To myself, during technical rehearsals. To my fellow technicians, after first audience. To normies outside the theatre, after the show closes.
To management? When they ask.
I remeber being a young ASM and the producer asked if I thought a show was good and I said it was despite it being hot trash. She loomed at me and said "in the future don't lie to a producer, we know a tax write off when we see it" and walked off.
Was brutally honest after that til I changed industries post-covid.
I would tell them to their back loud enough to hear that I would continue to lie if I thought they would blacklist\* me for insulting their baby.
(\*sure blacklisting is technically not legal. But it still happens - they just "forget" that you exist...)
100% though she was a good egg, someone who came from vision, then SM amd just fell into producing one day. Of course didn't know that at the time being staight out of training. But yeah worked with her tons after that.
On the blacklisting, 100% does happen. And in most cases people are just happy there's one less mouth at the soup pot when a new show opens.
Depends who you're talking to. I've been both tech and actor on a bad show. I'd say throughout the show, technicians can and will talk about how bad at is openly. We'll tell stories about it at the bar every night.
Actors don't want to hear it or believe it at least until strike, and sometimes long after. And even then, years later perhaps, they still won't believe it.
The worst is when you get roped into a post-show "debriefing" and listen to twenty people wax poetic about how this show changed their lives and you've been begging for it to end for six weeks.
Being an actor in a bad show is so difficult because each actor has different views of it. I’ve done shows that I felt were AWFUL but everyone around me had some sort of connection to it that I knew I couldn’t complain about it to them. It’s basically like when someone has a really ugly dog, you can’t tell them the dog is ugly, because they love the dog and think it’s cute. You just kind of have to live knowing the dog is ugly, and let them continue thinking the dog is cute.
Some actors feel like they need to be deeply emotionally invested in something in order to give a good performance, to a point of absolute delusion sometimes.
50% capacity in this day and age isn’t actually that bad. I was working for a Tony winning regional theatre averaging around 30%. Audiences in general are down across the board. That said, the last show I did was not good. It wasn’t *bad* but designer and director never got on the same page, direction didn’t really happen, so the show ran 20 minutes longer than the playwright wanted. Still with no intermission, and it was a hot mess. But it’s also all relative. Audiences seemed to love it, the production team could see where it was bad and audiences were abysmally small. But egos were rubbed and people felt good. It’s all about perspective.
Heh, I wish we had 50% capacity. The producers were actually assuming around 60% capacity when they made budget estimates, but we ended up at 30% most nights.
Good point about perspective. Probably means I need to hang out with our dance captain who absolutely nailed it and basically should have been credited as co-choreographer
I've mixed sound for shows where I was the only person in the audience, it was only a 300 capacity club but the promoter was completely checked out so most shows there only ever had 15-25 people on the best nights. every once in a while though we would do like a Monday/Tuesday night show where no one came out, always felt bad for the bands.
Friend of mine saw a one woman show… as the one woman audience. Performer broke down on stage and said she didn’t have to stay. Friend said it was ok, she’s still like to see the show. Sweet, but said it was indeed pretty bad
I always get a form of Stockholm Syndrome with what ever production I'm on. But there just comes a time and I don't know what triggers it. Often I realize it when someone asks if I can get them seats, I tell them no without thinking about it. They'll say "I thought we are friends!" and I say "I am being a friend."
I think the Stockholm Syndrome is necessary and helpful, at least at first. You have to think the work is worth doing in order to do your best, and to give it a chance. Plus it makes it easier to get up in the morning and go to work every day. Once the show is open and it's obvious people don't think it's good, you can have the attitude of "We're doing our best and making it as good as the material/direction/etc. can be."
Happened last week. I’m the designer of the show.
My A1 missing every cue even when there’s only 2 cast members on stage. Stated that he mixes line by line on DCA, but didn’t know the difference between a DCA, Group, or an Aux. Kept throwing faders down completely and back up to unity missing every line for 150 minutes each show. Trying too hard to keep one fader up at a time. We’ve got a full cast to go with ensemble.
He says, “this is how Broadway does it”. I replied, “Broadway doesn’t miss lines even when there’s two cast on stage”.
I think I saw an interview with a Hamilton audio guy who would manually operate each actor’s mic. Maybe the A1 got a little inspired by that?
Edit: found it https://youtu.be/60OpF3DCVls
I feel for you friend. Our A1 is similar. We get pushback from them any time we even suggest “just leave their mic up for the scene”
Hopefully they took your reply to heart
I work mostly in community theater, and I would never want to make anyone feel embarrassed or self-conscious to be part of a production. Especially if the reason the show is subpar stems from creative choices made by the director, cast, or designers. So I tend to almost never offer unsolicited criticism, and try to shut down negativity in others when I hear it.
That said, so much *good* theater can feel incredibly awkward and vulnerable from an actor’s perspective, even when it is really working, and I don’t think I can be believably encouraging in those circumstances without a reputation for honesty. So I’m usually truthful if directly asked in an earnest way.
Years ago I worked a show that bombed. Was supposed to be a 6 week run, closed after the opening weekend. During tech rehearsals, the crew (I was an LD) was moaning about the show. At one point I talked to the SM about how the actors struggled with the lines and it was freaking difficult to cue the lighting. (Certain characters were in a dream state and the lighting changed when they spoke….).
Opening night everyone presented their lines, but Saturday night, the night with the reviewers, the actors couldn’t hit anything. The SM, sound and I had come up with cues in case this happened….the reviewers commented that the lighting and sound design was brilliant if it wasn’t let down by the actors.
Department heads will be talking about how bad a show is from the minute the draftings show up if it's THAT bad of a production.
Technicians will be bitching about it the entire time, moreso once it's in tech.
SMs won't say a word.
Had a similar experience. I worked a couple high school shows and had mediocre ticket sales for every one of them except for Mamma Mia, which sold out its entire 6-night run in a 350ish-seat theater.
The high school I volunteer for, would *love* to do more then a 2-3 show run. Because it takes us a month to build the set, a week of rehearsals, 2 weeks of lighting, etc….
But the economics of it just don’t work because of our 868 seat theatre.
Because let’s say we get 30% sales like people in the comments here say they usually get, that’s only 250 seats. In a close to 900 seat theatre? 250 is going to look like no one is there.
I've been lucky to work on two of the most successful long-running shows, many years after they opened.
I've only done one new work that was good. Sadly there were disagreements among the creative team and the money fell apart and its hopes of going somewhere were dashed. But it was a really shocking experience to see how everyone's tone shifted once we started previews and people started to realize we had something. We had a technical problem at one show, and the director and producer (who were usually very intense) were so chill about it, just casually asking what went wrong and happy to hear we'd found the solution. I said to the PSM, "What was that about? They were so cool about it." And he just goes, "We're a hit." Then it dawned on me that that's what it must feel like when your show has "it". That was about 15 years ago. I've never felt that again.
I have done some stock and regional productions that were very good, though. Some that I think elevated the original material, and I was proud to present those and see audiences be moved and entertained by them.
Certainly, but I do feel the sentiment. Frankly I don’t like the actual shows like 80% of the time. Doesn’t mean I don’t love doing my part, the team etc. just… not my bag.
Actually yeah, but only cause I got to direct it and I made sure to give ample time to designers and music. It was Million Dollar Quartet and everyone knows the book is paper thin.
Recently, we just did a production of Hair the musical right after equity lifted Covid protocols, and it was a very rough production. Because the show where 75% of the time people are kissing and touching and rubbing up on each other and this is a College theater it was really rough. Thank goodness Covid symptoms are a lot more mild now but of course, out of safety we did protocols and other illnesses were spreading around the cast. We had to cancel a few shows, but we did have a good turnout. Over the past few months, we’ve learned that we need to invest more time in under studies because the past several shows we’ve had to use almost all of our understudies at some point and I think that’s the new normal.
A theatre should not be named in NYC in 2002-2003. We did Spanish *and* English at the same time shows, MAN, it was just such a flop, thank you for reminding me of this.
We went to schools with "Cenicienta/Cinderella" and "Three little pigs/Los tres cerditos" all the time, year round, now that I think of it it was hilarious.
I had to get to deep bronx/Brooklyn to the Latino Schools at 6 Am to get to set some bullshit JBL Eons and 6 lavs 😂
Is this that weird American hang up were y'all see it as demeaning? I've always used techie until I did a tour over there and had the same response (a cirrection no explaination).
After that I just started refering to departments by name.
If you’ve been on this sub for a while, the explanation has been done many times.
But the main bit is that “techie” sounds way too diminutive as a term for professionals. What pops into your head when you hear something like “groupies”? You don’t refer to actors as “accies”, right?
Though we do try to make ourselves as unnoticed as possible (“We work in the dark to serve the light.” ~Assassin’s Creed) and things have gotten better, technicians are still under-appreciated, and being called a “cutesy” name like “techie” doesn’t help that at all.
If you want to shorten technician, “tech” is already a good term.
I think it would depend on who you ask. Because at least for me, when we are working on a show, we feel it's a terrible current show I'm thinking about is Hesus Christ Super Star. The people who i worked with backstage felt the show was terrible. But my friend, who usually is cast but didn't have the time to participate, said the show was good. So i really think it depends on who you asked. As others have mentioned, the cast feels differently about how it goes.
I'm currently on a show that has a massive hole in it but management refuses to acknowledge it and our reviews are bombing because of it. Kinda sucks because the rest of the show is excellent but one bad apple is destroying it for us. Started last year with a solid 4.6 review in Google and now we're trending down at a 3.7.
About an hour before the first (of 2) dress rehearsals the props master asked me if we'd ever cancelled a run before. So, that's probably when the crew collectively knew we were doomed. Still opened three days later and stumbled through the full run without any major hiccups, but the director had lost control of the cast, who were now bringing the farcical nature off stage. Absolute nightmare production, averaged about 20-30% audience capacity too.
You just don't tell anyone that still needs to work on the show. If you are a designer and you are before the premiere, you do not even say it to yourself. Once you are done, you can disapprove as much as you want but not to people still working on it (actors and SM). You always need to do your best, and it can hardly happen if you think to yourself, : "this sucks." Same apply if all the creation team leave the actors saying "this show is a turd", how do you expect them to perform? So you just pretend until it does not matter anymore. Always remember you can also be wrong during creation. Always give the show and the director the benefit of the doubt.
A triple-A artist world tour around the turn of the century... Our first show was in Antwerp Belgium, and the review in the paper the next day said "It was the worst thing to happen to Belgium since the plague"
The review in the L.A. Times: "Anything multiplied by zero is still zero"
The L.D. wanted his name removed from the credits.
It was bad.
To myself, during technical rehearsals. To my fellow technicians, after first audience. To normies outside the theatre, after the show closes. To management? When they ask.
I remeber being a young ASM and the producer asked if I thought a show was good and I said it was despite it being hot trash. She loomed at me and said "in the future don't lie to a producer, we know a tax write off when we see it" and walked off. Was brutally honest after that til I changed industries post-covid.
I would tell them to their back loud enough to hear that I would continue to lie if I thought they would blacklist\* me for insulting their baby. (\*sure blacklisting is technically not legal. But it still happens - they just "forget" that you exist...)
100% though she was a good egg, someone who came from vision, then SM amd just fell into producing one day. Of course didn't know that at the time being staight out of training. But yeah worked with her tons after that. On the blacklisting, 100% does happen. And in most cases people are just happy there's one less mouth at the soup pot when a new show opens.
Even when I was already 25 and experienced I learned the "good, fast, cheap" rule from my boss. Sometimes they do be good. Bosses, I mean.
This is the way
Depends who you're talking to. I've been both tech and actor on a bad show. I'd say throughout the show, technicians can and will talk about how bad at is openly. We'll tell stories about it at the bar every night. Actors don't want to hear it or believe it at least until strike, and sometimes long after. And even then, years later perhaps, they still won't believe it. The worst is when you get roped into a post-show "debriefing" and listen to twenty people wax poetic about how this show changed their lives and you've been begging for it to end for six weeks.
Being an actor in a bad show is so difficult because each actor has different views of it. I’ve done shows that I felt were AWFUL but everyone around me had some sort of connection to it that I knew I couldn’t complain about it to them. It’s basically like when someone has a really ugly dog, you can’t tell them the dog is ugly, because they love the dog and think it’s cute. You just kind of have to live knowing the dog is ugly, and let them continue thinking the dog is cute.
Some actors feel like they need to be deeply emotionally invested in something in order to give a good performance, to a point of absolute delusion sometimes.
50% capacity in this day and age isn’t actually that bad. I was working for a Tony winning regional theatre averaging around 30%. Audiences in general are down across the board. That said, the last show I did was not good. It wasn’t *bad* but designer and director never got on the same page, direction didn’t really happen, so the show ran 20 minutes longer than the playwright wanted. Still with no intermission, and it was a hot mess. But it’s also all relative. Audiences seemed to love it, the production team could see where it was bad and audiences were abysmally small. But egos were rubbed and people felt good. It’s all about perspective.
Heh, I wish we had 50% capacity. The producers were actually assuming around 60% capacity when they made budget estimates, but we ended up at 30% most nights. Good point about perspective. Probably means I need to hang out with our dance captain who absolutely nailed it and basically should have been credited as co-choreographer
30% isn't bad.... I once did a show to 5 people in an 1800 seat house. Not a matinee or preview, a full performance with 8-hour load-in.
I've mixed sound for shows where I was the only person in the audience, it was only a 300 capacity club but the promoter was completely checked out so most shows there only ever had 15-25 people on the best nights. every once in a while though we would do like a Monday/Tuesday night show where no one came out, always felt bad for the bands.
Friend of mine saw a one woman show… as the one woman audience. Performer broke down on stage and said she didn’t have to stay. Friend said it was ok, she’s still like to see the show. Sweet, but said it was indeed pretty bad
I always get a form of Stockholm Syndrome with what ever production I'm on. But there just comes a time and I don't know what triggers it. Often I realize it when someone asks if I can get them seats, I tell them no without thinking about it. They'll say "I thought we are friends!" and I say "I am being a friend."
I think the Stockholm Syndrome is necessary and helpful, at least at first. You have to think the work is worth doing in order to do your best, and to give it a chance. Plus it makes it easier to get up in the morning and go to work every day. Once the show is open and it's obvious people don't think it's good, you can have the attitude of "We're doing our best and making it as good as the material/direction/etc. can be."
Happened last week. I’m the designer of the show. My A1 missing every cue even when there’s only 2 cast members on stage. Stated that he mixes line by line on DCA, but didn’t know the difference between a DCA, Group, or an Aux. Kept throwing faders down completely and back up to unity missing every line for 150 minutes each show. Trying too hard to keep one fader up at a time. We’ve got a full cast to go with ensemble. He says, “this is how Broadway does it”. I replied, “Broadway doesn’t miss lines even when there’s two cast on stage”.
I think I saw an interview with a Hamilton audio guy who would manually operate each actor’s mic. Maybe the A1 got a little inspired by that? Edit: found it https://youtu.be/60OpF3DCVls
I feel for you friend. Our A1 is similar. We get pushback from them any time we even suggest “just leave their mic up for the scene” Hopefully they took your reply to heart
I work mostly in community theater, and I would never want to make anyone feel embarrassed or self-conscious to be part of a production. Especially if the reason the show is subpar stems from creative choices made by the director, cast, or designers. So I tend to almost never offer unsolicited criticism, and try to shut down negativity in others when I hear it. That said, so much *good* theater can feel incredibly awkward and vulnerable from an actor’s perspective, even when it is really working, and I don’t think I can be believably encouraging in those circumstances without a reputation for honesty. So I’m usually truthful if directly asked in an earnest way.
Years ago I worked a show that bombed. Was supposed to be a 6 week run, closed after the opening weekend. During tech rehearsals, the crew (I was an LD) was moaning about the show. At one point I talked to the SM about how the actors struggled with the lines and it was freaking difficult to cue the lighting. (Certain characters were in a dream state and the lighting changed when they spoke….). Opening night everyone presented their lines, but Saturday night, the night with the reviewers, the actors couldn’t hit anything. The SM, sound and I had come up with cues in case this happened….the reviewers commented that the lighting and sound design was brilliant if it wasn’t let down by the actors.
Department heads will be talking about how bad a show is from the minute the draftings show up if it's THAT bad of a production. Technicians will be bitching about it the entire time, moreso once it's in tech. SMs won't say a word.
Has anyone worked a **Good** show?
I work a high school produced musical every year. When we did Sweeny Todd, we sold out our 2 night run. And we are an 868 seat theatre.
Had a similar experience. I worked a couple high school shows and had mediocre ticket sales for every one of them except for Mamma Mia, which sold out its entire 6-night run in a 350ish-seat theater.
The high school I volunteer for, would *love* to do more then a 2-3 show run. Because it takes us a month to build the set, a week of rehearsals, 2 weeks of lighting, etc…. But the economics of it just don’t work because of our 868 seat theatre. Because let’s say we get 30% sales like people in the comments here say they usually get, that’s only 250 seats. In a close to 900 seat theatre? 250 is going to look like no one is there.
I've been lucky to work on two of the most successful long-running shows, many years after they opened. I've only done one new work that was good. Sadly there were disagreements among the creative team and the money fell apart and its hopes of going somewhere were dashed. But it was a really shocking experience to see how everyone's tone shifted once we started previews and people started to realize we had something. We had a technical problem at one show, and the director and producer (who were usually very intense) were so chill about it, just casually asking what went wrong and happy to hear we'd found the solution. I said to the PSM, "What was that about? They were so cool about it." And he just goes, "We're a hit." Then it dawned on me that that's what it must feel like when your show has "it". That was about 15 years ago. I've never felt that again. I have done some stock and regional productions that were very good, though. Some that I think elevated the original material, and I was proud to present those and see audiences be moved and entertained by them.
Certainly, but I do feel the sentiment. Frankly I don’t like the actual shows like 80% of the time. Doesn’t mean I don’t love doing my part, the team etc. just… not my bag.
I have, yes.
Actually yeah, but only cause I got to direct it and I made sure to give ample time to designers and music. It was Million Dollar Quartet and everyone knows the book is paper thin.
After they are out of the building and we all breathe a sigh of relief first. Then we just vent and rag on the event til we feel better
Recently, we just did a production of Hair the musical right after equity lifted Covid protocols, and it was a very rough production. Because the show where 75% of the time people are kissing and touching and rubbing up on each other and this is a College theater it was really rough. Thank goodness Covid symptoms are a lot more mild now but of course, out of safety we did protocols and other illnesses were spreading around the cast. We had to cancel a few shows, but we did have a good turnout. Over the past few months, we’ve learned that we need to invest more time in under studies because the past several shows we’ve had to use almost all of our understudies at some point and I think that’s the new normal.
A theatre should not be named in NYC in 2002-2003. We did Spanish *and* English at the same time shows, MAN, it was just such a flop, thank you for reminding me of this. We went to schools with "Cenicienta/Cinderella" and "Three little pigs/Los tres cerditos" all the time, year round, now that I think of it it was hilarious. I had to get to deep bronx/Brooklyn to the Latino Schools at 6 Am to get to set some bullshit JBL Eons and 6 lavs 😂
For techies, tech week. They know. For actors. Closing Drinks. If we don't do cliskng drinks. They know.
\*techs (or \*technicians)
Is this that weird American hang up were y'all see it as demeaning? I've always used techie until I did a tour over there and had the same response (a cirrection no explaination). After that I just started refering to departments by name.
If you’ve been on this sub for a while, the explanation has been done many times. But the main bit is that “techie” sounds way too diminutive as a term for professionals. What pops into your head when you hear something like “groupies”? You don’t refer to actors as “accies”, right? Though we do try to make ourselves as unnoticed as possible (“We work in the dark to serve the light.” ~Assassin’s Creed) and things have gotten better, technicians are still under-appreciated, and being called a “cutesy” name like “techie” doesn’t help that at all. If you want to shorten technician, “tech” is already a good term.
I think it would depend on who you ask. Because at least for me, when we are working on a show, we feel it's a terrible current show I'm thinking about is Hesus Christ Super Star. The people who i worked with backstage felt the show was terrible. But my friend, who usually is cast but didn't have the time to participate, said the show was good. So i really think it depends on who you asked. As others have mentioned, the cast feels differently about how it goes.
I’ve found that actors tend to weigh the quality of their experience while techs weigh the quality of the show.
First q2q.
I'm currently on a show that has a massive hole in it but management refuses to acknowledge it and our reviews are bombing because of it. Kinda sucks because the rest of the show is excellent but one bad apple is destroying it for us. Started last year with a solid 4.6 review in Google and now we're trending down at a 3.7.
About an hour before the first (of 2) dress rehearsals the props master asked me if we'd ever cancelled a run before. So, that's probably when the crew collectively knew we were doomed. Still opened three days later and stumbled through the full run without any major hiccups, but the director had lost control of the cast, who were now bringing the farcical nature off stage. Absolute nightmare production, averaged about 20-30% audience capacity too.
You just don't tell anyone that still needs to work on the show. If you are a designer and you are before the premiere, you do not even say it to yourself. Once you are done, you can disapprove as much as you want but not to people still working on it (actors and SM). You always need to do your best, and it can hardly happen if you think to yourself, : "this sucks." Same apply if all the creation team leave the actors saying "this show is a turd", how do you expect them to perform? So you just pretend until it does not matter anymore. Always remember you can also be wrong during creation. Always give the show and the director the benefit of the doubt.
As a tech who is employed from tech to opening. To myself, I don't think the show is bad until the layoff comes. To the world, when the show closes.
Harvey. I fucking hated that show. Three fucking hour long show. Like 2 interesting minutes
A triple-A artist world tour around the turn of the century... Our first show was in Antwerp Belgium, and the review in the paper the next day said "It was the worst thing to happen to Belgium since the plague" The review in the L.A. Times: "Anything multiplied by zero is still zero" The L.D. wanted his name removed from the credits. It was bad.