Michael Riedel and West Side Story Turmoil- Page 7

[singtopher]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 11:53am

Ya know, I think I may have been at the one show where everyone showed up. Granted, it was the third preview.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 12:50pm

"I'm amazed this non-story is getting so much attention on BWW. Didn't Mike Nichols give the cast of SPAMALOT the same speech when they started missing performances?"

Yes, but I think it was aimed more at one performer than the cast as a whole. Baayork Lee also read the riot act to the cast of A Chorus Line because they were missing so many performances, and subsequently most of them didn't have their contracts renewed.

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 12:58pm

The "Spamalot" lecture was not aimed at just one performer, although one performer seemed to draw the most heat - all of the leads, with the exception of David Hyde Pierce, had atrocious attendance.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 1:12pm

"Do you honestly believe only the people on this board care? I guess theater really must be dying then."

No, but a majority of the tourists may not care by the end of the show. I have had experiences as well where people would express their initial disappointment, but would be satisfied with the show in the end. Sure, you are going to have some theatergoers who are not happy, but you are paying to see the show, not a certain cast. People have this preconceived notion that the main actors are better than the understudies, which is not always the case. This is why the lady adamgreer heard might have sounded like she would have been disappointed if an understudy was on for Tony, Maria and/or Anita.

Theater is not dying because one honestly believes only people on this board care about who plays a certain role. Theater is dying because people have these preconceived notions that they are being cheated in seeing an understudy.

Despite what I said, the cast still has a responsibility to show up to work and should not be skipping for frivolous reasons, such as partying.

[blaxx]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 1:16pm

I agree with you, millie. But having seven or more understudies in one night, and have this happen often, is offensive.

If this is the case, they better not have a playbill listing performers and their assigned roles, and instead a list of all actors hired and a note indicating that they all rotate/alternate performances.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 1:31pm

It becomes offensive because I have a hard time believing that everyone is actually legitimately sick or has some emergency, especially if this is a common occurrence. Also because, as people mentioned, they are doing something that a million people would love to do and are taking their jobs for granted.

However, it is normal for people to experience the initial disappointment to see an understudy, but you shouldn't let that feel like you are being cheated out of what you paid for. I am more disappointed in the fact that they might be taking their jobs for granted.

Updated On: 8/20/09 at 01:31 PM

[rwlevin]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 2:01pm

Hundreds, if not thousands, of actors try out for these roles and the CDs hire the person who they think is best. But if that was the only person who could play the role, shows would close when contracts were up. Just think of all the understudies who became stars when the actual star got sick and people responded to the understudy more.

Aside from Greene and the actor who replaced Hoff in Pal Joey, Sutton Foster got her break when Kristin Chenoweth left Millie, Brad Oscar was promoted to Franz Liebkind when the original actor got sick, and then ended up playing Max countless times when Nathan Lane decided to not show up for performances and then ended up playing Max for real until the box office decided to bring in big names when business started lagging. There's the famous story of Shirley Maclaine getting her big break subbing for Carol Haney. And there was Gretchen Wyler who explained in Broadway:The Golden Age, that she was a second understudy during an out-of-Broadway run for Silk Stockings ended up in the role on Broadway.

What's my point? There are thousands of people auditioning for these roles and sometimes an audition doesn't tell the whole story and when an understudy goes on in the actual production, maybe they were supposed to be in the role the whole time. That and I think that unless they think the show is so amazing word of mouth and reviews will get butts in the seats, CD's and producers will choose people who are more well known than those who are better in the role. (who can always take over the role when the originator's contract is up)

Speaking of Broadway:The Golden Age, the actors talked about how people thought theatre was dying for at least the last 50 years. As long as there are people like me and all of you in the world, theatre will survive.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 2:12pm

Well all of those stories about understudies becoming a lead are great, the only difference is now they do not lead to a pay off. I mean when I saw "Millie" Sutton Foster was so inspired and thrilling and had the audience in her hand. My friend turned to me and said, "too bad this isn't 25 years ago, she'd be another Streisand. This is Sutton's Funny Girl." Nowadays, getting a flashy read role, even winning a Tony on Broadway doesn't guarantee much other than more prominence on stage and in theatre circles. There will never be another Shirley Maclaine or Barbra Streisand coming from Broadway.

[CSonBroadway]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 2:14pm

I think it is possible to become a star if the Broadway actor/actress gets the right roles.

Look at Chenoweth, she is very well known on Broadway and also very well known in Hollywood.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 2:28pm

Yea, but I have to disagree a little. I still don't think anyone (meaning the public, not casting directors) knows who Chenowith is. If you asked a bunch of people, I doubt they'd know. If you showed them a photo, they might say she looks familiar or know her from the West Wing. She's done bit parts in mediocre or bad films, she's done some very brief stints on TV. She's not a name. A few places, including the network that gave her a sitcom tried to make her a name, but it didn't work.

[kristin_bernadette]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 2:29pm

I think this whole "work ethic" issue a lot of times starts in high school theater clubs. At my school, they make us sign a contract, and one part of that contract says that if we miss more than two rehearsals (unless we're absent from school, in which case you get a little more), than you will be replaced. I've been in three shows in my high school this past school year, and every show, there will always be people who miss several rehearsals, and they won't be replaced. And once people realize they can get away with it, they start missing more and more rehearsals. And this really annoys me, especially since I'm partly responsible for teaching the cast all of the ensemble pieces along with being in the show. I've only missed two or three rehearsals the entire year. I even came to rehearsal when I completely lost my voice, so it really annoys me when people don't honor their commitments. My point is, when people can get away with missing rehearsals in high school, they take that mindset to college and the the real world.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 2:40pm

rwlevin:
By CD's do you mean Casting Directors?
(I assume it's not Cross Dressers), they do not cast the actors, they get the actors to auditions and sometimes type out.
The Director should be making the final decisions but more and more the Producers are getting in on it.
If you followed the TweeterGate last week, it helps understand the role of the casting people.

And this thread is so out of hand, some people go to the theatre to see the show and some for the performers, that's not really the isue. Actors being lax about their jobs and how the powers that be are handling it, is more to the point of Reidels rantings.

[rwlevin]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 4:24pm

Dude, cross dressers get to cast shows? Awesome! A show completely cast by Eddie Izzard:)

Sorry, and I have to disagree about Sutton Foster. She was an unknown before Millie. Since then she's been a headliner in 4 different Broadway shows. Did I think she was miscast in some of them? Sure, but people who know about theatre see her name and will flock to the show. It's her choice to stick with theatre. And there are plenty of other actors out there like that but they must not be very good since I can never see them on tv, right? I personally believe that just doing theatre is a personal choice, it's not because they can't get roles in tv shows or movies. I get sad when actors choose tv and movies over theatre 'cause if it's a successful tv show it means they won't be back to Broadway for a while. Robert Sean Leonard comes to mind and, to a lesser extent, Billy Crudup.

But yeah, West Side Story understudies, not fun.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 4:42pm

The article mentioned as many as five understudies in one performance. When I saw In the Heights in March, I saw six. I saw the first Monday performance of Rock of Ages, and Amy Spanger was out, so Savannah Wise was on as Sherrie and Ericka Hunter was on as the waitress. I also saw Billy Elliot in March and Haydn Gwyn was out, her understudy normally played Billy's mom, so a swing went on. There was an understudy for Michael, and it was his first performance in the role. He normally was "Tall Boy", so he had another understudy. Of the three shows I saw over spring break, I never saw a full cast. I saw Jersey Boys in Chicago on Christmas Eve, and a swing was on for Frankie Valli's daughter, and understudy was on for Bob Gaudio, and the role of Frankie Valli (normally alternated one does wednesday and saturday matinees, I saw a wed. mattinee) was played by the performer who doesn't usually do the performance I saw. I saw an understudy for Robert in The Drowsy Chaperone on tour. The only performance where I wished I would have seen the regular performer was In the Heights. I agree that understudies are usually very talented. Of course, none of these shows have celebrities. Of course, I would think that when people who dream of being on Broadway are living their dreams, they wouldn't want to miss performances. I know that if I would be able to perform on Broadway, I would be way too excited about it to miss too many performances.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 4:50pm

Robert Sean Leonard comes to mind and, to a lesser extent, Billy Crudup.

I always kinda wonder what Robert Sean Leonard would have been like as "man in chair".

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 4:54pm

"Brad Oscar was promoted to Franz Liebkind when the original actor got sick."

Who was the original actor?

[snowskittle]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 5:05pm

Don't they loose some of their pay if they call out?

[DRSisLove]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 5:06pm

I think a main problem with WSS is that each cast member is listed on the board. Many other shows do not list ensemble members on their understudy boards, unless their specific track has a name.

[theatreguy]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 5:10pm

Ron Orbach was originally cast as Franz Liebkind. He was injured during the show's try-out in Chicago and was replaced between the end of the Chicago run and the Broadway opening.

[homeimp]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 5:30pm

To Awesome Danny: I can't speak about the other shows, but I saw Billy E four consecutive performances (don't ask why-long story). Haydn was coughing at each performance, but she was there. From my view in a box I could actually see her snatch a glass of water offstage when she went to retrieve her prop. I thought she was a real trouper to go on. It was probably Keean you saw as Michael. He has been with the show from the beginning and knows the role backwards. I'm sure it was fully intended from its inception that he become a regular Michael, which he is now. He had to get a first performance sometime. I thought he was great, but then I didn't see the show you did.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 6:21pm

I agree strongly with the post about the work ethic beginning in high school. My son has been in a rigorous, competitive theater program that does ambitious work ("Titanic," "Into the woods" {whole show}, "Fiddler" "Laramie Project" etc.) and requires the contract be signed by students and parents. 3 full months for musicals, two full day "10 out of 12" ish Saturdays are required, and they are literally 12 full hours when orchestra is involved. No one can miss.

Kids have performed with colds, with sprains, with every conceivable malady and emotional upset because they are made to understand: they are part of an artistic endeavor larger than themselves. It's not a terribly original thought, teamwork, but once learned, it creates a professionalism that will serve any perfomer for a lifetime. Serve the project first, and the self second. And ask any veteran: a big part of learning craft is learning how to work with pain, discomfort, boredom and with a feeling of being a mere cog in a wheel. The trick: put that wheel first, folks.

In our post-IDOL culture, we are in love with the diva temperament, the idea that creativity is tied first to self-promotion and the "expression" needs of the individual. Creativity is tied to the creation of art, not promotion of the self; art takes a village.

The earlier one embraces that reality -- and the resulting ethic -- the longer and more satisfying (and deseved) the career. Love the art, get over your self.

Updated On: 8/20/09 at 06:21 PM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 6:23pm

"The "Spamalot" lecture was not aimed at just one performer, although one performer seemed to draw the most heat - all of the leads, with the exception of David Hyde Pierce, had atrocious attendance."

Who was this performer everyone keeps referring to?

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 6:25pm

I would think Sara Ramirez. I remember her attendance being atrocious. Possibly worse than Karen's.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 6:26pm

I thought the Spamalot original leads were dedicated, but I could be mistaken. I didn't hear stories about attendance problems with the leads among the males. Was it Sara Ramirez?

But again, I do not remember because it was a while ago.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 6:27pm

Tim Curry also had terrible attendance.

The attendance of the In the Heights cast seems horrendous as well. Every time I walk by the Rogers there is always a long list of names on that board.