Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

I still think, even if they were going to be like the one's Nora posted that they still would be kind've cheesy/creepy. If they are going to be life size, that would just increase the weird factor, I would rather have people dressed up in costumes than puppets.

Plus, what Nora posted was Cirque du soleil, this is Scott we're talking about not Cirque du soleil producers. So, I don't think we're going to get the puppets like the ones Nora posted.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

But Matthew, trying to imitate Cirque de Soleil's style is what brings us masterpieces like Entwined. ;)
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

Seriously?!  That's all they make?  I assumed it was some sort of salary.  Do they get paid for the entire day or just the hours they perform?
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

Just the hours they perform. Not necessarily even 40 hours. Could be more, could be less. Plus canceled shows, weather, or park closings cut pay.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

I thought we discussed this way back a while ago. Performers get scheduled a shift, they clock in and do warm-ups, perform, and in between shows they rehearse or relax a bit. Then they clock out for a lunch break once each shift then clock back in and then clock out finishing their shift. Therefore they do not get paid just for being on stage, they also get paid in between shows when they are not technically on break.

It is way better than say $7.65 an hour, just saying it is still a fairly good rate.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

I am feeling like Matt on this one. WOW! A salary/contract seems way more appropriate for this kind of work. It's in New York too! $20 bucks an hour doesn't look like much to a New Yorker when a pack of smokes is $8 bucks and and a loaf of bread is $5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Planeteer and Smatt
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

Nobody has mentioned this yet, but it says in my Pass Member calendar that London Rocks will be opening in May. However it didn't say any specific day or week, but it definitely said it's opening in May.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

May sounds about right with Zachary's time frame or with or near the Food & Wine Festival.

This is actually not something new. I remember back when American Jukebox was around, some shows didn't start until peak season.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

pandorazboxx pid=92946 dateline=1393269936 said:
Entertainers in this industry are not paid a lot. These types of jobs are hopefully springboards to bigger shows/roles. I think it's like a resume builder.
Exactly. In the entertainment industry theme parks are right above cruise ships which is pretty much the bottom.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

I don't even want to know how much this show cost. Who goes to a themepark to watch a broadway production? I cant imagine the level of money they had to spend to bring in those names in to produce this show. If anything, it seems like Scott is using this to improve his clout in the broadway world... Also, I can't imagine what it's gonna cost to actually run the program.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

Just saying, but the cost of those big names is not as expensive as other things in this show. I really hope the things in this show are well done or else it will be the biggest failure attendance wise much like Verbolten.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

James said:
For the record, nothing at the park is remotely close to a broadway show. More like a really good art's college production level.

That's more or less my point. Why are you bringing in expensive broadway artist to prepare a themepark show. London Rocks! will be no Fantasmic! or World of Color I'm sure... So what are they trying to achieve by allotting what I'm sure is quite a bit more of the budget to Broadway designers and choreographers in roles that probably won't even matter to the general public? People don't care about who produced the show at a themepark, they care about the content... And considering there's all sorts of crap going on with the budget, perhaps I'm just trying to convey that it makes no sense to spend money on these things that aren't being produced to that level.
 
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

Like I said, those broadway artists are not as expensive as some of the other things they have going on for London Rocks! In fact, those broadway artists are probably dirt cheap compared to everything else being spent for this show. Although, the things is while the General Public may not care about Broadway names, the industry cares. If you see a big name, you attract the better talent and therefore you can produce the better product. Though people in the industry know the reputation of businesses and from the general understanding is that Busch Gardens does not have a good reputation, Entertainment wise.

With the use of these Broadway artists, perhaps the goal is to eventually work to produce Broadway level shows. To get to that level, they may want to work with those kinds of artists. Consider it a long-term investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Planeteer and Smatt
RE: London Rocks! (2014 to Present)

Sigh.  Remember Imaginique?  Irish Thunder??  Extremely successful shows that kept people coming back again and again.  Excellent choreography, skill, talent, entertaining.  Remember Entwined?  Didn't think so.  I couldn't even stand Kinetix when that was being performed.  Around the end of Irish Thunder and Imaginique (although the latest Irish show is pretty good), I really felt the quality and entertainment factor of the shows at BGW started suffering badly.  But what do I know....
 
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad