I just read the worst review ever.
The complaints were just horrendous. The reviewer didn't seem to understand what is supposed to be happening, which is amusing considering a crowd full of 6 year olds were able to follow it.
She had trouble following the story even though she's read the book a million times and seen the movies (Disney and the 1999 movie) heaps of times! And yet didn't seem to realise that our version actually didn't vary wildly in any way at all.
And when Tweedledum and Tweedledee were singing The Walrus and the Carpenter, apparently the always solid projection of Tim Camilleri and Sean Entwistle weren't good enough. Despite that, the reviewer wanted less screaming. Soooo... more projection, and less projection, right? Of course.
She liekd our kostumes. <3
Either way, I do not give half a shit about Burton's 2010 Alice. The sun does not shine from the asses of Tim Burton and Johnny Depp. People seem to get hyped up over the most ludicrous things.
...And finally, the reviewer has the audacity to compliment one of the actors while secretly panning the show behind her back. That's really low, y'know?
Everything we say has consequences, a lesson our reviewer is slowly learning. And indeed, I wonder how she'd feel if we shared this wonderful review with the people she had just been bagging? Doesn't even have the balls to name the production, as though hiding it in anonymity would make her actions any less heinous.
Moral of the story is, don't blog something that is liable to bite you in the ass.
I'm sorry that you think it was the 'worst review ever'.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't a review, actually, otherwise I would have approached it differently.
It was merely something I did, commenting on it, as aposed to a full on review.
As I said, I didn't like the script - which I know you guys didn't write.
I said the acting was mostly good, and I liked the costumes - and yes I did 'compliment one of the actors' as you said, which, as far as I can see, joins up with saying 'the acting was mostly good'.
What you have to learn, Tony, is if you get a bad 'review' (as you seem to think it is) you shouldn't go and bag the review and/or the reviewer.
That is extremely bad form.
If you need any clarification on that point, please refer to the following article about Alice Hoffman.
http://popwatch.ew.com/2009/06/29/alice-hoffman-exacts-revenge-on-reviewer-but-why/
As far as I can tell, it's one opinion to another. People are entitled to their own opinions and you don't have to agree with them, but it's the way it is.
ReplyDeleteYou can’t rip everything to shreds just because you don't agree with it. The reviewed stated their views and justified why. I don't see how you can justify ripping apart one person's perception of 'Alice in Wonderland' apart when you have done exactly the same thing to this reviewer.
Honestly, I think it is a little contradicting. You don't have to agree with it, but you can take it on board and say 'while I disagree with such and such, I do believe.....'etc.
So, in my opinion, I agree with Megan. Bad form buddy! If you can't learn to take the bad with the good, then you're going to lead a very unfulfilling life.
Can't we all just get along?
ReplyDeleteTony, while I do think Megs' review was a bit harsh and I can understand why you would've got upset after reading it - there was no need to make it personal.
I think the show had a lot of strengths and also some weaknesses. I was incredibly impressed by the girl who had a lead part. For a first-time performer she did an amazing job by appearing so natural and believable. I also thought that hyper-camp Mad Hatter performance was interesting and the Dutchess was really amusing. There were other good performances as well. The set was solid, as were the costumes. I think Michelle as the first time director did one heck of a job, especially given that she had quite a hard script to work with.
Having said that - there were some weaknesses also. And Megan pointed them out. I do not agree with the format she did it in and the review could have had a lot more constructive criticism. But she had a right to write what she wrote. I do not think her intention was to offend you or any other member of the cast or crew. It seems she just wanted to share her opinions on a show she has seen with people that read her blog.
Tony, all of us in the performing arts have to hear nasty things about the work that we do. I have heard my share of nasty comments about the shows I have done. Megan has also received criticisms in the past on her performances. If you are planning to continue performing - you should accept it as a fact of life. What would happen if The Age reviewer comes to the next show you are in and rips it apart? Are you going to crucify him (or her)?
Megs and Tony, both of you - end this little feud. I know both of you have a passion for writing and for theatre. So let's focus our energies on developing the arts, rather than waste them on childish bickering.
Fantastic! I finally got comments on my blog. ^_^
ReplyDeleteNow then, to address - yes you're entirely entitled to your opinion. Absolutely! I applaud people voicing their opinion. Similarly however, it's within my right to disagree with your opinion.
You see what we have here? Opinion. Mine is that I don't like yours, yours is that you don't like mine. Therein lies the beauty; we're not in any way forced to agree, nor are we censored in any way.
I regret nothing, I applaud opinion.
Unlike you, Tony, I didn't make it personal - that was crossing the line.
ReplyDeleteSuch is the risk of the Internet, you see. Our definitions of 'crossing the line' are clearly not the same.
ReplyDelete...Thanks for quoting me, by the way. My words are far more poignant when coloured. More arrogant and pompous too, but it's not like I try and deny that.
I am flabbergasted that you think bringing a personal attack is not crossing the line.
ReplyDeleteWe clearly have very different morals and standards, and judging that from alone I am glad that I left HTCY before you came, because I do not think we would have gotten along at all.
I'm glad you can see that you are arrogant and pompous, because you, Tony, (in my own little bringing personal-attack into this) are both.
There you go. Feel better now?
ReplyDeleteYou astound me, Tony, you really do.
ReplyDeleteI never aim for less. :D
ReplyDeleteI am finding it difficult to understand why you have any friends.
ReplyDeleteOh - and to quote a commentor on my blog: "A person who recieves a bad review is pissed off .. lol.. maybe they shouldnt have produced shitty work"
For someone who claims to be above personal attacks, you seem to now be relying heavily on them. I recommend you untwist your knickers, it's certainly not suited to your style.
ReplyDeleteAlso, in regards to this 'shitty work', it was the most successful show in HTCY's history, averaging 80% attendance rates, and an overwhelmingly positive response. Go figure.
Just remember that 'shitty work' wasn't my choice of words.
ReplyDeleteAnd clearly a huge name show like "Alice in Wonderland" is going to draw the crowds. You don't have to be a genius to figure that one out. And the publicity too I'm sure helped.
What can I say, Tony? You bring out the worst in people.
No, 'shitty work' was the choice of words from someone who hadn't seen the show. Your choice of words was 'the worst version of Alice ever'.
ReplyDeleteI find it unfortunate that record-breaking crowds were solely the result of the title Alice in Wonderland. To that degree, Peter Pan averaged roughly 60%. But that isn't a big name show, now is it? Also, I was in charge of publicity. So thank you very much! You're so sweet.
And finally, no. I don't bring out the worst in people. Just in you, apparently.
blarg blarg blarg
ReplyDeleteso many comments, mwah ha ha ha
ReplyDelete....Jess is the cleverest of them all
ReplyDelete....it's a blog off,.... definately a blog off.
ReplyDelete