The Green Room - Bad Reviews

Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:15am

mr. spiker Offline
All Access
a nest of sandworms
Eagle Mountain, UT

Gender:
Posts: 1133

So .... I'm wondering what y'all think about this issue.

http://inthisweek.com/view.php?id=1130478

In Utah This Week reviewed The Scarlet Pimpernel. It's pretty much a rave, apart from a note about one actor. One of the comments left was this:

Quote:

I don't think Kelly Ashkettle should be allowed to review anything if she chooses to use people's names when she puts them down

What do you think? Agree or disagree?

http://www.fiftytwoplays.com

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:45am

RENTBOY Offline
Diva
That's poetic that's pathetic

Gender:
Posts: 1048

ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE !!!!!

I'm in this production and agree with what is said.

If we as actors cant take the criticism our directors peers and theatre critics give us, then why are we acting?

I think her review is just that a review. How many times do you read an article from a "reviewer" with lines like, "This play was good cause it was funny," or "she was really good and pretty". "I liked the costumes, or the set lifted out of the ground and spun around and shot fireworks."

I think Kelly Ashkettles review is just that a review. She reviews everything, the plot, the costumes, the directing, AND YES the ACTING and singing.

I would much rather have a reviewer say a NAME then just the guy who played Marguretes brother couldn't sing

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:47am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

Disagree. When we make a choice to perform beyond work or Church talent shows, we make a choice to run the risk of getting criticized, or getting bad reviews. It's not pleasant, but it's part of the process. I believe a critic can show a little bit of senitivity when daling with local theatre, but I haven't seen one yet that I don't believe usually does that (ocassionally they'll go a little far, but for the most part I see fairness and restraint). In 20 years I have seen TWO local reviews that I felt got a little too personal, and in both cases the shows in question were, frankly, terrible. In this particular case, she is incredibly diplomatic, prasing the performer even as she offers a soft criticism that would make no sense if phrased in a vague manner. The job of the critic is to serve the audience, not the artists, and specifificty serves the audience.

In my opinion, too many people in the theatre community neeed to develop a somewhat thicker skin, and stop seeing bad reviews as attacks or meanness. You're doing ytour job and your art, and they're doing theirs (yes, critical writing is an art). In short, the person who wrote this complaint is wrong, wrong, wrong. Absolutley brimming over with wrongability.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:51am

RENTBOY Offline
Diva
That's poetic that's pathetic

Gender:
Posts: 1048

Quote:

Disagree. When we make a choice to perform beyond work or Church talent shows, we make a choice to run the risk of getting criticized, or getting bad reviews. It's not pleasant, but it's part of the process. I believe a critic can show a little bit of senitivity when daling with local theatre, but I haven't seen one yet that I don't believe usually does that (ocassionally they'll go a little far, but for the most part I see fairness and restraint). The job of the critic is to serve the audience, not the artists, and specifificty serves the audience.

In my opinion, too many people in the theatre community neeed to develop a somewhat thicker skin, and stop seeing bad reviews as attacks or meanness. You're doing ytour job and your art, and they're doing theirs (yes, critical writing is an art).

AMEN AMEN AMEN

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:59am

shimmer Offline
Diva
La Mirada, CA

Gender:
Posts: 1573

Not to mention that if you get a bad review, then you are also being given an opportunity to improve upon the performance.

And that's a good thing.

"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil. " C.S. Lewis

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 9:39am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

shimmer wrote on Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:59am:

Not to mention that if you get a bad review, then you are also being given an opportunity to improve upon the performance.

And that's a good thing.

A very good point, and an excellent way of looking at it. I've been fortunate in that the few times I've been mentioned by name in a professional review in it's been positive, but some of those same productions have lead to some harsh, anonymous online comments. I didn't like like getting those comments, but I listened to them and considered the them, and some of them have helped me improve considerably.

The one caveat I'd give to that is that I often hear performers calling criticism in a review pointless because it doesn't tell them how to improve. using a review as feedback that helps you improve is great, but, again, the purpose of a review or a critic is not to serve the performers, the theatre, or the theatre community, but to help audiences decide whether to see a particular production.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 10:16am

gem2477 Offline
Ensemble
I Love PA!

Posts: 111

No, I think names can and should be named. Let's reverse it - if it was a glowing review, wouldn't they WANT their name in the paper? Besides, how hard is it to find out the name if the keep the performers name anonymous?

Reviews are not to spare feelings or just look at everything with rose colored glasses, but to tell the truth as the reviewer sees it. That's just the way it is. Tickets are expensive now, and audiences want to know if the money is worth it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 10:57am

spiker Offline
All Access
I'm a fruitcake.
Salt Lake City, UT

Gender:
Posts: 5576

shimmer wrote on Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:59am:

Not to mention that if you get a bad review, then you are also being given an opportunity to improve upon the performance.

And that's a good thing.

I think taking your reviews as an opportunity to improve your work in a general sense may be a good thing. Taking what they say to change your performance of that particular show in any way...is a slippery slope. You should be doing what you were directed to do. Reviews, opinions of peers, family, etc., should not change what you do on stage.

"...there are more people alive now than have died in all of human history. �In other words, if everyone wanted to play Hamlet at once, they couldn't, because there aren't enough skulls!"

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 11:03am

BlueRoses Offline
Ensemble
I Love PA!
Salt Lake City

Gender:
Posts: 163

Can I just say that I think this topic is a sister to the topic of too many standing ovations in Utah? Some people seem to think that everyone should be praised for merely participating or trying. No! The whole point of art is to make people THINK!!!! Anyone who considers himself/herself an artist should be open to the idea that people will critique your work--and it is WORK!! Those who dabble half-heartedly do not understand that art SHOULD be critiqued. Otherwise, it isn't art. It is just you trying to find an excuse to be a four-year-old playing make-believe. Art is meant to be experienced by an audience and discussed. Reviewers should not merely be recapping what the message of a particular play is, but HOW WELL the artists convey this message. I wish more reviews around here would mention particular performances and focus on how well the actors told the story--rather than merely recapping the story.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Sep 4^th, 2009 at 11:23am

The Dark Knight Ex Member

spiker wrote on Sep 4^th, 2009 at 10:57am:

shimmer wrote on Sep 4^th, 2009 at 8:59am:

Not to mention that if you get a bad review, then you are also being given an opportunity to improve upon the performance.

And that's a good thing.

I think taking your reviews as an opportunity to improve your work in a general sense may be a good thing. �Taking what they say to change your performance of that particular show in any way...is a slippery slope. �You should be doing what you were directed to do. �Reviews, opinions of peers, family, etc., should not change what you do on stage. �

I was interpreting Shimmer's thought more as to what you do in the future. With every new project I t to use what I learned on the last one to improve the quality of my work. I agree with you that making any big changes to your performance mid run is likely to do more harm than good (and is likely to mean departing from the vision of the play to please someone, and is therefore potentially harmful to the play and your colleagues), but I think you would agree that learning form experience is part of growth.

Back to top

IP Logged

BackStage Utah