Ben Brantley, Theater Cellphone Use — Page 2

I don't know, perhaps I'm paranoid about this, but I don't even risk the vibrate mode during performances, I totally power it down until intermission or the show is over. At the Acorn Theater in December, a specific announcement was made after intermission to please check your phones if you had used them at the break to make sure they were quieted. Naturally, two idiots phones went off. It's not only inconsiderate of the audience around you, but I feel it's very disrepectful to the actors. On my theater pet peeve scale, it ranks right up there with getting up and leaving during a curtain call. It's just rude.

---

So let me see if I understand what he was trying to say.

"I used to be angry when cellphones went off, but now that it happened to a friend of mine who should have turned her phone off but didn't and was too stupid to find the phone, yet alone the off button, I now sympathize with all the idiots who let this happen."

Huh? What on earth was the point of this inane article?

The bottom line is that anyone who lets a cellphone ring in a performance thinks rules don't apply to him (or her) because he (or she) is above all rules.

Brantleys straight..?

---

ghostlight, I think you miss the main point (that was left unstated). Every single person who has ever let a cell phone go off during a performance is really no different than this bimbo was. Just because this happened to be a friend of his, he seems to indicate that now he understands when it happens and has some sort of sympathy. Really? Do you honestly think that the next time one goes off he'll sit there and say to himself, "well, there was a good reason that person didn't turn it off, so it doesn't bother me and I understand"? Give me a break.

Why did I put it in quotes? Because I thought it was clear to anyone from my opening sentence that I was paraphrasing -- but it was essentially what he was saying. Sorry you didn't understand that. Without quotes it wouldn't have seemed like an attempt to indicate what he meant by what he said. That's also why I put it in first person in case you didn't notice.

So what are YOU saying? That it was perfectly understandable that this person let her phone ring despite the announcements and the generally accepted knowledge that you should have them turned off? And are you honestly naive enough to think that anyone whose phone rang during a show WASN'T embarrassed? Of course they are. Why is this woman any different than anyone else except that she has a powerful friend to say it's all right in this case?

Updated On: 2/14/10 at 07:43 PM

I still don't understand the statement that Brantley was "wrong" about actors being disrespectful and leaving on their phones. Is acting now the only profession void of hypocrites?

---

People think that post on Broadway Abridged was actually written by Ben Brantley?

I'm more embarrassed for the kid who might not be able to work on his college applications during the two hours his mom is unreachable.

Well if you don't even understand that paraphrasing IS indeed a complete rewriting of what was said, then I certainly don't expect you to understand much of what any of us are saying. I'm sorry that whole concept was lost on you.

You are entitled to your opinion. And I am entitled to mine. My opinion is that this woman was no better than any other person who listens to the announcement to turn off cellphones and then decides that announcement doesn't have anything to do with her. She was WRONG.

When a person hears an announcement to turn off their cell phone and they don't, that's not just a mistake -- it's a definite failure to do what you have just been told. Unless the woman was also deaf, there is no reason for her not to have obeyed. Every person has the opportunity to follow the rule or not to follow the rule. She made her decision.

You're really being silly about this now -- and I'm starting to think you are either this woman defending your own stupidity, or else you have done the same thing. I am not the only person here with the same opinion, but you sure seem focused on MY comments alone.

The woman left her cell phone on. It rang. She was wrong IN MY OPINION. End of my comments.

Yes the article was more about Brantley's change of attitude. That's what most of us have been discussing -- that the only reason his attitude "changed" is because he knew this person. And I personally doubt that his attitude has changed at all to strangers who let that happen. That was one of my points in my first post.

And I didn't say I was sorry I was insulting you. I am not sorry about that at all -- if you are insulted by what I say (having an opinion other than yours) then so be it. I said I was sorry you didn't understand. That is not an apology. Clearly you don't understand the difference there either! Perhaps English is not your first language, and in that case I would understand your confusion in such basics as not understanding what paraphrasing means or not knowing what "sorry you don't understand" means.

Thank God indeed! If only it is the end of yours as well.

Updated On: 2/15/10 at 10:52 PM