Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 11:53 am EST 03/07/19 | |
| In reply to: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? - Pashacar 10:03 am EST 03/07/19 | |
|
|
|
| I think we have to step back and ask what we want off-B non-profits to do. Do we want them to produce only work that has been proven in advance? Or do we want them to be incubators? The risk in the latter is that it means we are not taking enough risks, and when we don't, we miss out on lots. Yes there is a balance that is a good thing: we don't want theatres to turn into fringe festivals. But when a show with this pedigree of creatives comes along, I don't think we insist it be sent to development hell. Speaking of which, we kvetch about development hell too. :-) So getting back to my question: is 2ST's mission to guarantee the quality of what it offers to audiences? or is it to do what a non-profit can do and take a lot of risk? To me the excitement of theatre is in the high wire act. Do you really want to watch American Ninja Warrior and not see anyone get wet? |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 09:56 pm EST 03/08/19 | |
| In reply to: re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? - ryhog 11:53 am EST 03/07/19 | |
|
|
|
| I would agree with that if anything about this show suggested it was risky or edgy. I get the exact opposite impression. This one seems like it was programmed primarily because the names involved would sell subscriptions. Nothing makes me more delighted than to see theater compared to Ninja Warrior :-) , and it is true that writing a good musical is as hard and as rare as finishing Stage 2 (never mind Stage 3 or Mount Midoriyama), but I still watch it to see people succeed. That's actually one of the reasons that I don't watch any of the qualifying runs, because most of the competitors aren't qualified enough to hit the buzzer. And yes, it is compelling to watch a great run fail at the cusp of victory, but Superhero seems more akin to watching Geoff Britten slip on the first obstacle after finishing Stage 4 the year before. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:42 am EST 03/09/19 | |
| In reply to: re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? - Singapore/Fling 09:56 pm EST 03/08/19 | |
|
|
|
| always happy to spread a little delight in this delight-starved world of ours. Although I wonder if what you wrote will prove more perplexing to some as the other perplexing posts in this thread. :-) I don't think a show has to be edgy (or risky in the edgy sense) to warrant the incubator. I think Kitt and Logan (and Carole Rothman) would be shocked to hear their names are selling season subscriptions and I'd be surprised if you could connect more than a handful to that. That said, I don't feel quite as skeptical of the worthiness of the undertaking, even though it wasn't good. I think putting a pair of award winning creatives in a room is not the worst thing for a theatre company to do. I see that Scott Rudin has commissioned 2 new plays from Jeremy Harris. Some here might say that's unworthy. :-) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 12:06 pm EST 03/07/19 | |
| In reply to: re: How does something as underdeveloped as SUPERHERO get produced on that level? - ryhog 11:53 am EST 03/07/19 | |
|
|
|
| I think that, if you are a subscriber at a theatre that presents largely new work, part of the deal is that you acknowledge that not every production is going to be great or even good. But I would think that the reason you're subscribing is that you like the game of chance or that you have a reasonable expectation that you'll see something over the season that makes all the not-so-great stuff worth it. So there's never going to be a guarantee of anything, including the titles presented in any given season. That's just part of the bargain. The audience is subscribing to the theatre, more so than any particular slate of productions because they trust that the theatre will present material that they find worthwhile in one way or another. If the theatre breaks that trust enough, that's when the audiences will start going elsewhere. One of the great things about New York is that you have institutional theatres to fit every sensibility...places that present almost entirely new work, places that present almost entirely revivals of known work, and places that do a mixture, so, if your favorite company starts letting you down, you have plenty of choice if you decide to go elsewhere. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.014071 seconds.