Chicago
Mon, 26 Mar 2001, 09:36 pmWalter Plinge25 posts in thread
Chicago
Mon, 26 Mar 2001, 09:36 pmFirst of all I would like to congratulate Grant and Julia for getting having ambition to form their own company. Secondly I would like to offer a piece of advice. I don't consider myself to be an expert, but I have been heavily involved with non-professional theatre for the past 10 years. In my expereince being part of the creative team and performing on stage do not mix. I saw Chicago on Sunday night and I felt that the production suffered from lack of direction. It is very difficult for the director/choreographer to be objective when they are on stage themselves. I could definitely see the talent and potential of the cast, but I could not shake the feeling that something was missing.
RE: Critique the Critics
Tue, 27 Mar 2001, 11:13 pmHi Jarrad and Emmalee
Can i take a moment to critique the critics here?
Emmalee wrote:
------------------
> I felt that the production suffered from lack of direction.
Where's the substantiation, the evidence, the examples? If Grant and Julia (sorry, i missed the show) are going to learn from your experience, can you provide information, practical examples, to support your view?
Jarrad wrote:
---------------
> I would like to challenge all critics of people like them to stage
> such a successful and polished show and to perform well in
> the lead roles at the same time.
"Those who can do, those who can't criticise"?
mmm... standard ad hominen argument used against critics. Attack the critic rather than challenge their point of view.
> The audience numbers, let alone the audience reaction, were
> proof enough that the show was a resounding success.
"Lots of people turned up and enjoyed it, so it must be good"?
Lots of people thought the earth was flat!
:-)
Some people might even argue that if lots of people enjoyed it, it can't be very good... Malcolm?
In my view, considered and careful criticism on this site is usually richly rewarded with meaningful debate and follow-ups. General, unsupported remarks have tended to lead to even more general and less helpful responses.
Cheers
Grant
Can i take a moment to critique the critics here?
Emmalee wrote:
------------------
> I felt that the production suffered from lack of direction.
Where's the substantiation, the evidence, the examples? If Grant and Julia (sorry, i missed the show) are going to learn from your experience, can you provide information, practical examples, to support your view?
Jarrad wrote:
---------------
> I would like to challenge all critics of people like them to stage
> such a successful and polished show and to perform well in
> the lead roles at the same time.
"Those who can do, those who can't criticise"?
mmm... standard ad hominen argument used against critics. Attack the critic rather than challenge their point of view.
> The audience numbers, let alone the audience reaction, were
> proof enough that the show was a resounding success.
"Lots of people turned up and enjoyed it, so it must be good"?
Lots of people thought the earth was flat!
:-)
Some people might even argue that if lots of people enjoyed it, it can't be very good... Malcolm?
In my view, considered and careful criticism on this site is usually richly rewarded with meaningful debate and follow-ups. General, unsupported remarks have tended to lead to even more general and less helpful responses.
Cheers
Grant
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···