ASU Gammages 14-15 Season: Webber, and Schwartz, and Fosse, oh my...

While writing up my next video game post tonight, I was following along to the live stream of ASU Gammage's 2014-15 season announcement. I'm a little mad at this blog right now because for some reason, none of my work saved so now I have to go back and rewrite the damn post. Grumble grumble grumble...

Add to that my very underwhelming response to the season and I'm not a happy camper tonight. But before I rewrite the video game post, here are my brief thoughts on the 2014-2015 50th Anniversary Season of Gammage:

Kinky Boots (Sept. 16-21, 2014) - The one and only show I'm really interested in seeing at Gammage next season.

Pippin (Dec. 2-7, 2014) - It's not often that Phoenix Theatre gets a show before Gammage does but because they'd had the rights since before the Broadway Revival actually happened, that's what we've got going on right now. Yes, the tour will probably have flashier, more big-budget spectacle, but you can also see it at Phoenix Theatre for the next two weeks in a much more intimate space (probably a little cheaper too).

Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (Jan. 13-18, 2015) - Seen it. At Gammage.

Dirty Dancing (Feb. 17-22, 2015) - Baby, you stay in that corner. If I want to watch this story, I'll pull it up on Netflix. But I'm much more likely to just watch the Everything Wrong With video again.

Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella (Mar. 10-15, 2015) - The version with Brandy in the 90s was all I really ever needed to see.

Motown (Apr. 21-26, 2015) - I've never been one for musical revues so I'll just listen to a Motown playlist on Pandora or Spotify instead.

The Phantom of the Opera (May 27-June 7, 2015) - Seen it. At Gammage. Plus, I've got Gerard Butler as the Phantom on DVD thank you very much. I'd much rather get some friends together and Mystery Science Theater 3000 the hell out of that.

SPECIAL ENGAGEMENTS

Chicago (Mar. 27-29, 2015) - Seen it. At Gammage. And another fun one to MST3K. Or just have the world's most boring drinking game where you only drink when you can see Renée Zellweger's pupils.

Wicked (Aug. 26-Oct. 4, 2015) - Let's see, we had The Lion King at Gammage this season. And the season before that was Les Miserables (plus Phoenix Theatre is doing it in the coming months). That must mean Wicked gets back in the rotation.  Also. Seen it. At Gammage. And New York.

Other thoughts:

Obviously The Book of Mormon is still a no-show. The long-standing rumor (that-I-have-absolutely-no-evidence-to-support-but-we-all-talk-about-anyway-so-don't-sue-me) has for years been that allegedly Ira Fulton is a major supporter of ASU/Gammage and opposes the mockery of his faith in the show so it will never come through the roadhouse or supposedly he'll pull his funding. I hear this year after year but I also heard through a variety of theatrical back channels this year that Gammage had secured the tour rights anyway. Guess not. Well, I'll spend my money elsewhere. It's just a shame I can't compare to that housing market money.

Overall, it's a very safe 50th season:

• Two Andrew Lloyd Webber shows (Joseph and Phantom)
• Two Stephen Schwartz shows (Pippin and Wicked)
• Two Bob Fosse shows (Chicago and Pippin again)
• Two movie adaptations (Kinky Boots and Dirty Dancing)
• A musical from the "classic" era (Cinderella)
• And an everyone-loves-the-music musical revue (Motown)

(A previous version of this post had a needlessly snatchy bit about the presentation itself. Upon further thought, I've decided to remove it).

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the upcoming season. What do you think?

Double Double, Toil and Trouble: We've Got Magic to Do

Review of Pippin at Phoenix Theatre and Equivocation at Southwest Shakespeare Company

Last weekend, I attended the opening night performance of Pippin alongside many of my co-workers at Phoenix Theatre and followed it up Saturday night with a performance of Southwest Shakespeare Company's Equivocation. This wound up being one of the most oddly thematic one-two punches of theatre I can ever remember seeing.

Pippin features a troupe of performers telling a fictionalized version of the life of Pippin, son of Charlemagne. Equivocation features a troupe of performers working with William "Shagspeare" telling a fictionalized version of events in which the renowned playwright is commissioned to write a play about the infamous Gunpowder Plot.

Both productions showcase the idea of theatricality - often jumping in and out of their respective plays-within-the-plays, breaking the fourth wall, and embracing the magic of live theatre (Pippin somewhat literally on that last one). This focus on theatricality, however, also served as a metaphorical fork in the road of these two productions: one path really worked for me while the other did not.

Follow Up to Putting AZ Back in AZ Theatre

I have had a couple people reach out with some questions regarding my last post so I thought I'd take the time to add a bit more food for thought.

The brunt of my criticism was directed at Arizona Theatre Company. Due to many of shows being their co-productions with other regional theatres, this is where we end up getting the highest ratio of out-of-state to local talent (save for the touring houses like Gammage). I then opened up those criticisms to the likes of Phoenix Theatre, Actors Theatre, and Southwest Shakespeare. I should have done a better job specifying that when I was speaking of these other companies, it tends to be a few roles here and there (rather than entire productions). But they are often the Lead roles in those productions.

Side note: I did not speak to Arizona Broadway Theatre as another local Equity house because I have not actually seen any of their shows and so it slipped my mind. Same with Theatreworks if they have made the jump to Equity house (as I've only seen Ragtime out there). But it is my understanding that they both have cast shows in the same way (bring in a New York/LA actor for the lead(s) and cast the rest locally).

I'm not completely opposed to this practice but I wish it were more of a last resort than it seems to be. From a business perspective, I guess I have a kind of Local First mentality in this regard. And artistically/communally, I've watched people leave town saying things like, "the opportunities just aren't here and those that are will go to out of town talent over me."

I should take a second now to emphasize that I'm never actually IN any of the casting sessions at any of these companies so what I'm saying is really all pure conjecture on my part. That said, let's look at some examples.

Pippin just opened at Phoenix Theatre this past weekend and I find it hard to believe there wasn't anyone local who could have played the Leading Player and/or Pippin but both of these roles were cast from a New York casting call. And that's not to take away anything from the performances of those two actors (which I'll try to write about later in the week) but I could have also seen a handful of local actors who would sunk their teeth into those roles. Going back to my original post, something like casting Kathy Fitzgerald in Gypsy makes sense because that's a name that means something in Phoenix and (even though it was before my time with the company) I remember Phoenix Theatre built a marketing campaign around her. But when we bring in that out of town talent without any kind of name recognition, we lose that option and have to rely much more on good word of mouth about their performances.

Actors Theatre's marketing of 4000 Miles was an example of utilizing this option with the local twist. I don't know if it was an intentional marketing strategy but everything I saw about the show also mentioned Patti Suarez (with many people throwing in superlatives like "Valley-favorite" before her name). You couple that with performances in a venue much more appropriate for their current audience than Stage West and you have sell-out houses. When they could afford to bring in out-of-towners, I personally think it was hit or miss. Bringing in someone when they were the originator of the role or someone who had done the show before (a la Triple Espresso or Andy Warhol: Good for the Jews?) makes sense, but bringing in the leads when there are local actors willing and able (a la Dead Man's Cell Phone or In the Next Room (or The Vibrator Play)) was money that might have been better spent elsewhere. Again here, I'm not speaking to whether or not the performances were good, but rather if they were worth the added costs when compared to a local artist.

I also saw Southwest Shakespeare Company's Equivocation this past weekend and I think it is a great example of why this mentality of casting out-of-towners is NOT necessarily needed (and really the whole "living within their means" side of my argument as it was a scaled-down production compared to some of their other recent works). This is another one I'll try to formulate a more focused write-up about later this week but I loved everything about that show and it is a testament to the talent we have around town. Now, does that come as a result of Director David Barker's involvement across the Valley scene? Maybe. When I think about the Southwest Shakespeare shows I've really enjoyed the pass few seasons, it has been those with David Barker or David Vining at the helm. I would submit that those two work on and see enough theatre around town that they have a great grasp on the community. And this knowledge of who's out there puts them in a position where they are able to identify somebody who might be great for a role. Other directors with less of an external focus in the community might have a much smaller idea of what talent we actually have in town.

There's also certainly an argument here that the local actors just aren't showing up to the auditions so the companies have to look elsewhere. I've certainly sat through auditions where people I knew just didn't show up. Hell, I myself have backed out of a handful of auditions (though I always notify the company because I know how frustrating no-shows are). There's a chicken and egg thing at play here, too. Regarding the local actors I do see on stage: do I see the same actors on these stages because other actors don't show up? Or do the other actors not show up because they always see the same actors onstage and think "what's the point?"

Or do I see the same faces because everyone shows up and I just have an over-inflated sense of the talent pool? As always, I'm eager to hear your thoughts about this as well.