118 replies to this topic

[curzon]

Dam, Dam, Dam. Where ever I go is reminders I missed that show.  

Well if you're feeling really rich (or start saving now) the show is being done at the Met next season with the same principals....

Sebastian

[armadillo]

Even if Equus has been running for less than 3 weeks, that doesn't take away from the fact that the NT managed to have a word-perfect understudy during previews for My Fair Lady. I know some people will say that the NT has masses of money from subsidies so understudies shouldn't be a problem (though they don't have them at the Cottesloe) but as we have recently been reminded, Equus has had the biggest box office advance ever for a West End play. So the producers have plenty of money, some of which should have gone into understudy rehearsals. They are like fire drills - boring and you hope that the real thing will never be needed, but absolutely necessary especially for a show like this where the very cheapest tickets are £35 or more.

[pesa]

Even if Equus has been running for less than 3 weeks, that doesn't take away from the fact that the NT managed to have a word-perfect understudy during previews for My Fair Lady. I know some people will say that the NT has masses of money from subsidies so understudies shouldn't be a problem (though they don't have them at the Cottesloe) but as we have recently been reminded, Equus has had the biggest box office advance ever for a West End play. So the producers have plenty of money, some of which should have gone into understudy rehearsals. They are like fire drills - boring and you hope that the real thing will never be needed, but absolutely necessary especially for a show like this where the very cheapest tickets are £35 or more.

Totally agree with you Armadillo I was just saying that the show had not been running for several weeks as you stated.

[Jaybee]

Agree you should either be refunded or given tickets later in the run. Yes it makes sense that understudies wouldn't be ready yet but if they're not then the producers must take responsibility. I also think that in the case of plays promoted primarily through a famous star, to not provide that star on a performance could just about be called a break in the contract established by the marketing material. I'm not sure that I would apply that in this case but certainly the lack of a prepared understudy requires you to be refunded.

(To answer the person querying the largest-advance-for-a-non-musical: perfectly plausible. Plays in the West End rarely have an initial booking period of over 3 months, and ticket prices rise each year.)

[Jaybee]

So what would you suggest, the show previews and opens, then closes for 1-2 weeks to rehearse the understudies?  Few shows could afford that financially so there would simply be fewer shows.

Skylight this really isn't the point. If, in the West End, at premium prices, they cannot provide a proper understudy, then they have not met their side of the bargain. Actors get ill: fine. And I can just about accept that it's not possible to have an understudy ready at the start of the run. But that's not the point. If you're not given a proper show, there MUST be the option of a refund or replacement tickets.

[Blue]

Just out of interest what happened in the evening? Was Richard back or did the understudy go on again?

[canmark]

I've just returned to Toronto from a whirlwind trip to London where I saw 7 shows in 4 days, my final show being the Saturday night performance of Equus. I had already been disappointed when 2 previous shows had featured understudies (the actress who played Sally Bowles in a disappointing production of Cabaret--the first show I saw--and the cute Simon Lipkin who plays Nicky/Trekkie Monster in Avenue Q--although the understudy was great) and I was beginning to wonder about actors of London, who I had always imagined were troopers, the show must go on... even during the Blitz-type people.

I had picked up my tickets for Equus on Friday, and noticed the sign on the box office indicating Richard Griffiths was away with an ill-timed illness--on the opening week of one of the most talked-about shows of the season, no less. Still, I hoped he would be available for the Saturday night show. Of course he was not. Further, when I bought my program, the woman had run out of slips announcing the replacement, so I was merely told verbally about the replacement (had I not previously seen the sign on the box office or had not bought a program I would have been caught unawares).

One of the main reasons I wanted to see the production was Richard Griffiths, not Daniel Radcliffe. Still, I resigned myself to bad luck. For the first third of the show I didn't realize that Colin Haigh was reading the script--I thought they were his doctors notes, a mere prop! By the interval I had my suspicions, and heard some Americans behind me (aside: I think they, uh, accidentally took my program, to add insult to inury, which must have fallen behind my seat during the intermission, as it was missing when I returned and I had to buy a *second* program after the show was over!) discussing whether they thought he was reading or not.

In the second act I found myself distracted, taken out of the performance as I kept watching to see how often Haigh was referring to his notes--which seemed to increase as the show went on.

Sometime after I thought I should have complained, but I don't know what reparation I should have expected. I was leaving Lodon on Monday, so I couldn't see any future peformance. And while it may not be the actor's or producers' fault that the understudy was unprepared so early in the run of the show, it wasn't my fault either, and I paid, 50 pounds for my ticket and ordered it a month in advance.

Had the producers made some kind of announcement and offered something like a discount on a future show, they could have won some audience goodwill. Instead, one is left with a feeling of badwill.

[Xander Hough]

I would also like to add one thing...

If you have a complaint about any aspect of the show this should be taken to the production company, producer or the company manager.

If you have a complaint about any aspect of the building and its staff then you should take it up with the theatre.

DO NOT have a go at theatre staff - it is NOT their fault that an understudy appeared or that an understudy was unprepared.  

The theatre is merely the host.

[JWC]

As the originator of this topic I thought I should re-enter the fray with an update.

Firstly, any more details on Saturday night (or last night for that matter)? Was it a performance or (as at the matinee) a reading? Anybody know how Richard Griffiths is?

Secondly, anybody got a link to the Evening Standard report mentioned earlier?

Thirdly, the deputy theatre manager at the Gielgud was handing out her business card as a placatory gesture and asking for disgruntled customers to contact her. Duly sent a complaint email. Have just heard back that Delfont Mackintosh (the Gielgud's owners) have decided that this is all the responsibility of the production company (David Pugh Limited??). While I agree it's interesting that the buck has shifted quite so quickly. Anybody else in same position? Anybody got contact details of David Pugh Ltd?

Would welcome advice from any lawyer readers. Is "the contract" between audience and the theatre (who sell you the ticket) or audience and the production company (who mount the show)? I would have thought it was the theatre (who then have a contract with the production company) but please feel free to correct this.