Non-Equity Tours - Scam?- Page 2

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 1:08pm

I guess there's about 1 every couple of years--Music Man was like 2001-2 or so? And then OK! was maybe 2 years ago...I guess we're due.

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 1:08pm

lil dogs, I have nothing against non-Eq shows playing small markets, and I certainly have nothing against any actor who takes whatever paying gig they can get.

This is a big challenge for Actors Equity, they've got to find a way to make clear the distinction between a non-Eq tour of West Side Story playing two days in a small midwestern town and Cats playing a month in Chicago. I know people who have bought houses and been able to settle down after a few years on a long running union tour. In comparison making a few hundred a week with no benefits can justifiably be termed being in a profession that has gone "down the toilet".

Do you think the upcoming Chorus Line tour should be allowed to go out non-Equity while promoting itself as "Straight From Broadway"?

[BroadwayDetroit]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 1:27pm

I'm starting to understand why shows like The Producers and Hairspray go non-equity, they have already had years to go around to all the big markets, when the shows were still red hot in NYC... now both seem to towards the end and they went to get them into one-nighter small markets.

I understand RENT doing it on purpose to give young actors a chance, it's had more than a few equity tours already. Ring of Fire can play somewhere in Texas, doesn't matter if people know it was on Broadway in the first place.

I just glad Sweeney Todd didn't go on the cheap, they clearly don't have a massive stage or props to haul around. They could of easily went non-equity. You'll probably see all the stage stuff from the Broadway revival being used, maybe even a few well known leads.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 1:30pm

"I'm not an actor and have nothing to do with Equity, but I'm sorry to see the theater acting profession going down the toilet so quickly."

Non-Equity tours have been around for decades. This is nothing new. And the acting profession has been going down the toilet since the days of Aristophanes. Nothing is going down the toilet so quickly. As a matter of fact, it's been pretty much the same for quite a while.

[Jonny boy]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 1:47pm

So... I paid 70 bucks last night and saw the touring company of RENT last night in Escondido and was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO emberassed for the cast. They were So bad. I am thinking it had to be a non-equits tour cause, it seemed like ammatures trying to put on RENT. They had the same sets and costumes as the original.Does anyone know if it is a non-equity tour???

[Jellylorum]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 2:09pm

Using the word "Broadway" in the ad is a little deceptive since these shows aren't actually from there. But I don't think it is the advertiser's intent to mislead people. In many small towns where the only other sources of performing arts are the community theatre and high schools, the "Broadway" is probably there to imply that these shows are of good quality. Or if not, of much better quality than what the town provides.

Being in a non-equity tour is not fun for actors. But a lot of them, if not most, know what they are getting themselves into. Acting is a very competitive field, so some people would take any job they can get.

Updated On: 5/3/07 at 02:09 PM

[Jellylorum]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 2:09pm

double post

Updated On: 5/3/07 at 02:09 PM

Posted: 5/3/07 at 3:45pm

I don't know it for a fact, but I'm pretty sure that the touring production of Wonderful Town that I saw last fall is a non-equity production. That said, it was outstanding. The performers were outstanding...the orchestra was exquisite. It was a much better performed production that the Encores! production with Donna Murphy. It didn't equal the original that I saw with Rosalind Russell, but it came pretty close. I know these performers will be getting their equity card soon and be going on to more lucrative, if not any better, production.

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 3:49pm

I hope there will be productions that are more lucrative for those actors to move on to.

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:11pm

"Being in a non-equity tour is not fun for actors"

Speak for yourself, I had a ball and would gladly go out again.

As for the "Broadway" moniker, according to many of you, it ned only apply to those shows appearing ON BROADWAY. But a Broadway musical is a generic term for most people, who have no idea what equity-non-equity means. Like the term "New York actor" it does connote a certain level of quality, that one should probably expect from any professional production.

It is also not the case that everything "Broadway/Equity" is good, simply because it's union--far from it in fact.

Also keep in mind that tours are almost always scaled down in terms of production values and those sets and costumes get banged around ALOT. That's the price of poker though--do you want first-rate big-star entertainment or do you want to live in Kenosha? You can't have it both ways....

OF COURSE it's not the same as Broadway--if you want to se Broadway, come to NYC. Anything else is technically not a Bway show.

[IAMmyownMUSICAL]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:25pm

Jonny Boy

How strange because all the reviews say this is the best tour, and best cast of RENT since the original production.

[junkyard]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:26pm

Scam? not really......sub-par is a better word......I have seen many of the non-equity tours. Usually they provide an evening of 'good theatre entertainment' not quality entertainment, that is supporsed to be the norm in show working under an AEA contract. However the box office price for these shows usually equals that of the Equity shows...............I have been an Equity member since July of 1962. I support our union and have often worked as a Deputy on shows, including touring companies....our membership must begin to realize that AEA is a labor union and start to take a more aggressive stance when it comes to non-equity tours. (except for a few shows working under a special agreement)
Touring actors work under a Production Contract and make a salery equal to their Broadway counterparts. If producers (especially major shows like "The Producers" and "Hairspray") continue to send out non-union tours then perhaps a job action on Broadway might be in the best interest of all actors. If our product is denied to the NYC theatre going public then these 'money hungry' producers might be more willing to come to the bargaining table and work out an agreement to everyone's benefit, ie. the actor, the producers and the out of town theatre going public. Equity has agreed to look at a lower weekly scale for some touring shows that no longer would be considered major draws. I remember being outside the St. James Theatre a few years ago, when actors were actively supporting local 802 AFM in their drive for better wages and orchestra minimums. We have a product that people love to purchase. Perhaps we might have to deny that product for a period of time in order to correct the wrong that is now going on with non AEA tours....like I mentioned earlier, we are a labor union, perhaps we should act like one.

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:39pm

junkyard, those Local 802 musicians had better back Equity up on this one. They owe you guys BIG TIME.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:43pm

amen. It always bugs me when Equity backs other unions, and then they refuse to back equity in turn.



Current RENT tour --
I am I the ONLY person bothered that they managed to DOWNSIZE Rent when it went Non-Eq?

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:45pm

You can THINK sub-par all you'd like, but it's simply not true. Unless you've seen every non-eq tour and its Bway counterpart, and even then, it's still subjective.

There are simply TOO MANY EQUITY ACTORS--there's not enough work to go around--do you REALLY think that non-eq actors are taking those roles? How many Equity actors want to tour with "Amelia Bedelia Goes Camping?"

And if these producers were truly "money-hungry," they wouldn't be in theatre to begin with. They'd be making porn and video games.

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:48pm

Junkyard said:

"our membership must begin to realize that AEA is a labor union and start to take a more aggressive stance..."

Maybe it's the officials of the AEA who need to be more aggressive. After all, they're the ones being paid with money deducted from the paychecks of the membership.

[ThePinballWizard]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 4:58pm

Thus being the whole topic of conversation. I have to agree though, there are too many Equity Actors out there and too few jobs to go around. One thing I do notice is the amount of Equity chorus people who are re-hired for every new show...i.e. The Jerry Mitchell Babies. I can probably bet you that for every one of them, there are 500 other actors who could easily do the part. But thus is life I guess.

If you were looking at the way the government does to produce jobs for the unemployed (as messed up as it is )then maybe we should think of revamping the Equity system towards that direction. But I'm telling you this right now, look at this way:

25 Broadway shows (musicals) x 35 available parts (estimate not accurate):

910 available roles not being filled at the same time.

910 available parts give or take....in a city that holds thousands if not hundreds of thousands of out of work actors.

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 5:26pm

The reason that Jerry hires the same people over and again is because he knows and trusts and likes them and finding a pleasant actor who's talented and agreeable isn't as easy as it sounds.

But you're right Pinball--plus add in another 900 for the tours...

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 5:28pm

Very true. You can't blame Jerry, or anyone, for wanting to work with an actor that they get along with, whose work they know......

[Neverandy]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 5:36pm

Fosse- I must clear up some mistakes in your post.
Not all Non-eqs play one nighters exclusively-There are weeks and split weeks. I did a tour in 2000 where we flew 75% of the time and we did full eight show weeks in major cities.
Also-The latest Saigon tour, while it had a few "Defectors" was made up of Non-eq talent. I know because I know many of the people in the show personnaly, in addition to the fact that I know first-hand how Equity was keeping tabs on that production specifically.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 6:35pm

Somone said the Avenue Q tour is on a "special contract" anyone know what that means or can clarify? If you want you can PM or just post here, considering more people might want to know.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 6:53pm

"Special contract" usually means that the producer has figured that they wouldn't be able to make the tour financially solvent if they tour the production under a full Production Touring Contract. They approach Equity with their projections and they negotiate a lower salary, in exchange for booking the show in smaller markets (i.e smaler houses, shorter stays, lower ticket prices, etc). Usually when on a special contract, if the production tours into a "major" market (i.e. Los Angeles, Chicago) the salary for those weeks will be at a full production rate.

Updated On: 5/3/07 at 06:53 PM

[jarretSF]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 6:56pm

Yes JonnyBoy-

Rent is currently Non-Equity on tour. Has been for years now. I saw it the first time it came through Non-Eq and it was great.

It came throught the Golden Gate Theatre last summer and was utterly horrendous. Even worse than the film if that's possible.

Posted: 5/3/07 at 8:05pm

YTeah but I'm not sure a bad Rent tour is indicative of it being Equity or not. I would wager that more unsatisfactory tours have been non-Equity than Equity but otherwise I think either way--quality wise you can find examples for both

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 5/3/07 at 8:31pm

The whole equity tours and non equity tours over there make me laugh.I also think its mad that non equity actors cant work on broadway(or rarely)
Here in the UK you can have huge west end shows with equity and non equity actors in, a lot of the teen shows what i did such as Fame etc always had a mix.