8,159 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Apr 12, 2017 6:52:07 GMT
I think there was a real missed opportunity last night. The awards were shown at prime time on a major TV channel and this was the perfect chance to showcase the best in British theatre and I think the Olivier's failed in that respect.
There wasn't much showbiz sparkle there apart from the frocks.
The musical numbers are what will draw joe public to go to the theatre and I think the selection was quite disappointing.
I don't think The Girls have done too badly out of it as it was a pleasant number and quite an uplifting song to start the show, but it went downhill from there on.
The song from Jesus Christ Superstar was very "shouty" with some very odd dancing going on in the background, School of Rock number was not the best choice and Groundhog Day was just odd. Plus the show isn't even on in London so nothing to tempt people there. Of course, Amber Riley's number was very powerful and got a standing ovation, but again, its not everyones cup of tea.
I think what was lacking was one or two big production numbers which had the "wow" factor. A perfect choice would have been something from Half a Sixpence which is currently in the West End and a show that people will know and maybe something from a new show like 42nd Street or An American in Paris.
I just don't think the Olivier's sold themselves and even I as a regular theatre goer was bored with the evening.
However it was great that British theatre got recognition at prime time.
Highlights for me were Russell Tovey presenting an award to his mate Jamie Parker, the director of Harry Potter giving his partner a smacker on the lips when he won and Sheridan saying "that gave me goosebumps" when the camera panned to her at the end of Amber's performance.
|
|
1,013 posts
|
Post by talkstageytome on Apr 12, 2017 7:09:37 GMT
Sheridan saying "that gave me goosebumps" when the camera panned to her at the end of Amber's performance. I saw that too. Bless her! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 7:18:24 GMT
I agree. In a show that is supposed to showcase the winners, performances and the best in London Theatre, Ms. Smith stole the show once again. But she is a fantastic actress and performer so its not like she derailed it.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 8:02:44 GMT
The song from Jesus Christ Superstar was very "shouty" with some very odd dancing going on in the background, School of Rock number was not the best choice and Groundhog Day was just odd. I remember thinking the same about the choreography for Heaven on their Minds when seeing JCS at Open Air last year. It looked quite odd on stage and definitely didn't translate very well on screen. School of Rock song I thought was alot more shouty than JCS and not particularly strong. And I have absolutely no recollection of the song from Groundhog Day from seeing it last year, but to me it felt quite a weird song to include to sell the show on. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 8:04:29 GMT
No one goes to Dreamgirls to see anything other than incredible vocal power. Amber and her alternates are doing what the show asks of them. Yes, apparently big voices are fine when it's someone screaming their head off in a gaudy musical - but totally wrong when opera singers have big voices. Go figure... |
|
239 posts
|
Post by dizzieblonde on Apr 12, 2017 8:15:36 GMT
No one goes to Dreamgirls to see anything other than incredible vocal power. Amber and her alternates are doing what the show asks of them. Exactly, and it is clearly working! Tickets are selling hugely, Amber got her Olivier and, unless I am mistaken, the only standing ovation of the night at the Oliviers. Audiences are loving it! Its almost a gurantee that is one show that isnt Arry Potter benifited last night, it ws Dreamgirls because of Ambers performance. Agreed - and that performance was selected, very specifically, to show people why Amber won the Olivier. For most of the TV audience, she's 'Mercedes from Glee', and they sort of needed to introduce her as 'bonafide stage star'. It doesn't hurt the Dreamgirls that they got a big primetime advert for their show - one of the only ones that will likely benefit, because so many of the others (Jesus Christ Superstar, Groundhog Day) aren't actually running right now. She was spectacular - but I'm a Gleek from way, waaay back, and always knew she was amazing! I'm hoping that she's still with the London production at the end of this year, so that I can see the show with her in it, but I suspect that the end of the current booking period (end of Oct) is pretty much the end of her run, and then she'll move (with absolute certainty now) to the Broadway production in the New Year. The awards themselves were messy, a bit unfocused, and it was such a shame that Half a Sixpence didn't get a performance slot. Next year will be the Hamilton awards, and I expect a total clean sweep for them - so at least we'll likely get a TV performance out of it! I think they just need to up their game for the TV broadcast - it's laudable (as others have mentioned) that this got a primetime ITV weeknight slot, but 2 whole days after the awards just feels too delayed to me. Fingers crossed there's more than just Hamilton to get excited about, next time round. The Albert hall was packed with huge talent this year, as the Oliviers are every year, they just need to find more interesting ways of using that talent to showcase the West End and British theatre on primetime TV! |
|
950 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Apr 12, 2017 10:10:13 GMT
Only 1m viewers - I can't see ITV putting the whole thing on the main channel at 8pm again after that. Tuesday is one of their weaker nights but even so that is awful for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 10:55:24 GMT
No one goes to Dreamgirls to see anything other than incredible vocal power. Amber and her alternates are doing what the show asks of them. Yes, apparently big voices are fine when it's someone screaming their head off in a gaudy musical - but totally wrong when opera singers have big voices. Go figure... Who is complaining about opera singers? Hamilton's Tonys got a 33% increase in viewers from the previous year so maybe they'll try again...I doubt it though. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 11:09:07 GMT
See I don't think the Oliviers will be as Hamilton heavy next year as the Tonys were (in terms of overall content of the show, not the awards themselves). It was so over the top at the Tonys, but at the time it came out, it was the hottest thing. Now it has been two/three years, it will be alot less here I imagine for the Oliviers. They will get a performance, their wins and a joke here or there, but nothing more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 11:23:22 GMT
There wasn't much else for the Tonys was there? Just an extra performance at the end?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 11:55:05 GMT
this was the perfect chance to showcase the best in British theatre and I think the Olivier's failed in that respect. No, Oliviers eligibility is strictly only for members of the Society of London Theatre, and its affiliates in a few categories. You're perhaps comfusing the Oliviers with the UK Theatre Awards, which do set out to showcase the best of British theatre. |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Apr 12, 2017 12:18:02 GMT
No one goes to Dreamgirls to see anything other than incredible vocal power. Amber and her alternates are doing what the show asks of them. In which case a concert would be more efficient. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 12:23:38 GMT
Or we could just let people enjoy what they enjoy!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 12:32:57 GMT
Yes, apparently big voices are fine when it's someone screaming their head off in a gaudy musical - but totally wrong when opera singers have big voices. Go figure... Who is complaining about opera singers? Hamilton's Tonys got a 33% increase in viewers from the previous year so maybe they'll try again...I doubt it though. Ever read any of the Alfie Boe threads? ;-) Seriously, Riley has a powerful voice and I wouldn't take that away from her. I just wish audiences would appreciate subtlety instead of volume (and how sad it was to see even a bunch of pros fall for the foghorn act). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 12:35:09 GMT
I thought the Alfie Boe issue was more to do with his acting?
I think there's room for appreciating both subtle vocals and dramatic vocals, similarly to how people can appreciate both subtle and dramatic acting. It depends on the show, the song, the character. For Dreamgirls, people want a big, belty performance and thats what the music was written for.
I've heard Amber Riley sing live (not in Dreamgirls) and it does give you chills like Sheridan said. I don't think there's anything wrong with standing up to applaud someone who has provoked a physical reaction in you just from singing.
As an example of people appreciating subtle singing, most people cite this song as one of the highlights of the Broadway show Natasha, Pierre & the Great Comet of 1812. It's very quiet, subtle and there's little power or belt in her voice. But it's a gorgeous moment in the show that has received a lot of acclaim. It works for the show, character and performer in the way that And I Am Telling You works for Amber:
|
|
12 posts
|
Post by theplaymirrorslife on Apr 12, 2017 13:07:06 GMT
The viewing figures the show gets is an interesting one. Last night's figures peaked at 1.4m with an average of 1m according to the Stage. That on face value looks disappointing. The BAFTAS in Feb pulled in 3.9m on a prime Sunday night a couple of hours after the event, so realistically a broadcast 2 days after the event when most people know the results, on a Tuesday for a far less high profile / mainstream event isn't going to get as high as that - much as I know we'd want it to! Wonder what they were hoping for? 2m? I would think it's only slightly disappointing rather than anything more.
Yes the show itself was a mixed bag, so perhaps that had an affect - but the show itself being 'better' wouldn't necessarily have made that much difference this time round. Room for improvement though - the BRITS have reinvented themselves so it can be done (although it would need sponsors with deep pockets!)
|
|
8,159 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Apr 12, 2017 13:20:29 GMT
this was the perfect chance to showcase the best in British theatre and I think the Olivier's failed in that respect. No, Oliviers eligibility is strictly only for members of the Society of London Theatre, and its affiliates in a few categories. You're perhaps comfusing the Oliviers with the UK Theatre Awards, which do set out to showcase the best of British theatre. No confusion. I put British in case someone pulled me up on saying London as I knew there were affiliate catagories. And London is a part of Britain so it shows off best of Britain as well as best of London. |
|
950 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Apr 12, 2017 13:38:19 GMT
The viewing figures the show gets is an interesting one. Last night's figures peaked at 1.4m with an average of 1m according to the Stage. That on face value looks disappointing. The BAFTAS in Feb pulled in 3.9m on a prime Sunday night a couple of hours after the event, so realistically a broadcast 2 days after the event when most people know the results, on a Tuesday for a far less high profile / mainstream event isn't going to get as high as that - much as I know we'd want it to! Wonder what they were hoping for? 2m? I would think it's only slightly disappointing rather than anything more. Yes the show itself was a mixed bag, so perhaps that had an affect - but the show itself being 'better' wouldn't necessarily have made that much difference this time round. Room for improvement though - the BRITS have reinvented themselves so it can be done (although it would need sponsors with deep pockets!) For the show itself I don't think it's that bad, for ITV on a weekday evening it's pretty terrible though. You've got to assume they expected more than that - the previous week they had a generic food/consumer programme at 8pm which got double those ratings. Maybe they hoped for good demographics but it skewed old and didn't even manage to be particularly ABC1 which I think will be a let down for them. Oddly (or perhaps not given the age breakdown) it had its weakest share in London though it did best in the South East. |
|
19,787 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 12, 2017 13:40:02 GMT
Sheridan saying "that gave me goosebumps" when the camera panned to her at the end of Amber's performance. I saw that too. Bless her! Yeah, Sheri knew the camera would be right on her so she did the right thing, then went home and stuck needles in a dolly that looks like Amber 🙂 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 13:46:53 GMT
It's no surprise that airing an award show two days after everyone knows the results gets bad ratings. The fact that people in London were barely watching just proves that even theatre fans couldn't be bothered.
Air it live and there will be an improvement. It's that simple. Hold the awards on a Tuesday if you have to.
|
|
19,787 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 12, 2017 13:52:12 GMT
It's no surprise that airing an award show two days after everyone knows the results gets bad ratings. The fact that people in London were barely watching just proves that even theatre fans couldn't be bothered.
Because all of the country's theatre fans are in London, obviously. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 13:54:22 GMT
Come on, that's obviously not what I meant. I don't even live in London myself.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Apr 12, 2017 14:27:43 GMT
It's no surprise that airing an award show two days after everyone knows the results gets bad ratings. The fact that people in London were barely watching just proves that even theatre fans couldn't be bothered. Air it live and there will be an improvement. It's that simple. Hold the awards on a Tuesday if you have to. Agree that airing live would be best. Trouble is that I think they are stuck with Sundays as most performers in ongoing shows are likely to be committed for other nights. However it might be worth exploring. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 14:30:00 GMT
No, Oliviers eligibility is strictly only for members of the Society of London Theatre, and its affiliates in a few categories. You're perhaps comfusing the Oliviers with the UK Theatre Awards, which do set out to showcase the best of British theatre. No confusion. I put British in case someone pulled me up on saying London as I knew there were affiliate catagories. And London is a part of Britain so it shows off best of Britain as well as best of London. Disagree! The affiliate members are a handful of other London theatres. The majority of British theatre (and other UK theatre) is neither a SOLT member nor a SOLT affiliate. It's ridiculous to claim that all theatre outside SOLT membership and affiliation is less good than the best of the Olivier-eligible theatre. Even the Oliviers don't claim that. They just define a limited pool of eligible theatre and then claim to award the best theatre within that pool. |
|
8,159 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Apr 12, 2017 14:49:27 GMT
No confusion. I put British in case someone pulled me up on saying London as I knew there were affiliate catagories. And London is a part of Britain so it shows off best of Britain as well as best of London. Disagree! The affiliate members are a handful of other London theatres. The majority of British theatre (and other UK theatre) is neither a SOLT member nor a SOLT affiliate. It's ridiculous to claim that all theatre outside SOLT membership and affiliation is less good than the best of the Olivier-eligible theatre. Even the Oliviers don't claim that. They just define a limited pool of eligible theatre and then claim to award the best theatre within that pool. Well let's agree to disagree. |
|
