Why Should We Be Okay With an UNDERSTUDY? — Page 4

I love the three pages of "I like understudies"/"I don't like understudies". I don't think the original poster was trying to say they didn't like understudies. (Correct me if I'm mistaken) I think the point is that sometimes you have your heart set on seeing a certain performer. Personally, if it were up to me, I'd care to see the entire cast and ensemble in the show. However, like some have said, some understudies are far superior to the usual performer.

And in the line of replacements, they can be fantastic. To substitute Matthew Broderick for Roger Bart in The Producers was a wonderful, welcome change. And then to substitute Hunter Foster for Roger Bart was another wonderful change.

This is why I feel it's important to see a show more than once, if you find that you like it. It's not just understudies that make the show change everytime. Every performance is different. It's like watching the outtakes of a movie repeatedly. Everytime something new happens. Which, I know sounds like the freakin' ABCs on a board all about theatre. I know you all know this, but I just think it's a really cool experience to see a show at least a few times. (If you like it.. you don't want to go see one that sucks a bunch of times, obviously.)


Oh, here I go a-ramblin' again.

---

Updated On: 8/21/07 at 04:29 PM

when i went to peter pan with cathy rigby i was surprised to
see that she had an understudy luckily cathy was at the performance but since the head line says cathy rigby is peter pan what do the producers do when shes out do they take down all
the posters at the theater and replace them new ones with the understudies name in place or does the audience complain and they give the audience refunds
i would be disapointed if that happen.

Updated On: 8/20/07 at 08:18 PM

Why should we be okay with an understudy (or "substitute lead," as it were)? Simple. Understudies work their ASSES off. They cover 3, 4, sometimes as many as 5 roles in a show. That's hard work. Imagine having to know staging, choreography, lines, harmonies, etc. for that many parts. Understudies don't get nearly as much credit as they deserve. They do so much, and they should be recognized far more than they are.

"It wasn't ME that saw it.. it was two friends of mine. They said she was really good. They were just dissapointed that they didn't get to see the woman who plays the role regularly, that's all."

Did they go to Mary Poppins just to see the show, or were they really intent on catching Ashley Brown? If not, then it doesn't matters if they didn't get to see Ashley. Especially since they thought the understudy was good and enjoyed her.

---

nathanlanestalker
i love you haha
your amazing

---

"Usually for my first time seeing a show, I prefer the whole cast to be in, unless I know in advance that someone's gonna be out (ex: Kate Shindle's July vacay in LB).

When I go to a show for a second time, I like it to be mixed up a bit. Lots of times I make an effort to see a show during someone's vacation just to be sure I'm getting an understudy".
_________________________________________________________________

It's just too FUNNY how many people say "I'm okay with an understudy on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc..."
HELLO! I don't have the luxury of seeing shows a 2nd & 3rd time. And I'm sure I'm in the majority! Last year, when I saw PHANTOM at the Music Hall in Dallas, I opened up my program, and a sh*t load of inserts fell out! I thought "Well, apparently - EVERYONE took tonight off". It was simply supporting cast, stuff - and I was fine with it. Truly - I'm more about the play, itself - not the cast. I might be a little tead off, though - if (as was the situation with my original post) if I'd traveled all the way to NYC and seen someone other than THE Mary Poppins in Mary Poppins! (From what I've heard, the "problem" is with the play, itself - not the cast).
You guys are awesome. I appreciate greatly your thoughts and ideas. If I was in or NEAR NYC - I'd be broke all the time - because I'd have to see EVERYTHING once, SOME twice... and then when it gets down to shows like RENT.... I could never be content with anything less than once a month - regardless of the cast!

---

"if I'd traveled all the way to NYC and seen someone other than THE Mary Poppins in Mary Poppins!"

When did Julie Andrews join the cast? For me, she is THE Mary Poppins. Not Ashley or anyone else. :)

---

I still want to know why Sleeth changed his name. Also why do you (Chason/Sleeth) seem so angry when you post? We are all friends right?

edited for my crappy spelling.:)

---

Updated On: 8/25/07 at 01:26 PM

"In my experience, the understudies I've seen have performed much better than the usual leads. It actually makes sense, as it would seem that if you didn't get the chance to do the show so often in that role, you would put much more heart and energy into it."

Amen. They can be better (not always, but still...) and they have to perform a role (or 2 or 3) and have to memorize their parts in addition to being in ensemble. Understudies are fine and I enojy reading the slips which end up all over the floor.

Of course, then tourists who came from Dubai to see Idina Menzel may be dissapointed, but Julia Murney is great.

---