'K & I' sackings
Sun, 24 Oct 2004, 10:28 pmWalter Plinge8 posts in thread
'K & I' sackings
Sun, 24 Oct 2004, 10:28 pmHi,
I've been reading some of the posts made by Joe and several other people regarding the 'K & I' understudy sackings. I'm not sure if you're aware but Justin Freind hasn't been the lead role for Luntha for very long. I was sacked about a month ago from lead role as Luntha and found out then that Justin had been replaced as lead role.
I'm 17 years old finishing year 12 TEE in Kelmscott. I spent 72 hours and a lot of money driving to bloody carlisle for rehearsals and having said that my TEE will suffer because of this experience.
I've discovered recently that the understudies were sacked over the phone. I'm not sure how you all took it at the time but when i was told in person i was shocked for 3 days. I too don't understand why proffessional performers are in a voluntary production and fortunately have had the support of my family to pry information from Marcus Stafford (He proudly calls himself the "CEO of the MS Society!") and came to our own conclusion quite some time ago that the goings on of this production have been far from a coincidence.
Interestingly enough I was one of the first, if not THE FIRST lead role to be cast in this production, that is, everyone else from my knowledge was still attending call-backs.
Odd how 4 or 5 weeks before opening night they suddenly changed their view on my acting ability in a 85% singing role.
Kind Regards,
Trent Laurenson
I've been reading some of the posts made by Joe and several other people regarding the 'K & I' understudy sackings. I'm not sure if you're aware but Justin Freind hasn't been the lead role for Luntha for very long. I was sacked about a month ago from lead role as Luntha and found out then that Justin had been replaced as lead role.
I'm 17 years old finishing year 12 TEE in Kelmscott. I spent 72 hours and a lot of money driving to bloody carlisle for rehearsals and having said that my TEE will suffer because of this experience.
I've discovered recently that the understudies were sacked over the phone. I'm not sure how you all took it at the time but when i was told in person i was shocked for 3 days. I too don't understand why proffessional performers are in a voluntary production and fortunately have had the support of my family to pry information from Marcus Stafford (He proudly calls himself the "CEO of the MS Society!") and came to our own conclusion quite some time ago that the goings on of this production have been far from a coincidence.
Interestingly enough I was one of the first, if not THE FIRST lead role to be cast in this production, that is, everyone else from my knowledge was still attending call-backs.
Odd how 4 or 5 weeks before opening night they suddenly changed their view on my acting ability in a 85% singing role.
Kind Regards,
Trent Laurenson
Re: 'K & I' sackings
Thu, 28 Oct 2004, 09:59 amWalter Plinge
Agreed Angelique - never happened to me but I've seen it happen in both pro-am and professional. My observation (which is admittedly from position of lesser experience to your own) has been that producers who engage in that kind of behaviour are often as naive/inexperienced as the young actors they tend to exploit - ie it seems to happen when through either grants, a good idea (or admittedly through the producer's hard work) they are producing a show that is 'ahead' of their experience level. Whenever I've seen actors unfairly sacked, it has been by a producer that has leaped straight into co-op after 1 or 2 amateur shows, or a relatively new film-maker that is undertaking their first professional project - who haven't quite got their head around the idea of 'Perth-having-professional-actors' and consequently they overrate the value of their production, they see casting an actor almost like doing him/her a favour (by virtue of giving the actor the opportunity to act) rather than being an agreement under which they have obligations, and tend to underestimate the experience, expertise and effort applied by their cast, all contributing to a management-style that would be completely discredited in any other 'commercial' setting.
By comparison, it has always seemed to me that the more experienced a producer is the better they treat their cast - maybe its because they are more likely to see good relations with the acting community as linked to their long-term viability, maybe its just because they have a better understanding of the effort (and in some cases financial reliance) associated with acting.
With that in mind, I'd suggest taking the same approach to producers that most people use with actors - forgive them a couple of episodes of bad/irresponsible behaviour when they're new and inexperienced, and if they do the same thing again then boycott them.
By comparison, it has always seemed to me that the more experienced a producer is the better they treat their cast - maybe its because they are more likely to see good relations with the acting community as linked to their long-term viability, maybe its just because they have a better understanding of the effort (and in some cases financial reliance) associated with acting.
With that in mind, I'd suggest taking the same approach to producers that most people use with actors - forgive them a couple of episodes of bad/irresponsible behaviour when they're new and inexperienced, and if they do the same thing again then boycott them.