Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

0

Ida Contestants Casting

Started by pixie, Jun 19 2008 05:46 PM

«
Prev

Page 5 of 11
3
4
5
6
7

Next
»

This topic is locked

102 replies to this topic

#41 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 05:44 AM

QUOTE(Matthew Winn @ Jun 25 2008, 05:17 AM)

If "sharing the role" meant they were both on stage at the same time then you'd have a point, but if someone had booked to see Jodie after voting for her and under the impression that she'd be doing a full week's work, only to find that the schedule had changed and Jessie was there instead, then they'd have every right to be disgruntled. I'm sure there are some people who don't care who they see so long as that person has been on the telly, but many of the audience will want to see "their" Nancy, not somebody else's Nancy.

It's not like the situation when someone's off sick and a replacement must be used. If people book to see Jodie and the producers don't even try to provide her then the audience is fully entitled to get a refund or an exchange.

I do see your point Matthew, and I don't believe for a moment that there wasn't a clause inserted by the BBC to prevent a runner up or another contestant from appearing as well within the initial contract time for the winner - which is about 6 months, isn't it? So, I really don't think it is going to be an issue.

However, Connie was only initially meant to do 6 shows, I believe I am right in saying?  Therefore, the public is probably aware that if they were pre booking tickets, it would be better to do so for one of the 'big' nights, and guarantee their choice of performer, because after Connie strained her voice, the producers may have been more insistent that a relatively inexperienced reality show performer not risk the same problem?   I am talking avoiding understudy here, not another contestant from IDA.

My second point to the person who said that to get top price tickets you had to book months in advance - this was certainly true for the first few months, and you needed to do that when they came out, four or five weeks before the final.  There was no guarantee who was going to be Nancy at this point, even though it may well have looked like it would be Jodie.

Thirdly, I wanted Jessie to win, or Sam or Rachel.  BUT, if one of them had and Jodie had been given two performances that were not at peak time, I really would not have had a problem.  Yes I would have been disappointed if I had booked one of those performances, but I had the wit to think they might use an understudy for some Wednesday matinees, and therefore booked a Friday instead (I admit, hoping for Jessie, hey ho!)

I would not want my money back.  The money raised from phone votes last year went to Children in Need, and this year it goes towards bursaries to help young performers train who may not have the funds to do so.

Lastly, I know that BG and RA may do all 8 shows, but RA is only on until July, and BG will probably have other filming commitments and therefore have the same sort of run.  Most big stars, especially those who do other things than MT, do not have a really protracted run.

It would be hoped, by her fans (?) presumably that Jodie will do a year or more.  8 shows a week for that length of time, even with holidays is exhausting.  Could this also be a factor in the decision, do you think?

Back to top

#42 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:05 AM

Sorry Matthew - had a 'blonde' moment and started warbling on about money back from phone voting, which was because I got posts mixed up - you were talking about theatre tickets!

I just wanted to make one other point to my very long ramble:

If Jodie intends, or is contracted to do a long period, aside from the fact it would be sensible to let her rest for two performances, Jodie herself might be quite pleased to have an afternoon and a night to herself, aside from Sunday.  She is in a strong position to negotiate because she can claim for herself everything her supporters have done on her behalf about 8 performances.  It may be she is hoping for a long run, and therefore welcomes the idea of resting her voice on these occasions?  I know Nancy is not as big a sing as Maria, but there is quite a lot of acting involved which is physically tiring too.  If she is not happy with the arrangement, if she opens to great acclaim, she is in a very strong position to renegotiate very quickly.

I say all this with no side even though I really do not rate Jodie very highly at all.  I think she will be safe, and I am very willing to be proved wrong when I see her in February.

I reiterate, I strongly suspected that the winner would have only 6 performances, and my opinion would be exactly the same even if Jessie, Sam, Rachel etc had won.  I know Lee did 8, but he understood and was shown to be able to cope with the demands of touring, which is more exhausting than night after night in the same theatre.

Really lastly this time, I take the point from another poster who said schedule only shown the week before the final.  I don't think we should presume this is because CM thought Jodie was a fait accompli, but it may have been that the girl who was known to have professional stamina (Rachel) was out, or if just before, clearly going.  That left Jodie, Jessie and Sam, all of whom are inexperienced in top class theatre, and the decision might have been finally made to protect whichever performer came through.

Back to top

#43 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 06:26 AM

QUOTE(art87 @ Jun 23 2008, 09:55 AM)

Whatever your opinion, you are clearly in the minority - Jodie won...

Of course she won - I am neither deaf, blind or a shouldn't be let out in the community.

I am in a minority of people who voted - but neither you nor I know (whatever the speculations on boards) how big or small a minority I am in.

I do believe that the voting audience, the vast majority of which I suspect is women, may have slightly different tastes to the proportion of the theatre audience who are going to see Oliver and couldn't give too hoots who is Nancy and didn't watch IDA.

And before everyone tells me all the men they know voted - out of a large circle of friends, acquaintances, work colleagues, aged rellies, and people you meet at parties - if the subject has come up, I have come across many women who were hooked - some voted in the final weeks, some loved it but never vote on these things - but I have not come across a man who would waste the money, frankly, though some enjoyed it. They could be embarrassed I suppose, but I really don't think so.

No that is just a sample group and of course others may differ. A voting audience is a sample group (Labour got elected last by only 29 per cent or something of the country. Yeah they beat the Tories - most voters stayed at home - my point being is their mandate was a very small percent of the population) People who go on forums are a sample group.

Back to top

#44 Haz

Advanced Member

Full Members
1264 posts

Gender:Female

Posted 25 June 2008 - 08:35 AM

QUOTE(poster girl @ Jun 25 2008, 06:44 AM)

However, Connie was only initially meant to do 6 shows, I believe I am right in saying?

I believe she was originally only meant to do FOUR shows, with the lovely Miss Emma Williams doing the rest.

As has been said previously, Nancy really can't be compared with Maria/Joseph.. the latter are THE LEAD ROLES, and in control of the show. In any other casting circumstance, Nancy would be defined as a supporting role, NOT a lead. It's a poor effort not to be able even to try and do all 8 shows a week.

whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should

http://curtain-up.blogspot.com/

Back to top

#45 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 09:24 AM

QUOTE(Haz @ Jun 25 2008, 08:35 AM)

I believe she was originally only meant to do FOUR shows, with the lovely Miss Emma Williams doing the rest.

As has been said previously, Nancy really can't be compared with Maria/Joseph.. the latter are THE LEAD ROLES, and in control of the show. In any other casting circumstance, Nancy would be defined as a supporting role, NOT a lead. It's a poor effort not to be able even to try and do all 8 shows a week.

Don't you think it might change though Haz? Maybe it is an insurance policy on the part of MacIntosh productions just in case whoever the eventual winner turned out to be struggled to keep their voice.

Better do it this way, than to find they have to cut performances and disappoint the proportion of the audience to whom it matters greatly who is playing Nancy.

It won't be all the audience because tickets have been selling very well since they were put up for sale, but it will clearly upset others.

Back to top

#46 Haz

Advanced Member

Full Members
1264 posts

Gender:Female

Posted 25 June 2008 - 09:32 AM

QUOTE(poster girl @ Jun 25 2008, 10:24 AM)

Don't you think it might change though Haz?

No. In a word.

QUOTE(poster girl @ Jun 25 2008, 10:24 AM)

Maybe it is an insurance policy on the part of MacIntosh productions just in case whoever the eventual winner turned out to be struggled to keep their voice.

If that was really the case then they should have said so from the off, rather than harping on about contestants needing to be able to sustain 8 shows a week, blah blah blah.

whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should

http://curtain-up.blogspot.com/

Back to top

#47 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 09:33 AM

Just meant to say - I know Joseph is a lead role, but I think the amount of acting/singing required not too different to Nancy if memory serves me correctly.

However, clearly Joseph is the lead role being the title one but does not have as much singing as the Narrator. However, without a solid Joe, the whole thing would collapse and he should have loads of charisma as Mr Mead does to ensure success.

Generally people look to see who is playing Fagin, and then Sikes. Oliver is usually an unknown quantity to an audience beforehand. And you need a strong Dodger, Bumble and Nancy. I think the audience in general, aside from tv one, booked to see Rowan Atkinson - great family Christmas treat, and no-one else was a consideration because Nancy hadn't been decided, and despite rumours, there was no definite news on Bill.

Back to top

#48 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 09:38 AM

QUOTE(Haz @ Jun 25 2008, 09:32 AM)

No. In a word.
If that was really the case then they should have said so from the off, rather than harping on about contestants needing to be able to sustain 8 shows a week, blah blah blah.

well it was probably silly because I think some people looked at the young ones and wondered whether it was wisest for their voices to be nightly challenged before totally mature.

I don't really know why they did it, but at the end of the day, CM wants bums on seats - he is hugely successful to this end, and I am sure that he will make a business decision, whatever the best may be in the end.

Back to top

#49 Haz

Advanced Member

Full Members
1264 posts

Gender:Female

Posted 25 June 2008 - 09:58 AM

QUOTE(poster girl @ Jun 25 2008, 10:38 AM)

I don't really know why they did it, but at the end of the day, CM wants bums on seats - he is hugely successful to this end, and I am sure that he will make a business decision, whatever the best may be in the end.

Best for what? His business? To be honest with you, I don't give two hoots about his business. I don't doubt that he'll make a business decision, but that's what is fundamentally wrong with this process, in my opinion. There are no artistic decisions being taken anywhere in this process, only business ones.

I know it's an idealistic view point, but it's my view point nonetheless.

whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should

http://curtain-up.blogspot.com/

Back to top

#50 Guest_poster girl_*

Guests

Posted 25 June 2008 - 10:42 AM

QUOTE(Haz @ Jun 25 2008, 09:58 AM)

Best for what? His business? To be honest with you, I don't give two hoots about his business. I don't doubt that he'll make a business decision, but that's what is fundamentally wrong with this process, in my opinion. There are no artistic decisions being taken anywhere in this process, only business ones.

I know it's an idealistic view point, but it's my view point nonetheless.

Well I have to agree and disagree on this one.  I think it was a business decision to take the casting process into the reality area.  They could just have auditioned unknowns alongside those with experience.  Although I was gripped by it, I don't like the reality bit I must confess because I am not sure I am comfortable with the likeability factor coming in.  I don't need actors I see to be great people, just thoroughly entertaining.

I do think that his artistic side wanted Jessie, but unfortunately his business side had already entered into a Faustian pact.  And it could be said that for its long term future, MT needs to attract the Sat armchair people out of their comfort zone and into theatres.  The first half of this run was always going to sell with RA, but after July they needed a story because it isn't very long ago this musical was staged, and while it will sell, it needs to continually play to near full houses because Oliver is a lavish production to stage.

But I have to agree, that I think you will inevitably make artistic sacrifices if you go down that road.  On the other hand, if these shows help generate a sleeping interest in theatre then it will benefit all those who work in them in the long run.