Rehearsing Mid-Season
Tue, 23 Nov 1999, 01:38 pmLabrug19 posts in thread
Rehearsing Mid-Season
Tue, 23 Nov 1999, 01:38 pmI won't name show or anything else incriminating, but that's what we are about to do.
What is there general opinion on Hastily called Mid-Season Rehearsals?
When I say mid-season, I mean the show has already performed to live audiences (as opposed to dead ones ;-) and suddenly a rehearsal is called.
I personally do not like the idea. Fair enough if it a very long season, and I mean long. Fair enough if it had been planned earlier in the piece (like before the show goes up.)
But really, I don't how to feel about this one. I'm upset, that much I do know, but why?
Thoughts?
Jeff "Con-fused" Watkins
What is there general opinion on Hastily called Mid-Season Rehearsals?
When I say mid-season, I mean the show has already performed to live audiences (as opposed to dead ones ;-) and suddenly a rehearsal is called.
I personally do not like the idea. Fair enough if it a very long season, and I mean long. Fair enough if it had been planned earlier in the piece (like before the show goes up.)
But really, I don't how to feel about this one. I'm upset, that much I do know, but why?
Thoughts?
Jeff "Con-fused" Watkins
RE: Rehearsing Mid-Season
Tue, 23 Nov 1999, 06:26 pmHi Jeff
I guess my first reaction is "huh? why?"
If the show was not adequately rehearsed and ready for opening night, why was it allowed to go on? Far too often - he says, somewhat guiltily - i see shows that are not ready, going on regardless. Sure they improve during the run. But the opening night audience pays the same as a closing night audience and they perhaps have a right to expect a similar quality of performance.
I concur with your examples, Jeff. A "rehearsal" during a long season is probably not a bad idea. And, particularly if you are working with a new script under development, perhaps you would reserve the right ahead of time to amend and adapt material as you see what is working and what is not. There may even be a situation where the particular style of the piece requires constant reworking - but as you have suggested, that's hardly suddenly calling actors for a rehearsal in the middle of a run.
It's not uncommon to hear of actors getting together after a long break in a season to run a few keys scenes or even to "run lines". I'm not endorsing the idea, but it does happen and sometimes probably with very good reason. I believe a policy requiring actors to rehearse fight and stunt scenes before every performance is an excellent idea. But i don't know that i'd call any of these last examples a rehearsal - the objectives are very different.
So i return to my original question "why?" What purpose is the rehearsal intended to serve? If the objectives have not been clearly explained to the actors, then i would think it is only natural that they would feel "threatened" by the idea.
Perhaps, Garry is right when he suggests that the director is being and precious and not letting go? Sheesh if the director doesn't have faith and confidence in the actors to let them get on with it after opening night - how bad would that make you feel?
I'd only temper these thoughts with an experience where i was told by an actor, in no uncertain terms, that they would not accept any notes from me after opening night and that only amateur (funny, the actor seemed to think "amateur" was a perjorative) directors tried to give any.
I'll cop it sweet for perhaps not realising that this actor was feeling sensitive about their performance and not choosing my moment better. But the notion that a director's job finishes as the curtain rises on the opening night is utter nonsense.
A director's responsibility doesn't end until the set is dismantled and packed away, the last items of costume have been stored and the final accounts and reports presented to the committee.
I've experienced a few very different directors. Without exception, i've always appreciated a director popping in a few times during the run see how things are going, to enthuse, encourage and offer a few fresh thoughts and constructive criticisms.
Cheers
Grant
I guess my first reaction is "huh? why?"
If the show was not adequately rehearsed and ready for opening night, why was it allowed to go on? Far too often - he says, somewhat guiltily - i see shows that are not ready, going on regardless. Sure they improve during the run. But the opening night audience pays the same as a closing night audience and they perhaps have a right to expect a similar quality of performance.
I concur with your examples, Jeff. A "rehearsal" during a long season is probably not a bad idea. And, particularly if you are working with a new script under development, perhaps you would reserve the right ahead of time to amend and adapt material as you see what is working and what is not. There may even be a situation where the particular style of the piece requires constant reworking - but as you have suggested, that's hardly suddenly calling actors for a rehearsal in the middle of a run.
It's not uncommon to hear of actors getting together after a long break in a season to run a few keys scenes or even to "run lines". I'm not endorsing the idea, but it does happen and sometimes probably with very good reason. I believe a policy requiring actors to rehearse fight and stunt scenes before every performance is an excellent idea. But i don't know that i'd call any of these last examples a rehearsal - the objectives are very different.
So i return to my original question "why?" What purpose is the rehearsal intended to serve? If the objectives have not been clearly explained to the actors, then i would think it is only natural that they would feel "threatened" by the idea.
Perhaps, Garry is right when he suggests that the director is being and precious and not letting go? Sheesh if the director doesn't have faith and confidence in the actors to let them get on with it after opening night - how bad would that make you feel?
I'd only temper these thoughts with an experience where i was told by an actor, in no uncertain terms, that they would not accept any notes from me after opening night and that only amateur (funny, the actor seemed to think "amateur" was a perjorative) directors tried to give any.
I'll cop it sweet for perhaps not realising that this actor was feeling sensitive about their performance and not choosing my moment better. But the notion that a director's job finishes as the curtain rises on the opening night is utter nonsense.
A director's responsibility doesn't end until the set is dismantled and packed away, the last items of costume have been stored and the final accounts and reports presented to the committee.
I've experienced a few very different directors. Without exception, i've always appreciated a director popping in a few times during the run see how things are going, to enthuse, encourage and offer a few fresh thoughts and constructive criticisms.
Cheers
Grant
- ···
- ···
- ···