562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 13:32:40 GMT
I mean, I see where the people who suggest that the play should have gone on sale without announcing any of the cast, so that people who are interested in the play itself could have bought the first lot of tickets, are coming from, but it's got an unfortunate subtext of "if you want to see a play because of who's in it then you're not a 'real' theatre fan", and that kind of gatekeepery nonsense has never sat well with me. Everyone has an actor who they'd pay to see read the phone book, and it's kinda gross to think it's okay to judge people because of who "their" actor is. I'm not cooler because my phone book actor is Patsy Ferran, you're not an unworthy teenybopper if your phone book actor is Tom Hiddleston, you're just as valid as anyone if your phone book actor is Cate Blanchett. This all sounds very right on but it is also unfortunately complete balls of the same variety as the "all art is subjective so all opinions are equal" school. When I went to see Killer Joe with Orlando Bloom, a play I've been wanting to see for years, I was sitting right next to a couple of tourists I ended up chatting to. All they knew about the whole thing is that Orlando Bloom was in it. The first thing they said to me as they took their seats was "Is Orlando Bloom going to be here? Can I take pictures?". I actually doubt they even knew it was a theatre production and after taking to them post show they gave the impression that they would be happy if they never saw another play again. Now we can pretend that those kinds of people are the same as somebody who has studied the play extensively, has seen several productions, and is a fan of Tracy Letts if it makes us feel better about ourselves, but beyond being courteous and accepting they have a right to be there, I am not going to pretend everybody that sees a production for whatever reason is the same. As such I will say that those who would see this for Martin Crimp or Katie Mitchell are actually different and leaning more towards being genuine theatre fans than those who are just celeb chasing, and I think they should have had a chance to book tickets before all the Blanchett hype began. This subtext is not "unfortunate", it's just the reality of the situation. The problem is that once you go down that route there's essentially no end. After all, for everyone you look to and think "meh, they're only here to see Orlando, I've been a fan of Tracy Letts for years" there'll be someone else who'll look to you and say "You can hardly call yourself a fan of Tracy Letts if you've not seen this yet. If you were a true fan you'd have flown to New York in 1999 and seen it then" or whatever. And why is going for Tracy Letts more 'true' than than going for the director, or the theatre itself?
Or extending that further, couldn't someone who considers themselves a lifelong Orlando Bloom fan turn to you and say "Why should you get priority tickets? You don't even care that Orlando Bloom is performing, I've supported him for years."
Naturally we all judge others based on our own (subjective) views, but it would be another thing entirely in my opinion if a publicly funded cultural centre started doing that. Not least because a (perhaps small) number of people who attend because "it has that guy from that thing in it" might actually find this to be their gateway into the artform. I dare say many boardmembers' first experiences of the theatre might also have 'less than pure' intentions (my parents forced me to go, I liked the movie, I had to for schoolwork, or whatever)...
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 12:24:54 GMT
I see where the people who suggest that the play should have gone on sale without announcing any of the cast, so that people who are interested in the play itself could have bought the first lot of tickets, are coming from, but it's got an unfortunate subtext of "if you want to see a play because of who's in it then you're not a 'real' theatre fan", and that kind of gatekeepery nonsense has never sat well with me. Everyone has an actor who they'd pay to see read the phone book, and it's kinda gross to think it's okay to judge people because of who "their" actor is. I'm not cooler because my phone book actor is Patsy Ferran, you're not an unworthy teenybopper if your phone book actor is Tom Hiddleston, you're just as valid as anyone if your phone book actor is Cate Blanchett. I absolutely agree with this. It's one thing if the casting isn't fixed at the time of sale, but if a venue deliberately withheld that information, it would effectively be judging what constitutes a good or bad reason to go to the theatre. That is just incredibly elitist and especially inappropriate for a publicly funded venue in my opinion.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 12:15:16 GMT
I think in general, as I've said earlier int his thread, you can either maintain your artistic integrity by doing the production in a small space, or cast an international star in the lead, but not both... That's fair enough from the NT perspective, but where does that leave the star? I mean, by that rationale once someone reaches a certain status they would effectively be forced into performing on the larger stages and, in turn, in plays that work on a big stage. ... Or aim for a transfer. Or do an NT Live screening. Or do an initial run with your star then recast. Or one of many other options. I agree about NT Live or a transfer (likely with a recast), but I don't think NT Live at the Dorfman has been done before (possibly mistaken but I think Mosquitoes for instance wasn't either?) so it might not be equipped, and we don't know yet that a transfer is off the cards.
In terms of music, it's far more accepted for big bands to occasionally play in tiny venues or on secret sets at festivals. Naturally this means that lots of people miss out, but the flipside is that for those that go it's a special experience and (I imagine) the musicians get a level of connection and artistry that might not exist once you're playing endless huge stadiums.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 16, 2019 12:00:25 GMT
Well, not compared to the Brexit chaos, which is of a totally other order of Effed-Uppness but it's a major PR disaster for the National (and potentially as to how that impacts funding; exclusivity doesn't go down well). Out of interest, is it your take that the NT shouldn't put on big stars onto the Dorfman? I mean, the high proportion of disappointed customers would only be reduced by decreasing demand (e.g. smaller star, higher ticket prices, less publicity) or increasing supply (e.g. larger auditorium, longer run). Isn't the flipside of that argument that cultural venues and the creatives should be driven by artistic goals rather than financial/monetary factors? I mean, more people might have been able to see it on the Olivier but if the play was best suited to the smaller stage, shouldn't that be a driving force? Similarly, while Blanchett will no doubt bring huge publicity, the playwright & director will also (hopefully) be thinking about how she fits into their production...
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 15, 2019 23:24:14 GMT
I've not seen too many operas but found this fantastic.
The radio 3 recording was good, but one thing that doesn't come through too clearly in the audio was the use of juggling. This was more impressive than it sounds and the sound & rhythm of this worked really well with the rhythm of Glass' music in my opinion.
I found the music was sort of similar to Koyaanisqatsi (certainly more to that than Satyagraha), so if you liked that then you will probably enjoy Akhnaten.
Ultimately, if you're unsure just get a cheap ticket perhaps(?)
Looking forward to seeing this again in a couple of weeks.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 15, 2019 10:47:22 GMT
You and I clearly have very different ideas of what "statistically significant" means. Considering people were reporting being up to position 9057 in the queue *just to enter the ballot* then I'd have to have a HELLUVA lot of different browsers available to me to put a noticeable dent in any stats, and I don't usually go over two unless it's something like Angels In America I think we might, or maybe not @baemax . I was thinking of all my experiences in the past year or two. I usually run 4 windows and find absolutely invariably that one will be in the very low hundreds at most - sometimes even lower or even straight in, one in the 1500 to 2500 range and the rest over 3000. That's what I was working off. In a traditional ticket sale if you're enter the queue with two goes (I'm not sure if this can be 2 browsers on the same machine, or needs to be 2 separate machines), then you're effectively getting 2 rolls of the die when queue-it assigns the queue positions. Assuming that each entry gets randomly assigned a number and the top X will effectively get tickets, then by entering twice you're (almost but not quite) doubling the likelihood of one of your randomly assigned numbers being within the top X. Your entering twice won't have much effect on everyone else, since your increased likelihood is distributed across the thousands of other entrants, but you are still reducing their chances ever so slightly. It's no different to buying two raffle tickets. Of course, with entering the ballot this makes no difference since getting in earlier or later in the 24 hours shouldn't affect your chances of success (unless you have a second account).
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 15, 2019 10:44:08 GMT
Mosquitoes was fairer because return tickets went back on sale immediately, enabling someone like me, who can only afford the trip if she can get advance train tickets, to get tickets weeks in advance and go. Typically at the National, return tickets pop up all the time. Not so with this: they seem to be holding them back (I've had that auto update system tracking the page and - nothing). Ditto Friday Rush, which allows non-Londoners to have a chance to get something 7 days in advance - they're not doing that for this either. Day seats are not an option for those outside London and it's a theatre funded by the whole country. I agree with you. However, that doesn't change the fact that the issues that you mention (Friday Rush, day seats and returns) are all completely separate from whether the initial sale occurs by ballot or traditional online sale. To say that the NT should have handled the returns differently for this or shouldn't have put on such a star in the first place or should/shouldn't prioritise existing customers are fine, but none of those points is an argument for or against them doing a ballot again.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 15, 2019 10:19:54 GMT
They also (not so politely) declined my offer to show them how to put their Apple Watches into Theatre Mode at the interval. Mind you, if it had been in Theatre Mode he wouldn't have heard the chirrup and checked his messages halfway through Act One. Ugh, this is annoying. How is it that some people reach adulthood and refuse to understand that theatres/galleries/cinemas aren't simply extensions of their living rooms?!
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 15, 2019 10:10:11 GMT
I don't really understand this high demand thing. It gives the impression of being a Willy Wonka-ish publicity stunt for newspaper coverage (which it got). They didn't do it for Mosquitoes with National Treasure Olivia Colman in the same small venue, and her stage appearances are rarer than Cate Blanchett's. In that case I missed out on public sale day (sold out in minutes) but with a couple of hours dedicated to page refreshing a few weeks later I got the best seats in the house, and again for my mum later in the run. If we're going to compare like with like, then how the day seats are handled, whether or not returns go online, whether or not names are printed on the tickets, and how the play was marketed are completely separate from the method that the tickets are initially sold. Similarly, one might say that the NT shouldn't pay for big stars in small venues but again, that's a separate issue from the sales method.
In your example, the fact that you missed out on Mosquitoes tickets within a few minutes is simply a reflection of demand v supply. Furthermore, your position in the queue when tickets went on sale was randomly assigned meaning that Mosquitoes was, in effect, sold by ballot. Even the 'multiple ballots' of "When We Have Sufficiently..." has a proxy with the Mosquitoes sale, since there were separate booking periods for each membership level.
The big difference is that traditional sales require you to enter the ballot at a specific moment in time, rather than giving a period of time. And while that period might encourage people to enter without really caring, the flipside is that some 'true' theatregoers don't have the flexiblity to knock off work/study/whatever at the moment that a new play goes on sale.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 16:32:50 GMT
that doesn't change the fact that there are some people who have never seen the inside of a theatre and never will do again got tickets and people who have seen over a hundred productions at The National didn't. We'll never agree because I will never accept that that is right. Unless the NT hand out tickets one-by-one to people based on the ranking system that you have in your mind, it's inevitable that some people who consider themselves 'true' theatre goers will miss out. That might be made worse (or 'fairer' depending on your viewpoint) by the ballot system, but is an inevitable fact of the combination of a limit run, small auditorium and big star. Indeed, even under such a ranked system of sales, some 'high passion' customers might miss out if their availability to come to London is limited and their available days happen to sell out to those above them. And, for what it's worth, those loyalty schemes you mention have less to do with 'rewarding' loyal customers, and more to do with encouraging people to buy stuff they wouldn't otherwise get. This is the same reason that shops generally do 'buy 3 for the price of 2' type sales far more than 'get 1/3 off' type sales.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 15:52:49 GMT
Except that under your definition of 'passion=money', the NT do run by those principles since anyone 'passionate' enough to donate £1500 a year (patron members) got to bypass the ballot altogether. And so they should get priority access. Yet members who commit themselves to £90 in membership fees and hundreds more in ticket purchases throughout the year were put on w same level as someone who couldn't even point out The National on a map... Nope. The different members levels had additional (separate) ballots that effectively gave them extra chances to succeed compared to those in the completely public sale.
That doesn't change the fact that when the demand is so high those 'chances' are still pretty low.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 15:47:22 GMT
I've very much enjoyed the mathematical side of this conversation, but now that we've gone into the realm of people having to pay their dues before they're considered worthy of buying theatre tickets, I'm out. If someone genuinely believes this, I don't think they can even understand the opposing viewpoint, which is mine. Hasta luego! Well, we'll have to disagree with each other. I'm not, for the record, being elitist. I benefitted greatly from the Travelex seasons coming from a ridiculously poor background with no members of my family interested in the theatre and certainly not interested in funding anyone who might be. However, as parsley might say, there are some people who are happy to spend £6 a pint and hundreds on alcohol and cigarettes each month-and that is not limited to any class or background - who haven't managed to fork up the £5-18 it costs for the cheapest tickets in London to see theatre. There's a reason why you, you if you so desired, would get nowhere a ticket to see England play in a World Cup match and why membership and loyalty schemes exist across a number of different fields. To reward loyalty. Why shouldn't theatre be run on the same principles? Except that under your definition of 'passion=money', the NT do run by those principles since anyone 'passionate' enough to donate £1500 a year (patron members) got to bypass the ballot altogether.
Even below that large donation, the different memberships (going down to ~£35) rewarded you with increased chances of success since there were multiple staggered ballots.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 15:33:29 GMT
So in your view is meer 'attendance' the key to determine someone's 'passion' for theatre? Or should audience-members be quizzed about how truly passionate they are before getting the booster treatment? If you go, but walk out at the interval does that count against your 'passion' and is that better or worse than not going in the first place? And, incidentally, how do you rank between those that don't attend for monetary reasons, or because of location, or other commitments, or because they simply don't like what's currently being put on?
Ultimately, whether you describe that approach as 'entitlement' or 'gate keeping' is I suppose a matter of opinion.
However, as I said, the reality is that with a fair ballot your chances are no different to a general sale. The fact that a proportion of regular goers will miss out is an unavoidable effect of supply << demand whether the tickets had been in a ballot or regular sale.
It's the continuous financial commitment which defines passion and loyalty. So perhaps priority ticket buying should go to those that buy the most G&Ts at the interval.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 15:25:07 GMT
The flipside of that argument is why should a publicly funded cultural space like the NT be biased against newcomers or, for that matter, youngsters?
Furthermore, as I said previously, in a truly fair ballot the likelihood of getting a ticket for those who don't game the system are actually higher than a traditional ticket sale. The reality is that whenever demand is far higher than supply we'll all know a few regulars who miss out.
Because whether people like it or not there are some people who are passionate theatre attendees who, collectively, keep theatre alive in the UK. Even with the Public subsidy The National still needs people to attend. I'm all for making theatre more inclusive but not at the expense of those who have supported theatres for many, many years. It reeks of self entitlement that somebody who has never visited the theatre in their life damands an equal chance to obtain tickets as soon as the most passionate patrons. So in your view is meer 'attendance' the key to determine someone's 'passion' for theatre? Or should audience-members be quizzed about how truly passionate they are before getting the booster treatment? If you go, but walk out at the interval does that count against your 'passion' and is that better or worse than not going in the first place? And, incidentally, how do you rank between those that don't attend for monetary reasons, or because of location, or other commitments, or because they simply don't like what's currently being put on?
Ultimately, whether you describe that approach as 'entitlement' or 'gate keeping' is I suppose a matter of opinion.
However, as I said, the reality is that with a fair ballot your chances are no different to a general sale. The fact that a proportion of regular goers will miss out is an unavoidable effect of supply << demand whether the tickets had been in a ballot or regular sale.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 15:13:06 GMT
For what it's worth, I hope the NT and other venues do ballots more regularly for events like this one where demand for tickets will hugely outstrip availability. Granted, the way this has run has been messy, but it's just their first attempt. In the future, being more transparent about how it will work and when & what proportion of tickets will be available will be good, perhaps in conjunction with a more open day-ticketing system. Ultimately though, once the kinks have been ironed out a ballot will mean that people aren't penalised for not having internet access, or access to lots of computers, or where work/study/other responsibilities means that they can't simply take time off at random times in order to enter the mad rush of a traditional sale. The balloting system (in theory at least) gives everyone a fair stab at getting tickets and removes the need to set aside an unknown amount of time on ticket day to sit in front of several computers frantically hitting refresh. I suspect that it also helps with things like touts and reduces the load on the IT infrastructure since the surge in web traffic should be reduced and it's less problematic if the website struggles. I can only imagine how thankless a task it must be for whoever is organising sales on things like this. At the end of the day, no matter what, there will always be a large number of people disappointed. Furthermore, there probably isn't a much chance of spending money on improving the ticketing system, given that the income is fixed (i.e. you can't increase the number of seats sold since it's already ~100%). I appreciate that I've been lucky enough to get tickets in this second ballot, but I was saying the same thing back when I lost in the initial ballot. Ballots for all aren't fair for long term members. I know a couple of people who have been members of the National for over a decade and who have seen over 100 productions there in that time frame but didn't get tickets for this. With all due respect why should they be bunched together with people going to see their first ever play, never mind first to The National? The flipside of that argument is why should a publicly funded cultural space like the NT be biased against newcomers or, for that matter, youngsters?
Furthermore, as I said previously, in a truly fair ballot the likelihood of getting a ticket for those who don't game the system are actually higher than a traditional ticket sale. The reality is that whenever demand is far higher than supply we'll all know a few regulars who miss out.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 15:10:19 GMT
I hate this ballot, it is annoying but not because I want to game the system. I just want to buy tickets, which has been possible for literally every other show in town. Even the ones that don't sell memberships to make ticket buying easier. Humph But the thing is that -if you're not gaming the system on traditional sales- then your chances of having been successful in this ballot were actually better than if it had been a regular sale.
What I mean is that, assuming in a truly fair ballot, then the only people who's chances of getting tickets are reduced are those who would have otherwise 'gamed' the system but cannot any longer. Granted, a proportion of people work outside the ballot (e.g. high donors) but that's the case anyway.
The fact that you were unforunately one of the (for the sake of argument) 75% of hopefuls who weren't able to buy tickets has nothing to do with the fact that it's a ballot.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 14, 2019 14:23:59 GMT
For what it's worth, I hope the NT and other venues do ballots more regularly for events like this one where demand for tickets will hugely outstrip availability.
Granted, the way this has run has been messy, but it's just their first attempt. In the future, being more transparent about how it will work and when & what proportion of tickets will be available will be good, perhaps in conjunction with a more open day-ticketing system.
Ultimately though, once the kinks have been ironed out a ballot will mean that people aren't penalised for not having internet access, or access to lots of computers, or where work/study/other responsibilities means that they can't simply take time off at random times in order to enter the mad rush of a traditional sale.
The balloting system (in theory at least) gives everyone a fair stab at getting tickets and removes the need to set aside an unknown amount of time on ticket day to sit in front of several computers frantically hitting refresh. I suspect that it also helps with things like touts and reduces the load on the IT infrastructure since the surge in web traffic should be reduced and it's less problematic if the website struggles.
I can only imagine how thankless a task it must be for whoever is organising sales on things like this. At the end of the day, no matter what, there will always be a large number of people disappointed. Furthermore, there probably isn't a much chance of spending money on improving the ticketing system, given that the income is fixed (i.e. you can't increase the number of seats sold since it's already ~100%).
I appreciate that I've been lucky enough to get tickets in this second ballot, but I was saying the same thing back when I lost in the initial ballot.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 13, 2019 2:32:44 GMT
Wow, I thought this was a really good play that touched on hugely timely and important topics. While it didn't quite reach the high watermark of recent drama on the decline of American industrial cities that was the second season of The Wire, this was still a great, thought-provoking couple of hours.
While the play was clearly written with a specific viewpoint to tell, the characters felt well rounded and 'true' with human (ie shifting and often contradictory) ideas and motivations driving their actions. I also really liked the fact that the story restricted itself to the central characters rather than attempting to go further. No doubt another side to this tale might come from the factory owners, or their customers (I.e. us), but imo it's completely fine for a complex story to be told without covering all the bases.
As @theatremonkey mentioned, I also felt that, while the first half was fantastic, the second was weaker. And unfortunately, while I agreed with the sentiment of the play, I really disliked the final scene and a half, which felt too contrived and explicit about its mission statement. For me the message of the play was clear, and it would have been far more impactful if it had ended in a more subtle manner.
Similarly, the fact that they played Childish Gambino's 'This is America' at the end also felt a little on the nose.
All in all though, despite some minor niggles I felt that this was really good. It was my first play for 2019 and a great start to my theatre-going year.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 12, 2019 16:44:21 GMT
So is the booking on Monday open to everyone who lost on the ballot or have just a few been emailed as I haven't had any? My take on it is that it's only open to those that receive a message. I.e. Any previous ballot losers were effectively automatically entered into this second ballot. If you've not received any emails it might be worth checking spam folder for the last few days in case it's gone there(?) Incidentlaly, for those in the know. Whenever they talk about 'new/extra seats available' what does this really mean? Is it a way of advertising less-than-expected sales figures (through the ballot or special/patron/industry figure seats), or is it because finalising the set means that 'new' seats (which they perhaps thought would have no view) have truly become available?
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 11, 2019 16:13:24 GMT
They've just announced extra tickets and automatically entered the past losers into a new ballot. Whoop. We won. Go check your emails. Good luck everyone.
edit: Just seen that @queertheatre beat me to the news.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 10, 2019 16:01:32 GMT
Without logging in, if you go to 'select your own seat' or 'best available' for some dates like this one www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/tickets/14242 then the error message is 'not available' whereas if you try it for others like this one www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/tickets/14208 then the error message is that it's sold out. I don't know if this reflects some difference in the underlying availability but hopefully it does. Edit: I don't know if it makes a difference, but that's checking on mobile
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 9, 2019 23:27:08 GMT
On the website some of the earlier shows are as sold out, but most of the later ones seem to just be off sale (listed as 'not available') so I'm hoping that those refer to extra returns or unsold tickets.
I'm pretty sure for Network some of the day tickets could be bought over the phone (standing ones, other than in the last few days) so hopefully those outside of London will be in with a chance.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Dec 30, 2018 21:42:34 GMT
Not in any order, the five that most stick in my mind from 2018 are:
- BIRTHDAY PARTY (Harold Pinter Theatre) Eerie & excellent. - BRIEF ENCOUNTER (Empire) Such fun! - JOHN (NT) Not quite as wonderful as The Flick, but still great. - THE KING AND I (palladium) I didn't think this would be my cup of tea but I really enjoyed it. - AN OCTOROON (NT) I didn't catch this at the orange tree but it was fab
...although I'm not seeing SWEAT til the new year. Biggest disappointment was definitely VERY VERY VERY DARK MATTER.
Looking ahead to 2019 I'm currently most looking forward to seeing Philip Glass' AKHNATEN again. Also have high expectations for Annie Baker's ANTIPODES. And really hoping that Laura Wade's THE WATSONS transfers to London.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Dec 8, 2018 1:30:45 GMT
Oof. This is sounding more and more interesting. Slightly nervous that some of the comments make it sound like Very Very Dark Matter, but might give it a go anyway.
For those who have been, how high is the stage? Is the view from the from row likely to be okay?
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Dec 7, 2018 19:54:08 GMT
Although I can't see the actual seatplan, it does list the number of tickets available at each price for each performance like usual. Assuming that's correct, it looks like there's still a reasonable number of seats still available for most days (lots of notes of 9+ seats)... particularly considering there's only ~1/2 day left for ballot winners. Given that it was free to enter, I wonder if a proportion of ballot winners have changed their minds when it comes down to stumping up for actual tickets.
As a fellow ballot-loser, here's hoping that there's a decent number of tickets left for a second go at tickets, whether it's through day seats, a regular sale or another ballot...
|
|