Annie at the Regal

Sun, 30 Mar 2008, 03:35 pm

Asta32 posts in thread

Yep kids it's time for another Asta review so be prepared for bitchiness and backstabbing galore. This weeks review is for Theatrebits production of Annie at the Regal Theatre in Perth. I could sum up this production in one word - AMAZING - but I won't leave it at that cause you all know I am a girl of very few words. Theatrebits had a bad run of publicity with its last big production of Cats. bitching was rife on this website about whether it should have advertised itself as an amateur company because the general public wouldn't know based on the ticket prices. I am not a general public theatre goer but I did go with a large group of them and the concensus was this show was fantastic. Lets do it Asta style and break it down for you (I apologise for any misspellings of people's names, I lost my programme and so am doing this by memory): The Good!!! Annie and the orphans: I saw the production yesterday at the matinee and the little girls playing the orphans were simply brilliant. They had clear strong voices and beautiful characterisation. Even when the focus was off them they continued to act. They were simply brilliant. Special mentions must go to Annie was was simply adorable and carried the show very well. Every time she came on stage the whole show lifted. ANy kid that can continue to sing a ballad while holding onto a wildly dog gets two very big thumbs up. Molly! What a voice this girl has on here. Look out for her in a few years time, simply brilliant. Bob playing Daddy Warbucks: His singing wasn't great but then neither was the singing good in the movie version. This is the kind of role that needs someone strong and with the right look. Bob was amazing. His first entrance onto stage lifted the show out of a slump it was in and he continued throughout the show. The chorus was gorgeous. They always looked excited to be there. Special mentions to Mikaela Briggs. Her singing was gorgeous and what a dancer. Someone told me she is quite young too...another one to look out for. The blonde boy who did the tapping in the radio scene was amazing too. Everytime he came on stage whether it was as a policeman or member of the crowd he stood out. Normally I would then say what I didn't like about this show but I enjoyed it so much that I am not going to belittle the efforts of a fabulous cast and crew for putting this together. All I can say to those critics of Theatrebits is that they definetly have their place and they proved it with this production. Theatrebits has found itself as a company responsible for discovering new talent and putting it on stage for all to see. Well done

Thread (32 posts)

Threaded Flat

AstaSun, 30 Mar 2008, 03:35 pm

Walter PlingeSun, 30 Mar 2008, 08:42 pm

And making a profit on the

And making a profit on the ignorance of its audience. I'm not going to comment on this particular show as I haven't seen it (and don't intend to) and I'm sure that everyone involved has worked very hard and should be commended for contributing their time to raise some degree of money for Cancer. However... Its all well and good for this company to put an amateur show on and good on them for taking the risk, but charging professional theatre prices ($75 top price and $55 for A reserve) is DISGUSTING! It is quite simply daylight robbery and needs to be stopped - not just this company but the copycats like it - the MS Society included. Yes, their "proceeds" go to the foundation. Fabulous - but exactly what monies are being skimmed off BEFORE it goes to the charity? I'm sure (well, actually I KNOW) that the directors and producers get their cut - with the cast and (usually) orchestra getting NOTHING. Again, nothing wrong with that - amateur theatre is FINE, but keep it what it is and what it deserves and don't charge professional prices. And if you need to charge that much to cover costs, DON'T USE THE REGAL! There are cheaper venues around. These types of companies are damaging our industry in Perth and those who are trying to better it. Audiences will go to these shows, pay top price for tickets and booking fee (and don't forget parking, meals, babysitting, etc), see an amateur production (which will not be value for money) and very frequently will not see anything else (including professional theatre) for the rest of the year because they can't afford to see anything else (or alternatively tar all local theatre with the same brush). This impacts other theatre who are struggling to get audiences. Hence, touring theatre will not come here. Does anyone else see this? THIS NEEDS to be discussed. We, as theatre people, need to discuss this. It is extremely important or there will be nothing left to be worried about. Mr D.

Walter PlingeMon, 31 Mar 2008, 11:25 pm

Couldn't agree more

Mr D wrote: Yes, their "proceeds" go to the foundation. Fabulous - but exactly what monies are being skimmed off BEFORE it goes to the charity? I'm sure (well, actually I KNOW) that the directors and producers get their cut - with the cast and (usually) orchestra getting NOTHING I didn't know this. I thought that after all production costs ONLY, that all outstanding monies went to the chosen source. This is shocking news. $75 for a ticket. What percentage does then actually go to the charity? Or does the money go to getting a nice newly fitted foyer put into a local church hall. I couldn't agree more with Mr D on this occasion. There should be not cuts for anyone. Maybe an after show party whilst at the same time presenting the charity with a cheque. Regards Leon

Walter PlingeTue, 1 Apr 2008, 10:56 am

Response to Mr D comments

Firstly I would like to begin with YES I have actually seen the show "Annie" at the Regal and yes I am one of those ignorant general audience members you refer to in your post. I am fortunate enough to be able to go to a lot of shows both professional and ammature and I am not affliliated with any professional or ammature theatre group, so I do feel I am within my rights to comment here. This show was WONDERFUL, so nice to be in a beautiful old theatre with hundreds of children quite obviously enjoying the show even though a little noisy at times but this only added to the atmosphere. Some with their families and lots with their Grandparents, who I might add do have the choice to either pay the $55.00 (Adult) or not to pay it. I take a little insult in your comments that as general audience goers we must be of some lower cultural status or god forbid have some lower intelligence level than yourself, for you to suggest we are ignorant to ticket pricing. Surely if you pay your $55.00 and are not happy with the production, quite clearly like yourself, you simply would just not go to one of their shows again. Judging by the full house I attended people were quite happy to pay the ticket price and were quite praising of the show afterwards. Your suggestion of having these "Ammature" productions in other venues to keep the ticket pricing down, well I'm sorry there is something special about getting dressed up and going to the theatre, especially for children and grandparents. It does sound like you have been once bitten twice shy, my suggestion to you give Theatrebits the benefit of the doubt and go along to the show, take your kids,grandkids,niece and nephews or your Mum and Dad and I think they will probably give you a very clear answer if it was value for money or not. Asta thanks for a very true review of the show, which we also thoroughly enjoyed and not a review of ticket pricing. A final note here, please ammatures, professionals whoever we have a desperate need for more productions with children, children love watching children and this was evident on Sunday when I watched the show, so come on we clearly have so much talent out there 'BRING IT ON'

Walter PlingeThu, 3 Apr 2008, 09:53 pm

As a avid supporter of all

As a avid supporter of all things theatre, I too strongly disagree with Mr D,D must be short for Dopey. Many amateur theatre groups go to many different venues the choice is theres. Surely to put an amateur show on at a theatre like the Regal is for the betterment of any show. The facilities they have and the proffesional staff there would be an asset not detrimental. I think if you ask MS Society for a break down of costs and how much they make, they would happily tell an ignorant person such as yourself about the time and money spent before selling even 1 ticket. Then to try and get your money back and not lose you need to spend more money. Its called Marketing. I havent seen Annie yet so will be definatley be checking it out, might even take my Mum.

Walter PlingeThu, 3 Apr 2008, 10:11 pm

Not that I necessarily

Not that I necessarily agree with all of Mr D's points, but I have to say- ticket price was what put me off seeing this show. I'm so sick and tired of seeing companies book venues they cannot afford and having to hike up ticket prices in order to break even on the booming. It is seriously a massive compensation of what amateur theatre is all about. People go to a professional venue and expect to see a professional show: sorry, but the majority of the time, you just won't get that. Amateur theatre, as far as I'm concerned, is about having fun, learning the ropes of theatre, giving Perth performers a chance to get up onstage, and generating interest in theatre from the general pbulic. None of this is necessarily achieved by booking incredibly expensive venues and then making people pay $40 and upwards to see something where people can't sing in tune. I appreciate that there are amateurs in amateur theatre, so I'm not expecting that everyone is perfect. I just don't appreciate forking out so much for it. I have seen fantastic shows at unis and smaller companies for half the price of some of these tickets: sure, the front of house might not have been as well polished, but everyone had a great night- including the perofmers- without feeling like they'd been cheated out of some of their dollars. You can still dress up for a night out! Since when is doing a great show hand in hand with having cushy seats? (Personally, I find the Regal incredibly uncomfortable.) Seriously, guys, just book cheaper venues. It's about the performance, in my (possibly quite naiive and romantic) opinion. PLEASE NOTE- this is a general comment, not a comment about Annie as I haven't seen it. I was unaware the ticket prices were for charitable reasons, but alas, still cannot afford. At any rate, I know that there's no concession, and as a lowly student, it's way out my price range, as I'm sure it is many others'.

Walter PlingeThu, 3 Apr 2008, 10:14 pm

These people have asked to

These people have asked to show a full account of their costs before and they have always refused.

Walter PlingeFri, 4 Apr 2008, 12:11 am

Costs

Asked by whom?

Walter PlingeFri, 4 Apr 2008, 08:50 am

Asked by people on this

Asked by people on this very website, in relation to past productions over the years.

Walter PlingeFri, 4 Apr 2008, 09:26 am

Is the Price is in the Pudding?

This is probably the wrong thread for this but...I would be interested to know who gets paid in the amateur theatre productions. I learnt last year that many in production team in amateur theatre particularly for musicals such as the Director, Band, choreographer and singing coaches get paid to do a show. I, being not in the know as a performer, didn't know this happened and it seems to be very hush hush about who is being paid. I thought amateur meant doing it for nothing. What is going on and why is it a big secret. Are the (low life) performers being scamed into thinking that the production team are doing it for the love of it. For me it puts a different slant on things when a production team member gives THAT speach about the work they are puting in and the time WE are waisting for them. Not impressed

LogosFri, 4 Apr 2008, 10:08 am

Well

This is an interesting point. Throughout the eighties and nineties it became common for the orchestras to be paid in most productions of amateur theatre. There is a huge debate over that issue in some areas. A great many MD's also get paid. I haven't heard of many Directors or choreographers being paid but I bet it happens. I occasionally get paid as a lighting designer by amateur companies as do other technical people. I have heard and do not know if this is correct that certain large scale shows pay performers. Some of these shows are raising money for charity and pay people in order to attract quality performers who make at least part of their living as performers. So where does the line get drawn between amateur and professional? If you want the show you are in to be as professional as possible then maybe you need to pay some of the production staff but then how far down the food chain do you go? Should you pay the leads in order to get the best people? Is this business we are in still amateur in its true sense. There seems to be a degree of competition between companies to get looked upon as the most professional. Is this a good thing? We all know of companies in most States that are run by individuals. The money comes in and very little goes out. Where does the money go. In a properly constituted amateur company the money trail is obvious where does it go in "one man bands". Discussion is open. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Walter PlingeFri, 4 Apr 2008, 04:44 pm

As a musical director for

As a musical director for amatuer theatre, I have never been paid for what I do and neither have my musicians. If money was offered, I wouldnt knock it back, but I certainly don't expect it, nor would I ever demand it as a condition of my involvement. Admittedly, I find it difficult to secure particular musicians when I can't pay them, but I have a very talented and committed core group that perform because they love it. Thats enough for them and its enough for me.

Walter PlingeSat, 5 Apr 2008, 09:45 am

Costs

By what right do you and others have to ask Theatre Bits about its financial situation? Would you expect any theatre company to spell their financial situation out on a public website? In relation to past productions over the years, Annie is only their second production after Cats last year.

Walter PlingeSat, 5 Apr 2008, 11:54 am

I have always seen it as 3

I have always seen it as 3 sections: Amateur - No pay Pro-Am - The Production Team are paid, actors not, regardless of parts of which there are few companies in Perth who operate this way) Pro - Everyone is paid As to companies paying for Lead's to get better quality, I have never seen it happen personally, but I am sure it does. The MS Society was mentioned, they are raising money for charity, yes, but they also wanted a professional Production team at least, so the Production Team/Creatives (ie Director,M usic Director, Band etc...) are paid, but the performers are not and go into the show knowing this. I think as long as he boundaries are drawn and the performers know what is to be expected upfront, then they have a choice to do the show or not and there should be no complaints. As to what happens to the money made by Amateur companies from shows - it would be nice to think the money goes back into the company for their next production. I will agree with some of the above comments tho - DON'T choose a venue you cannot afford and expect to be able to charge ridiculous prices and expect people to come. I don't know much about Theatrebits, but I have noticed that this is the first show in conjunction with the Cancer Council, so hopefully for their sake the Cancer Council is seeing the benefit - but it doesn't excuse the ticket prices etc.. for what was, very obviously, and AMATEUR production of CATS. I saw the professional version in London for a quarter of that price. Another thing I find very odd.... for both their shows so far they never credit and production team on the poster - not even the Director of Music Direct or Choreographer. Why is this?

Walter PlingeSat, 5 Apr 2008, 12:09 pm

sorry bad spelling at the

sorry bad spelling at the end it should read: Director or Music Director or Choreographer!

AstaSat, 5 Apr 2008, 05:59 pm

Theatrebits obviously doesn't read this site

I am dissapointed by the way this thread has developed. This is meant to be a forum for discussing theatre shows and reviewing them, not for bitching about ticket prices. Obviously Theatrebits doesn't read this site. This was the same argument that went on during Cats. I'm sure there are people out there that have seen Annie and would like to actually offer some critique of their show. I love to read reviews when i'm in a show. They help me to perform better (if it's a bad review) and gives me more confidence (if it's a good review). C'mon people lets keep the threads where they belong.

Walter PlingeSun, 6 Apr 2008, 09:08 am

thankyou asta

lets start by saying, yes i am involved in theatrebits' production of Annie, i was also in their prod. of Cats. No I have not been paid and yes i have enjoyed myself. I thankyou asta for your review, and would welcome other critiques of the show if anyone else has seen it. As an amateur performer, slowly working towards becoming professional its great to have reveiws of the show good or bad it helps give us (the actors) a perspective of how we're doing as for the rants about ticket prices and this ongoing AM/PRO-AM/PRO debate, lets save it, who really gives a flying f**k. If you can't afford the ticket don't come. Theatrebits as well as all other production companies, rep societies and amateur groups have the right to stage shows where ever they damn well like. The Regal, like Burswood, the Maj, Playhouse and Rechabites are all JUST venues, venues for hire. A venue cannot be professional or amatuer its just bricks and concrete. In conclusion, can't afford the ticket? Don't come. Seen the show already? Give us your feedback. Let's stop the whinging people, and get on the shows!

Walter PlingeSun, 6 Apr 2008, 09:44 am

Then surely they can

Then surely they can explain what percentage of the ticket cost is going where, without spelling out the actual amount. It's called being accountable - if local governments have to be spell out their financial situation in annual reports, why not an organisation such as this?

Walter PlingeSun, 6 Apr 2008, 09:47 am

Surely the public has a

Surely the public has a right to know if money is being skimmed off to pay people, rather than thinking "Oh, all the money I'm paying for this ticket is going to a worthy cause." And that should be spelled clearly in any promotional material.

Walter PlingeSun, 6 Apr 2008, 01:21 pm

David,My point was that

David, My point was that people who are genuinely interested in the good of the show shouldn't hire massive venues that mean ticket prices are sky-high, when frankly, amateur shows aren't necessarily worth that. I'm not sorry for saying this. It was meant to be a general comment about venues, perhaps not made here, and my apologies for that. Again, it was nothing to do with your particular show as I ddin't see it. I couldn't afford it. You'll notice I wasn't actually "whinging" though, just making an observation. I see nothing wrong with that, or what anyone has said. It's a discussion forum. But I do agree with Asta that mayeb it should not have been brought up in a review forum. Again, apologies.

Walter PlingeSun, 6 Apr 2008, 04:06 pm

Accountability

Local governments are public, and as such are publicly accountable. Private Business is just that, private.

Walter PlingeSun, 6 Apr 2008, 04:39 pm

But don't businesses also

But don't businesses also have to show their financial figures to investors? And charities, such as World Vision and the World Wildlife Fund? And given this show is giving money to charity, then similarly the public should have a *right* to know how much of their ticket price is actually *going* to that charity? How are we to know if only $5 of the ticket price of $75 is going to the charity in question?

Walter PlingeMon, 7 Apr 2008, 08:23 am

Apologies Smiley

it was rude of me to declare that you or anyone else was whinging, i should have been slightly more tactful I guess what really gets me riled up is the fact that I poured massive amounts of energy and effort into Annie and Cats and MS' Oliver and it really hurts to have all this negativity flying around. It's incredibly disconcerting to have a show that you've put your all into, to try and make it a success, bitched and moaned about in a post. I understand the generality of the posts but lets put these general posts under a general thread and try not to mention names, cos it cuts the little people just trying to have fun in theatre

Walter PlingeFri, 18 Apr 2008, 07:57 pm

Annie was a success

Just read through these comments ... bloggers you are supposed to be reviewing the show. If you have issues with prices or where proceeds go, these are fair enough questions, especially the latter one, and should be raised, but not here.I'm sure that the appropriate channels do exist. Yes, If a company, professional or otherswise uses the statement that proceeds go to Charity, especially when advertising the show, as Theatrebits did, then I think that proceeds should go to Charity. I understand that overheads must be accounted for, whatever those are within reason, but after that perhaps a statement regarding what was raised for the particular Charity involved should follow. Perhaps the industry can look into this. Now as for the show, I saw Annie, many times. My child was performing in it, so yes perhaps I'm slightly biased, however I've seen many shows and I was actually amazed by the high standard of the end product of this show. As far as I can see, for myself and my child, we overall enjoyed the experience of being involved with Theatrebits and Annie. My child gained great experience over the two weeks of the show. I thought that the performances put on by all, including the chorus, were just way above what I had expected, infact better than some professional theatre which I have seen. The cast appeared to be truly engaged with what they were doing each night, and truly enjoying it. There were a few sound/mic problems which I noticed but these didn't in any way take away from my overall impresssion of the show. Ultimately, it's the audience who review the show, through the looks on their faces during intermission and after the show. While waiting for my child at the stage door I did not notice one unhappy face walk by. I was especially delighted to see the number of children walking away and singing the songs or excitedly talking to their parents about the show. I think that's what it's all about, theatre/performing arts in general, it's about bringing happiness to others through the arts. And did "Annie" succeed in that regard? My answer would have to be a resounding "YES". So good on you Theatrebits, you put on a good show.

Walter PlingeFri, 18 Apr 2008, 09:26 pm

A mother reviewing her child

A mother reviewing her child in the show. So no bias there, then, hmm?

Walter PlingeSat, 19 Apr 2008, 07:48 pm

OH HENRY!!!!!

Come on Henry thats a bit below the belt!!! My bet is you haven't even seen the show, Hmmm???

Walter PlingeSun, 20 Apr 2008, 10:25 am

THAT IT NOT THE POINT!

THAT IT NOT THE POINT! GEEZ! IS THE SHOW WORTH THE PRICE OF THE TICKET? NO!

RichardLOZThu, 1 May 2008, 07:35 am

Lets be realistic people.

Lets be realistic people. There are 30 or so posts here in regards to this show. Cats was the same. The Regal holds just under 1000 people, who were all willing to pay the proce to see the show. Over a 10 day run at 80% occupancy thats around 8000 people having see the show, compared with 20 or 30 carrying on like children about it. Grow up and start acting like responsible adults rather than Prima Donnas. Richard

Walter PlingeThu, 1 May 2008, 10:21 am

Well aren't you a

Well aren't you a condescending wanker? THIS IS NOT THE POINT OF THE ARGUMENT! The point is: do you think companies like this should be supported when they produce an inferior product at a professional theatre price? (Regardless or not whether stupid general public attend, or whether its at a (so-called) professional venue or whether parents of the kids in the show support it because of their selfish intentions?) Think outside yourselves people!

RichardLOZFri, 2 May 2008, 02:04 pm

It is exactly the point.

It is exactly the point. The bums on seats support the argument. 1000's have seen it and are happy with the productions they have seen, or they wouldnt go again vs the few on here who do nothing but complain and put down these productions. In case you havent already realised its the "stupid general public" who possibly witness your acting / musical / drama skills, whether amateur or professional and possibly keep you in food and clothing as a result. I am sure that if they knew how you felt about them, maybe there would be a few empty seats if you were performing, and you call me condescending. For Gods sake at least have the guts to post under a real name rather than hide behind some made up crap. At the end of the day the public will decide whether they wish to pay the price or not, and they will decide how they felt about the production, and they will also decide whether to spend the money once again if that company puts another production on. I was not involved in this production at all and in fact given the general bitchyness of the whole theatre industry probably wont be involved in any others. Ill just go back to mu rock and roll roots and deal with pissed punters in pubs, rather than stuckup prima donnas in the theatre community who think they are so damn high and mighty over everyone else. BTW, that is a general comment I know and by no means applies to everybody. The people who it does apply to however will or should know who they are.

Walter PlingeFri, 2 May 2008, 02:27 pm

So how much money did the

So how much money did the charity involved actually get?

Walter PlingeFri, 2 May 2008, 04:15 pm

Go Richardloz

You're exactly right Ric, : ) Couldn't have said it better. Stick it right up their noses

← Back to Theatre Reviews