| re: She's out (at least sometimes) because she's pregnant | |
| Last Edit: Mmac72 09:43 am EDT 04/24/24 | |
| Posted by: Mmac72 09:40 am EDT 04/24/24 | |
| In reply to: re: She's out (at least sometimes) because she's pregnant - Ann 08:38 am EDT 04/24/24 | |
|
|
|
| Thank you, Ann. I’m not calling for it, at all! For the record, I think it’s great that she’s pregnant and hope she gets to do the rest of the run because she’s great in the role and people deserve to see her. That’s the problem-I’ve seen this Merrily revival three times-once she was in, and the other two she was not, and that announcement was made approximately thirty seconds before the baton was raised. It wasn’t even on the cast board when you walk in, the ushers would just say “you’ll know before the show starts.” Not cool. Can you imagine if the roles were reversed and this was happening with Groff or Radcliffe? It hasn’t been handled well in respect to theatergoers, despite those in this thread and elsewhere pretending like there’s no issue whatsoever in Mendez missing what’s now approaching 70 performances as a star of the show that people are paying good money to see. It’s the “let them eat cake” mentality of some on this board that gets to me-people are paying lots of money to see this and they deserve better. That’s all! |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: She's out (at least sometimes) because she's pregnant - Ann 08:38 am EDT 04/24/24 |
| Next: | re: She's out (at least sometimes) because she's pregnant - Roman 10:30 am EDT 04/24/24 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.013275 seconds.