So, I will tell you who I am, not that it would mean anything to most of you and not that any of you really care too much. I taught drama as a guest in Sydney and have directed a few plays in Melbourne. I have close friends here in London and in Perth whom I have taught and Directed.

Take care

George Hall
Old Friend

Old Friend/George wrote:
>
> I couldn't agree with you both by the way.


...So which one did you decide to agree with? :-)

Hello then, 'George', although as you say, I'm afraid the name still means little...apart from something else to associate with 'Old Friend'.


I actually have no problem with anonymous posts, as I have ascertained in a previous essay. ( Anonymous Verse; http://theatre.asn.au/read.php?f=19&i=6475&t=6475). If someone feels more at ease writing what they think without being identified, I think that is valid, especially if they feel they would need to temper their thoughts because of close personal associations. Anonymity can mean more honesty, which should not be seen as cowardly. And if the points are valid, I don't see the difference between writing under a pseudonym or a real name.

What I have the problem with is people who write crap. This applies equally to anonymous or identified authors, but tends to apply more to the pseudonyms only because people who identify themselves tend to be more responsible in what they say.
I don't mind a controversial or unpopular opinion if it is justified and argued well. But if what you write is no more than name-calling or poorly conceived ridicule, expect to be the object of my own perhaps unpopular opinion.

Cheers,
Craig

[%sig%]

<
<
<
<
These were the points (:-)

Which is what prompted me to come out, so to speak.


Hope your tour is going well. You sound like you are getting around quite alot Graig.

Best wishes

George

aka Old Friend

Hey Cris,
I hope you didnt see my post as a chance to air a 'personal grievance'
I just wanted to thank the cast and crew of B&T for there support.

Alex.