Wizard of Oz

I went and saw the show today with my family and despite what some people may claim is bias as I know some of the cast very well, I was extremely impressed. The only real criticism I could give to the show in general was the scene changes were a bit long at times (it broke the flow of the show) and that the band wasn't loud enough when there was no singing (dance breaks, and in particular the scene changes) The main annoyance was actually the audience, they wouldn't be quiet, but thats what I get for coming to a matinee performance of a kids show I guess. I saw Jennifer Wickham play Dorothy and I felt she captured the Judy Garland character part perfectly and how she got through the show with out hyperventilating I don't know. She looked the part, she can act, dance and sing! Somewhere Over the Rainbow was absolutely beautiful! But anyone who saw her perform it in Celebrate earlier last year would expect that!! A very demanding role pulled off brilliantly!!! Can't wait to see more of this actress! Kim Godleman as the Scarecrow was extremely lovable, and very different to anything I've seen him in before (Cinderella's ugly stepsister, and Beauty and the Beasts Lumiere) which was nice. He also did very well in covering the fact that his mike went out half way through act 1, his projection was so well we didn't miss any dialogue, and the 1 solo singing line he had after that point he managed to get into Dorothy's mike. Well Done Kim! Jesse Angus played a sweet tinman, I almost didn't recognise his voice when he first started talking. I liked his little tap dance he did in the Emerald City as well. The only pity was his costume looked a little baggy and didn't look that much like tin I thought. Darren Bilstron did a lovable cowardly lion as to be expected, and had my favourity line from the show, quoting The Lion King. A couple of times the diction was a bit hard to hear what he was saying due to the type of voice he had copying the guy on the movie, but that was a minor gripe in such a lovable performance. All the other leads performed memorable characters each in their own rights, I loved Carole Dhu's villanious Wicked Witch and Karen Godfrey's Glinda, whilst different to what I was expecting seemed like a nice nod to the character of Glinda from Wicked. Toto played by little Rusty (who got his own profile in the program - adorable) was fun when he was on, although it was quite obvious his owners were just side stage where he could see them. Next time perhaps they could hide from his view so he doesn't keep trying to run off stage to them. All the minor leads really stole there scenes beautifully, the Mayor of Munchkinland, the leader of the Winkies and the Winged Monkey are the first ones that come to mind. But I don't think there was a single minor lead I didn't enjoy. The chorus for what little they got to do (its really a show for the big four isn't it) were quite lively and could be heard! (Not an often achieved accomplishment at MPAC) The munchkin kids were very cute and everytime the lively Ding Dong the Witch Is Dead came on the audience were clapping along thouroughly enjoying themselves. The band filled with Luke Savage and his usual lot of professionals did justice to the score. There were times like I said before they needed to be louder but thats really the sound guys job. The only thing I'd really say is there felt like there needed to be more instruments playing sometimes to give a fuller sound. The atmosphere felt a bit lacking particularly in the overture which really is there turn to shine. This is in no way a disrespect to the actual players, I have the deepest respect for Luke and Co. as musicians but lets face it, the poor souls can only play one instrument at a time (although many over the course of the show :P) The sets were a wide range, unfortunately there were times were it looked as if they had run out of budget, such as the Emerald City and the Lion's forest. But others particularly the Munchkinland were absolutely awe inspiring. And just some of the little details that were added here and there (dragonflies that ACTUALLY FLEW out into the audience, and puppet lemurs dancing from out of the music pit) were great. It just would have been nice to see that level of commitment and ingenuity applied to the rest of the show. Biggest gripe was the yellow brick road. Didn't have a problem as such with the lights showing the road in later scenes, but the spiral one at the beginning ended without going anywhere.... poor Dorothy had to follow the yellow brick road and pretend it just kept spiralling until she got offstage.... looked a bit silly. Lighting was good, I didn't read who did it but I presume it was Shane as usual. There was one instant I noticed the Wicked Witch wasn't lit, can't remember right now. The twister could have had lights spinning around the stage to give it a bit more atmosphere which that scene lacked I thought, but otherwise was a nice contrast from the drab Kansas to bright and colourful Oz. Sound was MUCH better than I'm used to seeing in MPAC. This and Singing in the Rain have got to be the only shows I've seen/been in at MPAC which haven't been ruined by the sound problems - so congrats whoever was in charge. There was one glitch with the Scarecrows mike but that was because it got hit on stage and was no-ones fault (plus Kim covered it really well) and that was fixed by half time. I have already mentioned that the band was too quiet in points when there are no characters speaking/singing but the main impressive thing was we could hear EVERYONE ALL THE TIME, from the back row no less - which for MPAC's past record with sound, is brilliant! Costumes were up and down, some good some not so much, I've already commented the Tin Man's didn't really look like Tin as much as someone from a B grade sci fi movie. The Elmerald City looked a bit strange with every one wearing EXACTLY the same thing, but everything else was good. I have to agree Craigo in that I feel that the Centre really doesn't give the Techies enough time to practice the scene changes, get the little technical things worked out the poor wicked witch had this brilliant flame projecting device which shot fireballs, but out of the three times I think she did it it only worked once! And I was told that Carole only got this device ten minutes before opening night! The Direction was sound, coming from the experience Kim Angus, some of the detail and tricks were brilliant. The winkies changing of the guard was brilliant. The magical appearance of Dorothy's ruby slippers was quick and clever and the direction of the characters in general was nicely styled to the movie we all know and love. My only gripe was the decision to freeze the witch instead of melting her. "I'm Melting!, I'm Melting!" is got to be in the top 5 most well known quotes from WOZ and to cut that seems a bit wrong. Wow, I ramble alot, I better stop before I bore everyone completely. To finish it off, the shows a great one to see, sure I may have just thrown in quite a bit of constructive criticism but I did REALLY enjoy the show and I recommend anyone to go see it. I believe its on this week from thursday to sunday. If you happen to know either Jenn Wickham or Ali Hill try to find out which nights they're on so you can see your gal play the part. But I think Jenn is phenomenol on the stage and I hear Ali plays the part brilliantly as well, so no matter which night you go, you'll have a great night in the merry old land of oz.

Hey Theatre Lover, I'm interested to see which scene changes you felt interrupted the flow of the show, I am part of the crew and i agree with pretty much everything that you have written in your review, I just think that if there was anything in particular you think could be sped up I'd like to know as we are now only half way through the run :) Cheers

Hey BC, the one that most comes to mind at the moment was the change in and out of the Wizards chamber, particularly out as the characters were running out, and then running into the next scene, that needed a fast scene change.... which honestly with the sets you had to move, I'm not sure how much faster it could physically get. I think that scene could have been put simply in front of a curtain to reduce the break in the flow. there was one other really long one in second act which I unfortunately can't remember for the life of me where it was now.... sorry.... I THINK it was in or out of one of the Witch's castle scenes.... but I can't remember... :S The change from the Gypsy Caravan back to Kansas was particularly slow as well... I think with the music being the famous twister music at that point as well, things were building up in tension, so the long wait between scenes became more noticable. The twister scene was a bit strange as well, not sure if that really counts as a scene change though.... it felt like it was missing a few elements. I think all the other scene changes mostly felt disconnecting because the band wasn't loud enough during it. I think if the music was louder and had more energy/atmosphere it would have linked the scene changes a bit better, even the longer ones, (cos lets face it you had a lot of sets to move on certain scenes and with the limited time MPAC usually gives to practice theres only so much one can do) Oh and on rereading my review I realised I forgot to mention Lawrence Williams playing Professor Marvel/Wizard of Oz..... I did love you too on stage! :P The Gypsy Caravan scene between him and Dorothy was one of my favourites. I thought he was bit young for the Wizard, but otherwise did a good job. Anyway hope that helps BC (yeah I know, probably didn't sorry) but keep up the good work, hopefully I'll be able to scrounge enough money to come see it again and see Ali this time... Cheers

This post removed 26 January 2008 at the request of Malcolm Pratt for reason: defamatory content.

to the defence of darren the lion, iam part of the show, and very pleased to be a part of such a TALENTED cast. darren was actually dancing his little heart out, in the jitterbug, right up to wed the night before opening, when he actually fainted. So they decided to be on the safe side, and change it, you try dancing, around in a fur suit, with the temp outside 40, not to mention the heat from the stage lights, but them by all the nasty comments you make on many differnt shows, you are mr or mrs briliant, and can do anything. Remember all the cast in the show are doing this for the love of theatre, and not getting paid. we are doing the best that we all can. Is there anything or anybody ( apart from yourself) that you do like. Having done 3 months of rehearsal with all the cast, i have seen it from woe to go, and I have nothing but praise for all the cast from leads to chorus, I have really enjoyed it. I know every one is entitled to their opions, but where do you get off sting, being so darn rude. you must have nothing better to do with your life.

Sting, I have but one question - Why do you keep coming to see shows in the southwest if you think we are such poor performers? I don't give a rats what you say about my own personal work - I know I'm certainly not perfect. I'm doing my best though, all of us down here do our best. Evidently our best is not good enough for you - so why spend your money on seeing our shows? Is it just because you want to write nasty things on the internet?? I really want to know why? You don't seem to enjoy the shows you come to see, so why keep coming back? Anyway, thanks for the feedback - I always like to know what I need to work on. Personally I think you need to work on your communication skills, but I doubt you'll listen to anything anyone says to you. Darren

Well Mr Stinger you are a nasty piece of work indeed, obviously you do not stick by the dictum, "if can't think of anything nice say, don't say anything". You seem to think that because you paid for a ticket, (well I assume you did) that you are entitled to heap vitriol without fear or favour on all concerned. Would I be right in assuming your only claim to fame is your alias "Stinger". I am nothing to do with MPAC I have never seen one of their performances but I will certainly defend them as I would defend all amateur theatre. Who are you and by what right do attack MPAC so vehemently. Is there a past history which is unresolved? Do you get a thrill out of sniping from the wings and from the stools. Paying for a ticket for show gives you the right to see the show, but it does not give the right to drag everybody in the show down to your level by leveling unsubstantiated criticism at them. To me you represent all that is bad in an anonymous world, where you are essentially a cyber bully, inflicting wounds on people that are unable to respond in kind to you because they don't know who are. You are mostly to be the jovial man at the bar after the show congratulating everybody to their face. My suggestion to you is not to stop writing reviews/critiques but rather to approach the review/critique as if you in the cast or crew and how you would like to be told you got something wrong, or that something didn't work. If after reading your final review/critique your blood pressure has not risen then submit the post.

Hey Sting, Do you act or direct? If so, I would love to see something you have put on. If not, how unfortunate it is that your only connection to theatre is the poorly written reivews you post on this site (I can't structure a sentence properly so I have to put half of it into brackets or else use one of these things [-] albeit, incorrectly. I am planning on tutoring high school english this year, but I will not object to offering my servies to adults as well. If you interested, my fee is $30 an hour. Thanks, Daniel.

I would like to clarify that the reviewer's (ha) alias is Sting and not Stinger, which belongs to a Peter Nettleton. Is Pilgrim's Progress a reference to Slaughter House Five? Daniel.

You are so good at putting other people down, yet you do not have the guts to put your real name, and let people know where you are performing ( if you do that is). why not are you that bad, that you are scared of what people might say. you no the saying if you cant take it dont give it. Unless you have something nice to say dont bother ok. we dont mind a bit of critism, but you are just down right rude with it. as darren says, why do you bother going to shows, you cant go and just sit there and enjoy your self can you.

Apologies to "Stinger" my rant was at "Sting". Pilgrim's Progress refers to Chaucer, we are all on our way to our particular Canterbury.

I saw this show over the weekend - and I agree with Stings review. This show was very boring, so much so in fact, my friend and I left at interval (Something I have never done, and hope not to again) The characters seemed bored and did not engage the audience. The sets were very basic, and set chages seemed to take forever. And the lighting left some cast members in the dark, so much at one point that we didnt even see Dorothy hit the Lions nose at one point! I understand that Stings review would ruffle a few feathers. But I challenge anyone to see this show and not agree, if not with the way the review is worded at least with the points he or she has made about the show. When you get on stage you open yourself up to others opinions - good or bad. I think people telling Sting to work on the way they word the review should maybe clean up a few of the reviews they have posted about other Theatre companies on different sites before they start throwing high and mighty moral lectures around? YOU know who you are - "I don't normally come down so hard on a show - particularly community theatre - but this was just TOTAL CRAP! " That seems to be a little less constructive than evens Stings reviews eh?

Wizard of Oz is NOT a pantomime, do you know the difference, a pantomime is what engages the audience, the cast were told, not to take it beyond the edge of the stage, they were simply following the directors instructions, thats what a director does, you say you are a member of the audience, do you have any exp in theatre, ( prob not). Why do people go to shows, and be so judgemental , why cant you go and simply enjoy the show for petes sake. the sets were basic, you do realise that this is a local production, and not the big time, they are only allocated a certain budget, they would love to have the funds, that the big time theatres have. but the sad fact is they do not, they are doing the best they can, with the best they have available. what they are doing most and its great, is giving young and old a chance to gain exp in theatre, which is hard to get. unless you have been around in shows, and behind, dont just open your mouth and let what ever come out. you say you challenge anyone to not agreee, well there is heaps out there, that have seen the show, and loved it to bits, thats all that matters like everything in life, you will always get a few that agree to disagree. sorry i have to disagree with you the show was not as you say CRAP, that is stupid to say that. you didnt even have the decency to stay and watch the 2nd act. sets were not

just a question, you say that the lighting was so bad and dark that you couldnt even see dorothy hitting the lions nose. SO how come you know that happened then LOL, if it was so dark, you wouldnt have known about that mmmmmmmmmm

By engage the audience - I mean - make the audience warm to you and have an interest in what is happening, I didnt mean literally speak to the audience.... please! Because this show isnt a panto you dont have to establish a relationship with your audience?????? And I was not saying the show was crap - I was quoting a review I had read by another person - who happens to have a go at Sting for writing unkind reviews. The point I was TRYING to make was that just because people write glowing reviews on here, doesnt mean the dont slag off another companies show on a personal page or another site....I never said this show was crap - it was just not very exciting. And I know that Dorothy hit the lions nose because I know the show and realised what was supposed to be happening - Im not so sure the children in the audience did though? I am no expert - but I did pay to see the show and therefore am entitled to my opinion :)

yes you did pay to see the show, and yes you are entitled to your opion, as iam. its just some people can be real cruel on here, and as i said, a lot of the cast are not professionals, and are doing the best they can. i can take it the critism if any, but there are some who are new, and could be their first show, etc, i just think people could be careful in their choice of words thats all/ some critism is great, thats how you learn and get better, isnt it i take it all on board, whats that saying, you learn something new everyday, iam here to learn. so sorry you felt this way, about the show, but some people are liking it and some arnt, like everything in life, life would be boring if we were all the same wouldnt it.

Oh good old Mr Sting again. I saw your ... um.. review... of Paris not long ago, and I must say after losing all credibility in that one, were you attempting to try and gain it back? If so you failed miserably. You are of course entitled to your opinion as much as the next person, but please try to learn some people skills and basic manners in the way you address that opinion. Look, SOME of your points I agreed with, as I said in my own review (whilst others I completely disagree with) but there is absolutely no need to say it the way you do. It makes the term "I'd like to see you do better" come to mind. There are some truly talented individuals I've seen in both Paris and Wizard of Oz who you have tried to claim are worthless that simply need to ignore you. But this IS a discusion forum after so lets discuss your points shall we? You said Jennifer Wickham was boring and no emotion. Well I humbly disagree.... she was in tears much of the play! How can you claim there is no emotion here? Just curious. You dislike the obvious attempts to recreate the film's characterisations. That is obviously one opinion that some people hold. You are not alone, I realise many agree with this opinion. I personally disagree. Although there is room for personal interpretation and style that EVERY actor/actress does automatically, I feel one should at least stick to the original characterisation of the story. I don't like it when they diverge too far from the original vision. I felt the professional Grease in the Burswood Dome in 2005 did this, as well as MLT's We Will Rock You last year. However you have to understand that this tends to be a directors choice. Some directors instruct their actors to study up on a previous incarnation of the show, whilst others encourage the exact opposite. Its not necersarily the actors who choose this. Now how they pull this off is dependant on their acting ability. I personally thought the cast of Wizard of Oz pulled this off superbly. I do agree with your comments of the Tinman's costume obviously, but I try not to go around saying "Oh that was just appalling" in a public review. Those sort of comments don't help matters. The lion's hiding in the jitterbug, again I agree with your point, it seemed a bit strange story wise. Of course I had already heard the story of Darren collapsing in the tech rehearsal so I managed to put two and two togethor at that point and forgive them for it. I disagree with your comments on Carole. And the comments on Karen actually remind me of another audience member who actually commented that she really didn't like Glinda because of the very reason you praised her - she was different to what this audience member thought Glinda was supposed to be due to the movie. Now I'm not saying who is wrong or right, just that different people have different opinions on that, so you shouldn't be going around saying its awful because of the show choosing a different opinion to your preference. Your comments on Malcom Pratt I have to say, despite whatever you may think of a persons performance, to go and tell them its time to retire is uncalled for in amateur theatre. But then you told cast members of Paris to stop singing now if I recall correctly, some of whom had brilliant singing voices, so Malcom, don't take those comments to heart please. The scene changes comments I obviously have already agreed with in my previous review so I will say no more on the topic But to end I just want to point out your statement to Darren: "I look forward to your eloquent and highly biassed response" you do realise how highly biassed your own critique of Darren's is right? It is no secret to anyone who read the Paris reviews that you and Darren clash. Just look at your comments on him in comparison to the rest of the cast, can you really try to claim your response is unbiassed. So now I think your just a hypocrit as well as a sad lonely audience member who has obviously been passed over in one too many auditions in the area. Anyways, now that I got that out of my system, lets just ignore comments that are obviously intended to hurt rather than constructively criticise and await some more instructive reviews. "Nothing to see here, move along, move along"

Oh forgot something... you said that Jenn was too tall for the part, being as tall as the other three characters.... umm... I think you may suffer from sight problems, because I can tell you for a fact that Darren is 6 foot 2 (I was in Beauty and the Beast with him) Jesse must be close to 6 foot, and Kim is definately above 6 foot since he is taller than me and I'm over 6 foot. I can assure you Jennifer Wickham is no where near that hieght. She certainly looked much younger than she actually is on stage up against those three.

Hey guys just thought i would drop in on this conversation, i am new here and hoping to do some stuff with MPAC later this year in another musical. I went to the opening night of Wizard of OZ< and despite there being a few tech hitches (mics, no fire balls, couple of long changes), i actually really enjoyed it. Props to Jen for making it through those mic hitches on the first night, it must have been so distressing to know that your voice is cutting in and out. Her recreation of Dorothy was great, i feel she got the innocence but strong willed character about right. I would have been a bit annoyed to see Dorothy changed up to much. The tin man i found actually quite good, his singing voice was not AMAZING, but i still rate his performance as quite good, the dance he did in the emerald city(i think) was very entertaining and i had a good chuckle about it. DazzaB, i LOVED you as the Lion mate, your dialog was clear most of the night i was there, and obviously it is going to be hard to keep your characters voice on some of the bigger strong notes but as soon as they finished you came right back into character, but then again in the king of the jungle song i think this proved as a great contrast. It was good when you where sining about how great you where going to be your voice was strong and powerful, but when the character had the realization about his current state and the power dropped off a bit you could see the vulnerability of the cowardly lion. Kim...oh Kim, now to say you didn't put yourself into character is, for lack of a better word, moronic. Having met you a couple of times i know that this character suited you down to a 'T', your are a funny/sappy/intellectually challenged guy ;) and i know you take critique on board and i know your going to take what people say and improve yourself further. The guy who played OZ you by FAR where my favorite, i don't know what it was about you but i loved you character in the show, i felt connected to your character, especially the scene when we where back in Kansas and you where gathered around Dorothy, it was a short scene but a great one for you. To those who listen to Sting, don't. I have read many of his reviews and i would just like to say that his knowledge of music/singing is pathetic at best, when you mistake the word base for bass, and tombre for timbre...well lets just say that your work doesn't serve as a credible source for anything outside a year 3 musical class learning about 4/4 timing. If your talents are as lackluster as your singing i am not surprised you are critiquing more plays then getting roles in them. Get a musical lesson or two, learn to use those crazy characters to form words that make sense and go out and sing. Lots of Love

Actually I noticed the review a few days ago & was hoping Sting or perhaps Randomboi were due for a comment or 2. Always good for business. Had it occurred to the cast that this is Sting's intent. He is, of course, a friend of us all. He should never play poker... or Pass-the-Pigs. :P Coming to you from the Pit of Despair.

 

 

... dance lightly my friend, but carry a big stick...

Luke

Hey Yo, Can I review a review that I started! So Bug Boy, that until of late has defied scientists on your ability to fly... "Was it laziness that promted this pathetic script choice? Please explain!" - I'm not too bright but I'm sure when you get a script you generally stick to it, or risk copyright prosecution. The Tin Woodman's "costume was simply apalling!" - I was under the belief that this was a show for the kids. What the hell did you expect! Of course, Bugs Bunny is in complete proportion & representation to all rabbits as Barbie should be a model for all girls to emulate... As for the Jitterbug scene. (Again if you want to cut it from the scipt you need permission from the copyright owner) I recall that the extra scene included in some video/DVD copies give a reason that is was excluded from the movie. At that time it was required to be shot as one sequence, and the actors were overheating in their costumes as they attempted to do it. From comments within this thread it would appear that MPAC too discovered this. As for all other disparaging comments. You are a sad little man. The actors are Am are they not? The tickets are about a 5th of the cost of a Pro show. People come to see a local production to be entertained at a fraction of the cost of having to travel to Sydney/Melbourne to see shows they love that appear only rarely anyway. When I was in the audience all ahh'd at Munchkinland, were awed at every song, & chuckled for a good 15 minutes at the Winkies, even if no-one figured out that they were all killed off as if some cruel joke. Lemmings the lot of them. I eagerly await the next sword stroke! Craigo the Great

Hello to all who have posted here thus far :) I would like to start by saying thankyou to those who have offered up defence for my performance. Your kind sentiments are greatly appreciated :) I would like to offer a suggestion to us all however. I think that Sting is writing things on here in the hope of illiciting a response. What that means is that we are all playing into his/her hands and giving him/her exactly what they want. My suggestion is that we all simply ignore what this person has to say. I have moderated the posting down so that it no longer appears unless you click on the link. Let's leave it at that. I personally don't want to play Sting's game any more. I'm bored of it. To the cast and crew of Wizard: here's to an awesome second week and all the fun that goes with it. I look forward to seeing you all again on Thursday. Oh, and many apologies for forgetting the bow :( Please feel free to slap me around a bit, I certainly deserve it! Keep it real Darren

Is it standard now to moderate any reviews that do not please those in the cast?

me! Ssstinger>>>

i wish they invented an ignorance filter...oh how i wish, i think i shall patent one

Well, I used to like this site but if people are going to moderate down reviews they don't like I may well stop coming here. Sting's reveiw was harsh, much harsher than i would write I agree but at least one other person largely agreed with him and was also moderated down. That is simply censorship of what you don't like. Will the next step be moderating down articles about plays you don't approve of. I live in SA so did not see the production, I neither agree nor disagree with the content of Stings review. I have a few issues with how he said some things but can have no other opinion exceot that censorship of his views is wrong. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Well, call me ignorant, but it seems that Stings review was not the only post moderated? Another review that was less than glowing has been moderated down.

Apologies for the moderation. You all make a very good point about censorship and I stand corrected eating a large slice of humble pie. The moderation was done because I felt parts of each of the postings were offensive, but I have now enquired as to how I go about undoing the moderation. Hopefully the postings will be back in short time. Darren

Surely people going to see this show know the film very well and due to copyright they would have to stick to the script that would they not. Sting says that there was no originality to the cast members, would you rahter them take away from the magic that was formed over 50 years ago? Having read the script The Wicked Witch has actually got the jokes written into her dialog, so therefore the script broke the villan not the actor. You say there was no originality in the show, apart from Glinda, however OZ himself was quite orignial would you not think. Many people would watch the show expecting an old man, at no time is there any indication to his age. As sting says a boy? This was clearly a man and not a boy and would have got the role for a reason. The set changes are a little slow and sometimes under appreciated, however if the budget was there a lot more would have been spent on this equipment. As for the audience member who walked out. You must know that characters go on a jounney and in the first act they had just all met how could a bond be created in a first instance., clearly you walked out and didn't see the tight bond and the warm fuzzy feeling the created in the 2nd act. I think it was quiet nieve and impatient of you to have left at that point, But obviously you want things spelt out to you in black and white. I had a lady in tears next to me by the end of the show due to the emotion portrayed by Dorothy and the 3 other leads (emotionless I don't think so Sting) These people have all trained in professional fields and you can see that bought to stage. I strongly suggest seeing it.

Sorry about that.

In reply to Sting's posting I address the Cast and Crew of the Wizard of Oz. Remember the many and varied reasons you involve yourselves in the theatre and their intrinsic value to yourselves. You have, nor ever will need the approaval of a 'Sting' type reviewer. All audiences are entitled to their 'critical opinion,' however, that is not what Sting offers. History has shown that Sting writes bitter, vitriolic, personal attacks and in doing so loses all credability as a result. His attention seeking comments are aimed at invoking a response pure and simple. The old adage "negative attention is better than no attention at all" springs to mind. My opinion is that Stings comments be treated with the disdain they deserve by simply not replying to him. "Any fool can criticise, condemn and complain - and most fools do." Dale Carnegie, author of "How to Win Friends and Influence People."

Hi guys! I'm a long-time listener, first-time caller ;o) I saw the production on Saturday night and thought it was fantastic, from start to finish! The performances by all of the cast were phenomenal! I believed every word and emotion that the characters portrayed to the audience as if they were my own. When Dorothy was devastated by the loss of Toto, I was on the verge of tears myself! I found all of the scenes that included the Darren as the Cowardly Lion - the voice, the actions, all of it - BRILLIANT. He had me laughing constantly so Darren, thank you immensley! Karen's characters of Glinda the Witch and Aunty Em were spot on for me. She added those little bits of humour to her characters which completely captured my attention whenever she was on stage. Professor Marvel/OZ was by far my favourite character of the night. Laurence Williams portrayed both of his characters with such enthusiasm that I felt like he was talking directly to me! I know that many people were shocked that someone so young would be chosen to portray the wise OZ, but him to be an excellent choice for the part. Clearly he is someone who is not restricted by people's preconceptions of what a character SHOULD look like, and delivered his performance flawlessly. Fantastic work Laurence. One of my favourite scenes of the night would have to have been the Jitterbug Scene. I heard many comments after the show that it went on for too long, but I felt the opposite. I would gladly have watched the dancing for the rest of the evening! Great work by the Jitterbug Leader (Allen Blachford) and his entourage :o) I felt like standing up and joining them on stage! And so ends my review - if you haven't seen the performance, I suggest you do, and SOON!!!!

Wut Wut

Hi i just wanna apologize for all the bad things i have said in the past, it is just a vent of frustration because i like old men

OH really that is just too much Yeah sting posts reviews that go too far. But they are fun to read :)And it gives a show attention if nothing else! I might just invite them to the next show I am in! Postings like the one above are just immature, and taking this whole site down to a nasty level wouldnt you say? WWS!!

way to go meercat, i agree, i was going to post the same. sting is doing the shows he puts down a favour really, because, i thought that as well, it is such interesting reading, that people , will have to go and watch just to see for themselves, LOL and i agreee nasty comments, but like darren says also i agree, just ignore him, and do not answer anymore, he might just go away.

Hi Tony, Darren's taken your advice on board I see and your point on censorship stands strongly. The whole Sting saga is a relatively new one & it's value... well, to be seen. I feel that not everyone can see past it and generally the majority who read about it are in the cast & it just seems to upset them. Probably not Sting's intent. As he realizes this outcome maybe he'll rethink. As for the other whose post was moderated. That was probably Sting as well. A whole bunch of comments on these threads are unvarified. Sting owns a few of them I feel. Perhaps this is a path Grant doesn't want the site to go down. Keep on Dancing mate,

 

 

... dance lightly my friend, but carry a big stick...

Luke

Hey all, You all just need to stop discussing this sting guy. He is just jacking off over this whole situation. I have seen the show and overall I think that it is an amazing show. You may need to use your imagination with the sets, but the whole oz is Dorothy Gale's imagination. The singing was awesome, the acting was really good, especially on the part of Dorothy and the wizard. But with the good things, there are some bad things. There was a child in the munchikin scene which I could have done without. He was one of the lollipop guild, he was just overacting a little too much. And I distinctly remember him acting scared when there was no reason for him too. All the other munchikins were really good, so I realise this is not a fault of the director but of the child. And there was a song that I personally do not like, although it was sung brillantly by the lion, and was much better than the movie. I just personally dislike the song, not any fault of the lion. And with the lion, I have to agree that he did look like a man in a suit. But that is supposed to be part of the show. That is Dorothy putting the farmhand into her dream, so it has to recognise a human. Although a real life lion flown in from africa and taught to sing and dance as good as the cowardly lion would have been really cool. I highly doubt that this will ever happen. Overall, the singing was amazing, the acting was superb, and the show was spectacular. You've been Darcified.

I don't find the ramblings of "Sting" amusing, helpful or accurate in either fact or insinuation. He/she is obviously a person of little or no intellectual capacity who hides like a frightened coward behind the anonimity of his/her rather pathetic pseudonym. Many of his/her comments I find offensive and those directed at me personally are arguably defamatory. I put this individual on notice that I have placed the matter in the hands of my Solicitors and it is highly likely that we will shortly meet in Court. I am all in favour of the intent if the Theatre Australia web site but we must be alert that care should be taken when we are publishing anything that the bounds of decorum and the Law are respected. Despite the disclaimer the controller of this site should also realise that ultimately they cannot disclaim away their legal responsibility when they have within their power the ability to ensure that all comments posted do not defame or slander. Isn't it time we realised that we are all members of the thespian family and should show some respect to each other? One can be critical without resorting to "cheap shots". I am yet to meet the actor who doesn't appreciate constructive criticism backed up by demonstrable fact and detail. If I have used some words of more than one syllable thus rendering it beyond the comprehension of Sting aka "he/she of little or no intellectual capacity"then so be it.

I'm sorry Mr Pratt but I imagine that your solicitor has already told you to sue somebody for defamation you have to establish that what they said was published as fact not opinion and could reasonably be believed by a ordinary person and damaged your character in some way. I do not believe any of these apply. Sting stated it was his opinion and he did not attack your character in any way just the way you were playing the character. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

well said malcolm bravo, good luck with the court thing, somebody has to do something.

It will get to the point when the only reviews on here (or not moderated down) will be lovely, glowing ones that give the cast a warm and fuzzy feeling. Not that there is anything wrong with that...... but I would much rather read one review that gives an interesting opinion than pages pages and pages of praise. I have read both reviews that were moderated and they dont seem to be the same person, or even that terrible. They just offered the opinions of people that didnt enjoy the show for whatever reason. Someone telling you that your performance didnt impress them is not defamation! And before you ask YES the next show I am in I hope Sting comes and gives a review of my performance. I wish they had seen me shaking my tailfeather last year in Robin the Hood. Why the hell not? :) WWS!!

Grant Malcolm is not responsible for anything published on the site - it's a public forum, nuff said. I hope MPAC managed to sell some tickets through all this bullshit.

Its ok, I'm pretty sure WOZ has been quite successful

I have read a lot of negative and quite personal insulting comments on this sight, thinly disguised as a "critique". I think we are loosing sight of what community theatre is all about"HAVING FUN" It has become so competitive and full of egotistical behaviour,Tyrant Directors bullying and intimidating inexperienced cast, prima-donnas upsetting everyone, aggresive stage managers and even screaming nasty wardrobe misstress's. All of the above being "Amature' status but "Full of it" When I worked in the "West End" you would have been "out on your ear" it certainly wasn't tolerated in Professional productions. Now it appears to be the "norm" for Am theatre and just from the comment's on this web sight proves those behaviour's and attitude's are still thriving. Lets all step back take a breath, focus on what's great about being in a show. Remember that first feeling when you found out you were cast in the part? elation, remember when you took your first step out on opening night? thrilling, and remember when you came down stage for your bow and all your hard work is appreciated? euphoric. No One can take that away from you. When I was in professional show's we never read the critiques we gaged our sucsess from the reaction's of our audience.To all you performers in Wiz of Oz go out and give of your best, have fun ignore your cynic's and don't respond to any negativity.

It's terrible when you "loose" sight of something, rather than actually "lose" it.

I think you are the last person to be talking about grammar and spelling.

I think we should get back to talking about the musical now that everyone has their angst out.

I have been involved in theatre amateur and pro for forty years. I am sure that there are others out there like me. There have always been tyrannical directors, aggressive stage managers and screaming diva's. I suspect there always will be. Some people will always take having a little authority or a little talent to mean that they can treat others like s**t, the answer is to refuse to work with them a second time. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au