RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
At Bgw again to watch the second show, lets see if it improves
At Bgw again to watch the second show, lets see if it improves
All For One
- Thread starter CastleOSullivan
- Start date
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Not to be too disagreeable, however...
Actors like designers, stage managers, directors, producers, audio engineers, electricians, musicians, and everyone else involved in theater are human and have no greater or less tendency as a group to be lazy, and ineffectual.
I will say, techs have to work harder then everyone else around them or they don't make the cut, just due to the pure volume of work involved. (of course as a former designer I am biased)
CastleOSullivan said:
Not to be too disagreeable, however...
Actors like designers, stage managers, directors, producers, audio engineers, electricians, musicians, and everyone else involved in theater are human and have no greater or less tendency as a group to be lazy, and ineffectual.
I will say, techs have to work harder then everyone else around them or they don't make the cut, just due to the pure volume of work involved. (of course as a former designer I am biased)
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Instead of making uninformed assessments of cast/crew capability, I feel more comfortable judging the casting/directorial/production staff.
Even if it is the case that there are a few bad apples in the bunch on the front line, it falls on the show's management to get those problems resolved before it shows to an audience. If that means replacing people, so be it. If that means reassigning parts to make it work, so be it. If that means firing your casting director because the entire cast is incapable of performing their parts, so be it. It all ultimately falls on the shoulders of the show's management structure and it is their job to make it work.
Instead of making uninformed assessments of cast/crew capability, I feel more comfortable judging the casting/directorial/production staff.
Even if it is the case that there are a few bad apples in the bunch on the front line, it falls on the show's management to get those problems resolved before it shows to an audience. If that means replacing people, so be it. If that means reassigning parts to make it work, so be it. If that means firing your casting director because the entire cast is incapable of performing their parts, so be it. It all ultimately falls on the shoulders of the show's management structure and it is their job to make it work.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Mics(mostly) worked in the 8:45 show, seemed like a substantial improvement from the first show to me.
Mics(mostly) worked in the 8:45 show, seemed like a substantial improvement from the first show to me.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
I had the free reserved tickets for the 10pm show on Friday. Went to the park at 9:00 just or the show. Got front row seats, and they made an announcement about 1 minute after we sat down. The show was cancelled due to approaching bad weather. Theater ushers said go to guest relations to exchange the tickets for another night. Guest relations said "nope, sorry, we aren't doing that." I emailed the park asking them to reconsider. It was a nice perk for passmembers, but not cool to not let us do it another night instead. It won't cost them a dime.
I had the free reserved tickets for the 10pm show on Friday. Went to the park at 9:00 just or the show. Got front row seats, and they made an announcement about 1 minute after we sat down. The show was cancelled due to approaching bad weather. Theater ushers said go to guest relations to exchange the tickets for another night. Guest relations said "nope, sorry, we aren't doing that." I emailed the park asking them to reconsider. It was a nice perk for passmembers, but not cool to not let us do it another night instead. It won't cost them a dime.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Returning from Disney World tonight and coming here for reviews of this show...
Ugghhhh...
Are you sure you're not being too hard on it? The people here sometimes have impossible standards (this includes me for absolute certain). Is this one of those cases, or is it really as bad as you're saying?
I was really looking forward to this show. Is it a good show being performed poorly or a bad show all around?
Returning from Disney World tonight and coming here for reviews of this show...
Ugghhhh...
Are you sure you're not being too hard on it? The people here sometimes have impossible standards (this includes me for absolute certain). Is this one of those cases, or is it really as bad as you're saying?
I was really looking forward to this show. Is it a good show being performed poorly or a bad show all around?
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Well I can't wait to see this show......In August.
Well I can't wait to see this show......In August.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
The performance does not feel smooth, but the set and music are perfect.
CoolDrMoney said:
The performance does not feel smooth, but the set and music are perfect.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
If it's the opening we're talking about with the crowd participation, I would say the latter. As for the rest of the show, I do believe it had the potential to be good, and very good at times if they fixed the performance and technical issues and tied up some loose ends. I don't think the show overall will ever reach a level of "fantastic" or "amazing" this season, mainly because of that opening number that botches half the story up. Next season, however, I think if they cut the opening number/preshow with the crowd participation, and simply added a small scene that explained what happened, who the villain and the three musketeers are without botching the storyline, then it could reach those levels. I think the preshow/opening as it goes right into the tavern scene confuses the crap out of the crowd, which is the main issue with the show right now, I just want to know what is going on. For this year, however, if they're going to keep the preshow/opening they need to find a way to elaborate and explain the story to the crowd more than what I saw on Friday.
That being said, I've heard a number of people who said they enjoyed it on Friday, and the crowd overall seemed to enjoy it (I think it's mainly because of the special effects that actually did work(lots of oooos and ahs)). I would say I and others are critiquing the show a lot more than most other people ever will. However, I'm just trying to keep in mind that this show and genre was a shot in complete darkness for the park, and like anything, it will be a learning process, but hopefully they are committed to improving it in the future. I think they definitely needed to give themselves more time to prepare knowing this. And for those who saw the show both yesterday and today, it's going to take a lot more time to work out the kinks that this show has than just one day.
CoolDrMoney said:
If it's the opening we're talking about with the crowd participation, I would say the latter. As for the rest of the show, I do believe it had the potential to be good, and very good at times if they fixed the performance and technical issues and tied up some loose ends. I don't think the show overall will ever reach a level of "fantastic" or "amazing" this season, mainly because of that opening number that botches half the story up. Next season, however, I think if they cut the opening number/preshow with the crowd participation, and simply added a small scene that explained what happened, who the villain and the three musketeers are without botching the storyline, then it could reach those levels. I think the preshow/opening as it goes right into the tavern scene confuses the crap out of the crowd, which is the main issue with the show right now, I just want to know what is going on. For this year, however, if they're going to keep the preshow/opening they need to find a way to elaborate and explain the story to the crowd more than what I saw on Friday.
That being said, I've heard a number of people who said they enjoyed it on Friday, and the crowd overall seemed to enjoy it (I think it's mainly because of the special effects that actually did work(lots of oooos and ahs)). I would say I and others are critiquing the show a lot more than most other people ever will. However, I'm just trying to keep in mind that this show and genre was a shot in complete darkness for the park, and like anything, it will be a learning process, but hopefully they are committed to improving it in the future. I think they definitely needed to give themselves more time to prepare knowing this. And for those who saw the show both yesterday and today, it's going to take a lot more time to work out the kinks that this show has than just one day.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Well, I mean, I don't know that very many people are all that familiar with the particulars of the plot of the book, so what can it hurt the show if the show's storyline differs from that of the novel? Is that really a negative?
Matthew said:
Well, I mean, I don't know that very many people are all that familiar with the particulars of the plot of the book, so what can it hurt the show if the show's storyline differs from that of the novel? Is that really a negative?
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
I don't think the show's storyline differs much from the novel other than that fact I mentioned about Cardinal Richelieu not being mentioned in the show. I think the issue is that they took a portion of the novel for the show, which is fine, but then they took that portion and tried to explain the conflict and characters cheesily in a preshow with crowd participation, and then just hop right in the middle of that portion of the novel. This just makes the story development seem half-assed, even if it is mostly accurate.
CoolDrMoney said:
I don't think the show's storyline differs much from the novel other than that fact I mentioned about Cardinal Richelieu not being mentioned in the show. I think the issue is that they took a portion of the novel for the show, which is fine, but then they took that portion and tried to explain the conflict and characters cheesily in a preshow with crowd participation, and then just hop right in the middle of that portion of the novel. This just makes the story development seem half-assed, even if it is mostly accurate.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Well.......... I watched the 10:30 showing last night. Sat pretty close up front and didn't get it. The microphones were cutting in and out and if they didnt give me damn near a heartattack with those flash guns. I thought maybe if I didn't sit so close maybe that was the issue of me not understanding but I see from the many comments I may be wrong.
Well.......... I watched the 10:30 showing last night. Sat pretty close up front and didn't get it. The microphones were cutting in and out and if they didnt give me damn near a heartattack with those flash guns. I thought maybe if I didn't sit so close maybe that was the issue of me not understanding but I see from the many comments I may be wrong.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
Oh, I see. Okay, so I follow you.
Like I said, I just came back from Disney World. While there, I saw the "For the First Time in Forever" Frozen sing-along show. Basically, all that is, is two narrators playing "Arendelle Historians" telling the story of the movie before Elsa and them show up at the end to do the finale. Sounds to me like something like that could work here, with some kind of narrator coming out and, in an entertaining way, bringing the crowd up to speed on the part of the story they're getting ready to watch.
Matthew said:
Oh, I see. Okay, so I follow you.
Like I said, I just came back from Disney World. While there, I saw the "For the First Time in Forever" Frozen sing-along show. Basically, all that is, is two narrators playing "Arendelle Historians" telling the story of the movie before Elsa and them show up at the end to do the finale. Sounds to me like something like that could work here, with some kind of narrator coming out and, in an entertaining way, bringing the crowd up to speed on the part of the story they're getting ready to watch.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
In addition to the absence of Cardinal Richelieu (who only got a quick off-hand mention), there were two other important plot points that got left out. First, D'Artagnan falls in love with Constance, so Milady poisons Constance to get revenge on D'Artagnan. Second, Milady was previously married to Athos, which explains the kiss. Maybe that was mentioned and I missed it due to the malfunctioning mics.
As far as the musketeers in the show went, I thought Porthos had the best lines and performance, while Aramis was a complete non-entity. It was like some guy wandered on stage & they just threw a blue tabard on him. The actors who played Athos & D'Artagnan were decent, but looked similar enough that with all the action going on, I sometimes got confused about who was who unless they were close to each other (D'Artagnan has the longer blond hair).
If BG can tell the entire story of "A Christmas Carol" in 25 minutes, it's a shame "All For One" couldn't achieve similar success. The problem, I think, is that this is a "stunt spectacular" show, and so time is spent on stage fighting & stunts instead of plot. That's a valid choice (although better exposition is still needed to "set the stage"), but the only way it works is if the stunts are indeed "spectacular." The "All For One" folks clearly have a lot of work to do.
In addition to the absence of Cardinal Richelieu (who only got a quick off-hand mention), there were two other important plot points that got left out. First, D'Artagnan falls in love with Constance, so Milady poisons Constance to get revenge on D'Artagnan. Second, Milady was previously married to Athos, which explains the kiss. Maybe that was mentioned and I missed it due to the malfunctioning mics.
As far as the musketeers in the show went, I thought Porthos had the best lines and performance, while Aramis was a complete non-entity. It was like some guy wandered on stage & they just threw a blue tabard on him. The actors who played Athos & D'Artagnan were decent, but looked similar enough that with all the action going on, I sometimes got confused about who was who unless they were close to each other (D'Artagnan has the longer blond hair).
If BG can tell the entire story of "A Christmas Carol" in 25 minutes, it's a shame "All For One" couldn't achieve similar success. The problem, I think, is that this is a "stunt spectacular" show, and so time is spent on stage fighting & stunts instead of plot. That's a valid choice (although better exposition is still needed to "set the stage"), but the only way it works is if the stunts are indeed "spectacular." The "All For One" folks clearly have a lot of work to do.
RE: New Show for 2016: All For One
If I remember correctly, the original Aramis was the one who got injured during rehearsal, so that may be the problem there.
Flyer said:
If I remember correctly, the original Aramis was the one who got injured during rehearsal, so that may be the problem there.
