#76
Posted: 10/13/15 at 5:17pm
No. Not the same concert. Already addressed.
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
The Secret Garden 2016 Concert Presentation — Page 4
#77
Posted: 10/13/15 at 5:46pm
Didn't realize it was two different concerts. I'm sure I'm not going to be only one who is confused.
Update: "This version of Lucy Simon and Marsha Norman's Tony-winning tuner is unrelated to Manhattan Concert Productions' upcoming staging of The Secret Garden, which stars Tony nominee Sydney Lucas (Fun Home)"
Updated On: 10/13/15 at 05:46 PM
#78
Posted: 10/13/15 at 6:23pm
Does anyone else thinks that the second one is a little shady? For extra shade cast the other girl as Mary after Sydney Lucas is doing the other one
#79
Posted: 10/13/15 at 9:19pm
broadwayboy223 said: "Does anyone else thinks that the second one is a little shady? For extra shade cast the other girl as Mary after Sydney Lucas is doing the other one"
Bingo. Truly hope this doesn't cause bad blood between the two lovely girls.
#80
Posted: 10/13/15 at 10:09pm
"Shady?" How could a benefit for dying children be shady? I personally would rather support a charity than a show that is charging kids to be in the chorus and doing the show for profit!
#81
Posted: 10/13/15 at 10:39pm
The timing and casting is a little weird, though. We can't get a revival, but we can get two concerts within two months, with a Mary who's played the same character in a currently running hit show?
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#82
Posted: 10/19/15 at 4:59pm
This concert is on the AEA "Do Not Work" list. Any chance it's not happening anymore? Or is it going noneq? Sorry Sydney Lucas..
#83
Posted: 10/19/15 at 5:03pm
Actor_NYC said: "This concert is on the AEA "Do Not Work" list. Any chance it's not happening anymore? Or is it going noneq? Sorry Sydney Lucas.."
Addressed earlier in the thread.
#84
Posted: 10/19/15 at 7:18pm
Equity explicitly tweeted about it today, though. Interesting that they want to follow up outside of twitter when people ask about it.
https://twitter.com/ActorsEquity/status/656146573169139716
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#85
Posted: 10/19/15 at 7:39pm
From what I have heard Equity has been in talks with this organization the past three years and were never able to reach an agreement. They ultimately let them slide because the events were being billed as benefits, but they have decided to take a harder stance this year.
#86
Posted: 10/19/15 at 9:50pm
Actor_NYC said: "This concert is on the AEA "Do Not Work" list. Any chance it's not happening anymore? Or is it going noneq? Sorry Sydney Lucas..
"
Equity actors can work on an AEA Do Not Work listed show as long as they negotiate an Equity contract.
Can anyone answer me whether Equity actors can bypass any possible repercussions by... let's say.. doing it pro bono?
The thing is, besides being an utter toad of a human being, Riedel usually has the least knowledge of the topic in the room. He doesn't usually understand the content or approach of a show, and is always completely and unfailingly socially ignorant, which makes it really infuriating when Susan can't get a word in edgewise. A definitive mansplainer; it's always painful when he has female guests. I watch the show sporadically when I really want to see a guest, because it's the only theatre talkshow we have, but it would be so much better without this hateful clown in a dadcoat. (thanks ScaryWarhol)
#87
Posted: 10/19/15 at 10:19pm
c0113g3b0y said: "Equity actors can work on an AEA Do Not Work listed show as long as they negotiate an Equity contract.
Can anyone answer me whether Equity actors can bypass any possible repercussions by... let's say.. doing it pro bono?"
Of course they can work if an agreement is reached, but nine times out of ten the reason a show is put on the "Do Not Work" list is because the producers of that show and Equity have already failed to reach an agreement.
And the past three years Equity has allowed it to slide under the claims of it being a benefit. This year they are not letting that happen and want the cast to be under an Equity contract.
#88
Posted: 10/20/15 at 4:37am
^ what if the actor offers their services for free? just hypothetically speaking. Would it be breaching equity protocol then?
The thing is, besides being an utter toad of a human being, Riedel usually has the least knowledge of the topic in the room. He doesn't usually understand the content or approach of a show, and is always completely and unfailingly socially ignorant, which makes it really infuriating when Susan can't get a word in edgewise. A definitive mansplainer; it's always painful when he has female guests. I watch the show sporadically when I really want to see a guest, because it's the only theatre talkshow we have, but it would be so much better without this hateful clown in a dadcoat. (thanks ScaryWarhol)
#89
Posted: 10/20/15 at 7:50am
Yes, it would be a huge breach to knowingly accept work on a production that is on the "Do Not Work" list and disciplinary actions would probably result.
Equity has guidelines in place for what constitutes a benefit performance where the actor can volunteer their services for free. That is how these concerts have operated the past three years, though Equity did still try to get them under an agreement. This year Equity has determined that this concert is not falling under those guidelines (and I don't know why, as I'm not privy to all of the inner workings of the office and staff), and they have thus far failed to secure a mutual agreement with the producers of the concert. Can that change as they move forward? Of course, but until then, no member can work on it without facing repercussions.
#90
Posted: 10/20/15 at 8:33am
thanks for the detailed reply AEA AGMA SM
The thing is, besides being an utter toad of a human being, Riedel usually has the least knowledge of the topic in the room. He doesn't usually understand the content or approach of a show, and is always completely and unfailingly socially ignorant, which makes it really infuriating when Susan can't get a word in edgewise. A definitive mansplainer; it's always painful when he has female guests. I watch the show sporadically when I really want to see a guest, because it's the only theatre talkshow we have, but it would be so much better without this hateful clown in a dadcoat. (thanks ScaryWarhol)
#91
Posted: 10/20/15 at 9:26am
So here's a question, having paid "Lincoln Center"-level prices for the concert with the expectation of Broadway stars, if this production ends up being cast with non-equity performers, what standing do ticket buyers have in getting a refund?
#92
Posted: 10/20/15 at 9:32am
It really is in MCP's best interest to negotiate an Equity contract, as that is what people have come to expect from them: big name Equity actors. Truly bizarre. The last thing they should be doing is pissing off Equity.
#93
Posted: 10/20/15 at 9:38am
LucyHoneychurch said: "So here's a question, having paid "Lincoln Center"-level prices for the concert with the expectation of Broadway stars, if this production ends up being cast with non-equity performers, what standing do ticket buyers have in getting a refund?"
If they don't reach an agreement you could probably ask for a refund based on buying the ticket because of Sydney Lucas being announced as the star and her no longer being involved. They may deny it, but of course that would just bring more bad press to the whole affair.
#94
Posted: 10/20/15 at 10:18am
Isn't there a rule about Equity members under age 14 being allowed to do non-Equity productions (so for example, once they leave their show they can be Annie or Oliver, etc... in their hometown)? I don't remember where I heard that, so please correct me if I'm wrong!
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#95
Posted: 10/20/15 at 10:21am
Yes, young Equity members aged 14 or below can take temporary withdrawal from the union to do non-Equity work.
The issue with THIS production is that the producer is on Equity's do-not-work list. It means, under no circumstances, should members be accepting that work, even through the various channels Equity allows for members to take non-union work.
The issue with these concerts claiming the benefits of being considered, well, a benefit concert is that they patently are *not* benefits, and therefore AEA members shouldn't have to be volunteering their time for them.
The issue with THIS production is that the producer is on Equity's do-not-work list. It means, under no circumstances, should members be accepting that work, even through the various channels Equity allows for members to take non-union work.
The issue with these concerts claiming the benefits of being considered, well, a benefit concert is that they patently are *not* benefits, and therefore AEA members shouldn't have to be volunteering their time for them.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
Updated On: 10/20/15 at 10:21 AM
#96
Posted: 10/20/15 at 10:28am
Ah, thanks for the clarification.
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#97
Posted: 10/20/15 at 11:34am
I think we can safely say that this one probably won't happen without the agreement with Equity. Manhattan Concerts has gone to the well too many times on this one. I'm sure the people behind the Rebecca Luker concert are pretty happy though.
#98
Posted: 10/20/15 at 1:34pm
^ For sure. Too late for Sydney to do that one instead?
#99
Posted: 10/20/15 at 1:38pm
They've already cast Mary. What do you want, a Small Alison cage-match?
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#100
Posted: 10/20/15 at 1:43pm
If you're actually asking what I want, what I want is for MCP to have everyone on Equity contracts. :)
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95