Theatre Reviews

Thanks to my friend Chuck Pennington for posting this article about the art, craft and attitude one should have in reviewing community theatre. 

    Chuck and I have exchanged notes on many local productions.  It was interesting to sit with him at the Central Ohio Theatre Roundtable awards on January 31st, 2016 and talk about 2015 shows we saw.  We agreed about many of the awards and disagreed on some. 

   As other reviewers have pointed out, these kinds of opinions tend to be subjective.  I am very aware that many people don’t share my taste in theatre. I try to be sensitive to that as I offer my perceptions. 

    Michael Grossberg is a professional arts journalist and critic with over 30 years of experience. I appreciated his reflections and comments during his Harold Award acceptance speech at the Theatre Roundtable event. He spoke about what he views as the purpose and process of the art and craft of reviewing and his experiences with that.    

   Many people have told me that they enjoy my amateur reviews and look forward to reading them -- unless/until I have something less-than-flattering to say about a production with which they are associated. 

   I see about 70 Central Ohio live theatre performances every year including professional and semi-professional productions, community theatre, college and high school shows. 

     I miss a lot of good shows because I don’t have time to see everything.  

   I avoid some shows if I suspect their content or concepts won't appeal to me. 

    I boycott troupes, directors and actors when cumulative experiences with them have proven disappointing or unpleasant.

    In writing my evaluations, I try to be honest.

      I assign numerical ratings to 18 elements, including curtain speeches and audience behavior. 

    A rating of "ten" is for what I perceive to be an ultimate, fully-realized, professional implementation.  

   A rating of "one" is for things that nobody should ever have to experience in the theatre. 

   Few productions ever rise to an overall ten for me. Nothing has ever descended to a one. 

       If I cannot give something an overall rating of five or above, I don’t publish a review because I know it will only hurt people’s feelings and invite personal attacks. Since I am not getting paid for my opinions, I don't need to incur that kind of negativity and aggravation.     

   I find it is better to emphasize compelling, informative and entertaining elements of shows, even while noting a few flaws.

    I love good theatre and I want to support it.  I want to encourage others to go see shows and participate in the many meaningful, uplifting opportunities with which the Central Ohio theatre scene is so richly endowed.   

   

We Should Review Community Theater Productions....Honestly

October 20, 2015

by Skip Maloney   onstageblog.com

 There is, and as far as I have been able to determine, always has been a problem with reviews of community theater productions. While the quality of the productions under scrutiny can vary widely from very, very good to very, very bad, community theater reviews always seem to err on the side of caution, which, in general, tends to produce an essay that tries hard, often too hard, to be nice.

The fault lies in the nature of an often unspoken relationship between the media that publishes such reviews and the community it serves. Appearing in a local newspaper, or sometimes as commentary on a local radio station, community theater reviews (not all, but many) proceed from the assumption that since the local performers and production staff are unpaid, it's unfair to measure the performance with the same yardstick used to assess a more professional offering, which is nonsense.

While local theater companies operate under obviously tighter budget constraints, there is no single aspect of a theatrical production that is defined by the amount of money that can be  thrown at it. I've witnessed productions that were mounted with the aid of millions of dollars on Broadway that worked better in community theater productions with far less to spend. Equus comes to mind. I've seen professional productions of it on Broadway (most recently with Daniel Radcliffe in the role of Alan Strang), and a variety of regional, professional theater productions and none were as effective as a community theater production of it that I witnessed in a 50-seat, small-old-schoolhouse in Reading, Massachusetts.

In a way, local theater reviews are hampered by a mindset, which asks the question, "Well, what can you expect?"

It's community theater, right? Local, unpaid performers and staff can't be expected to create a product with anywhere near the level of professionalism exhibited by companies that do this sort of a thing for a living.

This is nonsense, too; a particularly insidious form of nonsense, because it can affect the local performers and staff who mount local productions and end up believing that there's no way they can do professional work, and after all (they think), it's really just about being involved.

No one is expecting professional work, so why bother trying to achieve it?

Enter your local theater reviewer, who, bearing all of this in mind, tries to be nice. Makes comments about a particularly good individual performance, or the good lighting, or whatever it takes to "accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative and (not) mess with Mr. In-Between."

God forbid that a reviewer should note that a particular performer appeared to have no idea what he or she was doing, or that a trumpet player in the band couldn't hit a lot of the notes he was expected to, or that the production, in general, failed, fundamentally, to deliver the promise of a given script. Ignore the fact that a performer in a minor role appeared incapable of paying attention to what was going on around him/her unless, and until he/she had lines to deliver.  And above all, never say "bad," "awful," or "horrendous" because the fragile egos of the people on and back stage will be incapable of dealing with it; might even write a nasty Letter to the Editor saying "How dare you?"

This equation does far more disservice to a community than the mere fact of a bad production, because it has a way of lowering expectations, on both sides of the proscenium arch. A local theatre patron reads a "nice" review, goes to the see the show, and assumes because the reviewer knew what he/she was talking about, that what they're witnessing is a good production, even if, in truth, they end up bored out of their skulls, anxious to get back out on the street and check for messages on their cell phones. And while the performers get to bask in the glow of the nice things said, they move onto the next production, secure in the knowledge that they're doing good work, when, perhaps, they're not.

Recently, having witnessed a particularly bad, horrendous and just awful production of a play,  I was surprised by a local writer's nice, even glowing review. It wasn't even a play. It was an evening of original material sketch comedy, with trivia questions (???!!) thrown into the middle of it, presumably to keep the audience engaged, because there was very little else going on with the ability to do that. Opinions are, of course, like certain body parts. Everybody's got them, but I saw at least half a dozen people texting during the production. Oh, they courteously had the ringtones and alerts silenced, forgetting that the glowing screen reflected on their faces was just about as rude as any noise their phone could make. And my wife, who is just generally much easier to please, called it the "worst production (she) had ever seen in (her) life."

Misguided attempts to be "nice" are only part of the problem. Another component of this issue is incompetence on the part of the reviewer. Locally-based reviewers are often pressed into service with little or no background in theater, or understanding of what makes a production work, or not work, as the case may be. Such inexperience manifests itself in a review that criticizes the ingredients of a theatrical 'meal,' without ever comprehending the important, central role of the 'cook,' known as the director.

It is a critical subtlety of the art form and any attempt to write about it; that a production stands or falls on the merits of the person at the helm. In film, as proposed by the French, this is known as the "auteur" theory, stating that a film's director is the "author" of the piece; that what makes it pleasurable or not is directly attributable to the director. The theory holds, I submit, to theatrical work, as well, which is where the assumption that there's some essential difference, related to expectations, between professional and community theater work breaks down.

A good stage director has to do two essential things - cast well, and assure that the basic conventions of any staged production are met. In so doing, a good stage director can direct less-than-professional performers to understand that acting is not just about learning lines and navigating the stage without bumping into furniture. A good stage director will be able to assess the production capabilities of the group with which he/she works and tailor the production design to those capabilities (this has to start with a company's awareness of what it can and can't do when it comes to selecting a play to produce). Given those essential tasks, there is no reason why a director, and through him/her, the performers and staff associated with a production, cannot produce a highly professional show.

An understanding of this clears the path to a journalist's keyboard, allowing him/her to assess the quality of a production without fear that a less-than-nice review will somehow damage the value of the effort that was put into it. If you're ever tempted, or asked to write a theater review about a community theater production, you'll do both the theater folk and your community a great service if you're brutally honest. Employ the above-mentioned triad of negative words if a given production has earned them. It'll have a way of improving the work that you see, and elevating your community's awareness of the best that theater has to offer.

Skip Maloney ---http://www.onstageblog.com/columns/2015/10/20/we-should-review-community-theater-productionshonestly?rq=Review+community+theatre

Chuck Pennington -- http://lifefullofcheese.com

Oscar Nomination Pettiness

  I have noticed a lot of petty whining over scarcity of recommendations for Black artists in this year’s Oscar nominations. One of the opinions I read was that overall quality for all the 2015 movies was not as high as it has been in past years.

     Opinions are like noses. Almost everybody has one. Awards recommendations tend to be very subjective and that is why I think the whole awards culture is over-rated.  

     I confess I don’t go to a lot of movies. Therefore, I am automatically disqualified to make any kind of judgment as to who or what may be award-worthy. I would respectfully suggest that anybody who is not a regular moviegoer and who has not seen all the movies under consideration, is equally unqualified to have a legitimate opinion.

         To automatically assume that the lack of award nominations for certain kinds or categories of artists is the result of racism, is ignorant and reflects an insidious form of cultural rot that is ripping our world apart.  It degrades everybody and everything rather than lifting up the highest and noblest that is within and among us.

    To assume that every decision is or ought to be guided by special considerations for race, culture, gender, and sexual orientation -- demeans the entertainment industry as a whole and everybody associated with it. If people are going to squabble and descend to this kind of pettiness, maybe the best solution would be to do away with the awards all together. That would be my preference at this point.

   Yes, of course it is nice to be recognized for one's efforts, but I have observed that people who are mature and comfortable with themselves don't need fancy medals and trophies or to have folks fawning all over them.

    True leaders and heroes do the best they can with what they understand. They find joy and meaning in doing the work for its own sake and have dedicated themselves to accomplishing the mission often in the face of overwhelming opposition.

    Awards sometimes honor maturity and professionalism. Sometimes it gets overlooked. But it doesn't really matter. In the words of the great American essayist and philosopher, Ralph Waldo Emerson, “The reward of a job well done is to have done it.”

Cruz Or Trump?

   Everybody has an opinion about Donald Trump.  There is a lot of drumming and humming about the fact that Trump, though running as a Republican candidate, is not a conservative.

   I agree, Trump is no conservative.  But so what? 

   People I consider to be the most reliable truth-tellers about current political trends have made the point that far too many folks in the mainstream Republican party have been moving away from true conservatism for decades. 

   I think Trump is an astute businessman whose occupational endeavors have been complicated and frustrated by growing government incompetence, encroachment and interference. 

    Maybe Trump believes that his best hope for stopping government tampering and rolling it back to insure the success of the Trump dynasty for himself and his heirs, is to be President himself and put some of his own executive orders and some of his own “people” into place while doing his best to get rid of the worst ones that others have effected, especially Obama.  

   That may explain why Trump is getting so much adoration and support from Democrats as well as Republicans.

   Ted Cruz might be more conservative, and therefore a more attractive candidate for conservative voters.  Cruz is certainly less arrogant and less of a bully.

  But who would have the most strength of purpose and be able to wield enough influence and power to roll back oppressive government regulations and policies and force better legislation that would exact immediate improvements in commerce? 

    In the short term, what is most important --  repealing and replacing regulations, legislation and people who obstruct commerce in order to gain a quick reprieve to improve commerce or propping up conservative idealism that dies on the vine in the face of a decades-long deterioration that will require decades-long diligence to transform it?

Writing and Living Our Own Stories

  We are often so consumed with trying to influence other people’s stories -- to control, change or convert other people to our way of thinking and doing things--  that we neglect our own story.   We fail to live up to the best that is within us. How can we expect other people to think better of us than we think of ourselves?  Why should others have more care, understanding and respect for us than we have for ourselves?

Phone Solicitors

Phone solicitors are people who think they know more about me and what I want-- or ought to want, than I do. They call here peddling home loans, roof repair and replacement, lawn care, insurance, home security systems and even religion. Then there are politicians and people conducting annoying surveys. I remember a time when it was considered immoral -- if not illegal-- to call strangers on the phone and try to "solicit" them. If these people really knew me, they wouldn't like me, and they would have better sense than to disturb themselves and their peace (as well as my privacy) by dialing my number. But if they insist, I am happy to be rude to them. It gives me an opportunity to hone my skills in witty sarcasm.

The Source of True Happiness

Christmas and the dawn of a new year inspire many reflections and philosophies about the meaning of life and what is truly important.

   As part of his Christmas message, my favorite talk show host noted that happiness and hope are not to be found in the news, politics or government. 

   Most news focuses on accidents, fires, murders, sickness, poverty and all unpleasant aspects of life. 

    The government and its minions busy themselves trying to regulate, educate and adjudicate all aspects of the problems of humanity.

   Politicians pass laws and postulate about more laws and regulations as they try to fix all the world’s problems or what they perceive to be problems.  They continue to make promises and speculate about how they will run the government so that it can make the world better.  All of this just makes everything and everybody more miserable.

   Real happiness comes from God and realizing that the universe that God created has provided us with all the resources we need for living productive, creative, meaningful lives.

   I know lots of folks don’t believe in God. That’s okay.  My understanding and experience have taught me that God believes in everything and everybody that God has created even when we don’t believe in or understand what God is and what God has created in us and for us.

   A philosopher friend suggests that we consider what our priorities and life-focus would be if we knew we only had a year to live.  What would we find important if we found ourselves in those kinds of circumstances?

    What would happen if we stepped aside from the news, the speculations of politicians and the prattling of advertising and social media to lift ourselves up to the best that is within us?  

   What would our lives be like if we lived in a way that reflected the kind of true joy and understanding that God has created as opposed to what the government, the news or social media tell us it ought to be? 

      My hope and prayer for all of us in this Christmas season and throughout the year is that we rise above the news, the government and politics to think for ourselves about true happiness, where it comes from, what it means and what we can do to apply true joy and love in our everyday lives. 

Spreading Misery and Terror

   It is an amusing paradox to me that so many people have no ability to rise above their fears and the latest fear-mongering from the main stream media to consider the larger picture. So many people have no capacity for thinking about anything beyond today’s news. 

    Schools don’t teach real history any more in deference to political correctness and multi-culturalism. 
     It is difficult for me to understand how so many people are so brain-washed that they believe the hype about how it is compassionate to allow thousands of would-be terrorists into our country. 
     The reason these people need to escape from their countries like Syria is because they have allowed these places to be turned into hell holes of terrorism and hatred. 
     To my way of thinking accepting these so-called refugees will only spread terrorism and hatred wherever they go, because that’s all they understand. 
     But maybe that will appease the people that believe we all need to be equal. Equality in this case seems to mean that we all need to be as angry and miserable as the most unhappy, incapable human beings on the planet. It’s just not fair that some of us have been able to rise above poverty, anger and difficult circumstances through our own hard work and self-determination while others have not figured it out. Instead of nurturing and promoting the accomplishments of the hard-working and capable and encouraging them to help train, educate, and encourage those who are less fortunate, we find it necessary to condemn hard work and initiative, because it is just not fair that some people are willing and able to achieve while so many others choose to fail and wallow in misery.