I've read more simplistic, dull and general CP reviews than this one but they all happened to be positive ones. However you never hear anyone complain about those. It seems this reviewer actually had the 'nerve' to give specific actors a negative review by name (gasp!) and that is upsetting.
Look, if you are an artist and can't handle a bad review or two, then you shouldn't be in the theatre world which is full of rejection and criticism. The woman is entitled to her opinion and she gave it based on the performance she saw. Writing back as a cast member and saying she was wrong...how do you know? You're on stage and not in the audience. It's a totally different and unbiased perspective.
Although its hard to be unbiased with someone pointing out before the show how hard the cast worked and that they are volunteers and have day jobs. That's making an apology for what you are about to see and it sets the cast up for even more scrutiny....which is probably why this reviewer was tougher.
I saw Camelot and agree with some of what the reviewer says but not all of it. What did she say that was so horrible anyway? That she thought a couple of the actors didn't interpret their characters strongly enough? That the orchestra was off and the music was kind of a mess? That is hardly a scathing review. Let it go.
And calling her writing 'superficial' and her a 'hack'? She's writing for City Paper not the New York Times. The general public doesn't want an in depth analysis of the show. They want to know if it is worth their money and entertaining. She served that purpose well.
Kudos to the cast of Camelot for a good performance. I enjoyed it for the most part. And thank you to the reviewer who wasn't afraid t give some specific criticisms.
Let's be real for a minute....Anyone who stayed on on as a dancer or otherwise after the first round of full board resignation last February followed by evacuation by the rest of the staff shortly thereafter should have had the good sense to get the 'hell out of dodge' a year ago. They certainly had the opportunity.
Those few dancers that are left made the choice to sign on for ANOTHER season even after they decried mistreatment...going to the board about multiple issues with the artistic leadership, being told last year their pay may not come...knowing full well all the controversy and great potential risk by signing a contract for yet ANOTHER season. But they did it anyway and were persuaded to by the artistic staff. Most of the dancers last year had the good sense to leave when they saw everything come to light publicly (in City Paper, P&C and witnessing it first hand)...why anyone would sign on for another year after knowing and seeing all that happened is beyond me...and why any new dancer would not do their research before signing on to move to Charleston to work for that company this past year is stultifying to say the least..so forgive me if I dont sympathize with people who CHOSE to be in the position they are in...ignoring the multitude of red flags and warning signs.
No art is worth having to endure such repetitive negativity and misery...unless you simply crave that sensation.
Well according to the reviewer the actors werent faulted. Just one actor was faulted. It's a tiny room, pretty easy to hear just about anything, and I had the same hearing issue the reviewer is talking about.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper