23 replies to this topic

[admin]

Hello all

We're currently working on a feature for the May issue of What's On Stage Magazine. Could you take a moment to vote in this poll?

We'd also be interested in any further comments on this subject. We will view and consider all comments posted on this topic. Some of these may be excerpted for publication in the magazine so please do sign off as you'd like to be attributed.

Kind regards,

Terri Paddock
Editorial Director

[teaboy]

I voted:

Yes - it generates interest and thus an audience. People have begun to talk about theatre. If just a small pecentage of viewers return to see other shows it can only be good for the industry as a whole.

No - because 'reality TV' is not here to stay. It is not truly 'reality' anyway. 'Casting by Audience' assumes commercial theatre to be democratic. The bottom line is that money needs to be made. While these TV shows generate sales they will remain, but a 'bad' decision by the audience could kill a show. Ultimately there's too much risk fo long-term sustainability.

[Wickalot Q]

I think we might get one or two more shows trying to get in on the act but then the novelty will just where off.

I’m sure the ‘next great idea’ of casting will come along in the next year.

Just stick to good old fashioned auditions I think.

[Matthew Winn]

I don't agree that reality TV casting promotes theatre. When people go to a musical that's been promoted by a TV series it doesn't represent the start of an interest in theatre but the end of an interest in a TV programme. They're tying up the loose ends. Having watched How Do You Solve... and The Sound of Music the TV viewers' experience is complete. They'll move on to the next Saturday night TV series, not the next musical. Musicality created a brief upsurge of interest in Chicago, but it didn't last and it didn't extend to other productions.

I think this type of casting will resurface from time to time. Producers are in it for the money they can make, and each TV series represents advertising that reaches millions of people. Furthermore, even if the audience makes the wrong choice the people who go to see the winner won't care. Cast a celebrity in a show and people will applaud from the moment they make their first entrance without bothering to wait to see whether they're any good. The audience is there to see someone who has been on TV, not to see a great performance. If they get a great performance so much the better, but that's not why they bought the tickets.

[Haz]

I don't have issue with the programmes themselves.. I think that ultimately, the right people probably do get selected in the end, and will probably have trained, or have experience - paid their dues, in other words, and TV is just providing them with their break.

What concerns me is how easy it makes it look. Yes, it might give more people aspirations to perform or work in theatre, which is great but they seem to have those aspirations coupled with a belief that there'll be an open door into whatever they want to do at the end of it.

I work for an agent and frequently meet with young actors who are coming out of graduating and to be honest, I am often appalled by the attitudes some of them have (emphasis on the 'some' - I by no means want to tar everyone with the same brush!). I recently met with someone who is about to graduate from one of London's leading drama schools after a 3 year musical theatre course and when I asked her how she was feeling about graduating, she said "I'm really looking forward to it. Training's the hard bit isn't it; it should be easier from now on"

Um, no.

10,000 people graduate from drama school every year. For most actors, the bench mark of 'success' for them would be to be able to live off the money they make from acting - ie, have no need to work in a shop, or a bar, or whatever to supplement their income. Reality TV programmes seem to encourage the belief that this is the norm for actors - it isn't. Of that 10,000 each year, how many reach that benchmark? I have no idea, but would hazard a guess at maybe 10-15% if that.

I watch these shows because I find it interesting to see a bit more of the characters involved behind the scenes (ie the David Ians, ALWs of the world). But, I'd much rather see fly-on-the-wall docusoaps about organic casting processes - the ones that go on day in, day out; where producers and casting directors approach agents for suggestions, and an audition process follows. That surely, would raise the profile of musical theatre, without encouraging this dreadful attitude.

People are talking about Connie et al and saying 'oh well, she trained - she must have deserved it'. I can't comment on Connie - I didn't watch Maria, and nor have I seen SoM, but why does training automatically mean that you deserve something? That's the attitude that worries me.

I think these programmes will continue for a while.. but there is a limit - there are only so many primetime TV slots to be filled and only so many theatres that can house revivals. (that's another issue - the nature of these programmes means that all the show concerned must be old shows being revived, so people already know the characters - no room for new writing!). I just hope the limit is reached before the West End becomes totally saturated and the quality of performers working there drops further and further.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

[Reich]

I hope it's just a fad;

in the 80's and early 90's we had power musicals

Then Juke box musicals

Then everything based on a film (but before that it was often a book)

Now we have lots of musical comedies

All these forms are still around but don't have as many Power Musicals as we used to etc ...

Times will change. I wonder what will happen next?

[JIJane]

Haz - that is exactly the point, very well put - I have had similar experiences.

[Moose]

Haz+post= genius.

[emkay]

I wish the first question had more options than just "yes" or "no".  Given the options available, I voted "yes", but it's a qualified "yes".  I think that this kind of casting can be good for theatre if the shows are open to serious performers, and if it's not overdone.  I would not like to see loads of these kind of shows showing up on the airwaves, but a few here and there--as long as they're well done, as the ALW ones have been IMO--is fine with me if it gets new people into the theatre.  Sure, there will be people who go to see the TV-cast show and never see another show again, but I'm also confident that there *will* be people who will be turned onto theatre as a result of this exposure.  

I also voted "no" on the last question.  I don't think these shows are here to stay--I think they are a passing fad that will eventually be eclipsed by another passing fad.  For the meantime, though, as long as they're well made and they allow the public to be exposed to theatre and discover genuine young talent, I'm okay with them for now.

[teaboy]

I think Haz put it better than anyone, although I disagree with it being a good thing to encourage more performers. Are there not enough out-of-work actors already?

As you say, these programmes make it look easy - turn up, audition, get part. Job done.

A reality TV programme following an average actor for a year would be interesting - show the crap jobs to pay rent, the rejections, the lack of opportunities because you're 2 inches too short despite being a better performer. Follow the rehearsals for shows that don't make press night, the attempts to find an agent/get a better agent, and the huge mix of work struggling actors will do. Now THAT'S reality TV!