NYTimes.com: For amusement park fans, summer is all about new rides. But if taking the 180-foot drop at the recently opened Goliath roller coaster at Six Flags Great America sounds like an afternoon gone horribly wrong, a new batch of live shows offers more down-to-earth pleasures.
10 comments:
I'm torn about this. One on hand I feel like these shows are dumbing down theater and sacrificing actual content for money. On the other hand however, I believe that if you start building a child's love for theater at a young age, they may be more engaged as they grow older and make their own choices. This is something I think is very important as it could help facilitate a shift from theater being a thing that "old people" do to something that is more universally appreciated.
I agree that I find that these shows dumb down theatre in a sense. They are standard, and they provide nothing new to the creativity of theatre. Now I'm not saying there isn't a place in the world for this type of production, and it is great that aspiring performers get a chance to prove their skills at such a high caliber venue. Disney has a big influence on the entertainment industry and being able to be performing for Disney is a huge career break, but it does leave something to be desired. Theatre encompasses aspects of both entertainment and art, and some people, myself included, find more value in creating something that sticks with people and gets them to join in a discussion about a larger concept.
I personally agree with the idea to make these 'cotton-candy' shows popular. Instilling the idea of theatre in a child's age really young could have the potential of changing their perspective on it forever. Disney has the right idea with these short entertainment shows and have proven so over time. Amusement parks need more than rides to keep a full park of people entertained. However, these so called 'dumbed-down' shows have the potential of giving several theatre-savvy people a bad taste in their mouth. I support what they are doing, but they have to be carful with their plan of attack.
I really like the idea of having musical theater shows to watch in amusement parks. As a frequent summer amusement park goer I find myself waiting hours in line for a ride that lasts maximum two minutes. With the rising prices of amusement parks currently I feel like I'm wasting my hard earned money on uncomfortably waiting in line with a bunch of sweaty strangers, while I watch the rich stranger zoom past me with the extra fifty dollar legal cut people line. So having the ability to sit down for 30 minutes and get a high quality show definitely feels like amusement parks are trying to come up with ways to make up for the discomfort.
I also enjoy the fact that they are not playing by union rules. I have heard and seen all too often that people in the union tend to be people who at the end of the day just want their pay check and go home. It's nice to go that they are giving people a chance who really care about the craft.
I think this is great. There is absolutely no reason to have profound or life altering theatre in an amusement park. Kids are not going to leave a show with a desire to discuss a "larger concept." The purpose of these shows is simply to entertain and expose children and their parents to musical theatre.
As an aspiring actor I definitely want to look into working a summer in Disney or another amusement park. It is a perfect opportunity to exercise what I'm learning in school and do something that exposes kids to live theatre.
To me these are not shows that a little and insignificant they are stepping stones in some peoples careers or ways to do some smaller jobs. I have to disagree with Alex and Sam this is not dumbed down theater if anything it is smarter theater. The ability to put song, dance, dialogue, action and keep to a plot in under thirty minutes is an incredible task. The amount of effort that has to go into these small pieces are enormous and that is not something that should be taken for granted.
I think these shows are a great idea for a multitude of reasons. The shows introduce theater to kids at a younger age, which is what the world of theater and art needs at this time considering many supporters of theatre are getting older and eventually we will need new supporters. Another reason these shows are a good idea is because of the transition to Broadway or professional musical theatre. The article mentions that it prepares actors for the rigor of Broadway, which is often one of the most troubling things that Broadway actors face. The final reason I support these shows is because of the technical achievement that some of these shows. I saw Finding Nemo in Disney and it was one of the most beautiful shows I've ever seen.
I'm horrified that these amusement parks don't abide by Equity rules. Re: Nikki, I'm sorry that you've had a negative experience with union members. But is the eagerness to work a non-union show a question of how much someone cares about their craft, or how desperately these [likely early-career] performers need a job? I am particularly concerned about the performers in these locations, since Disney theme parks especially have been known for overworking their employees. The union regulations are there to a) protect the actors, first and foremost, and b) to make sure other people in the industry don't justify lower pay and/or fewer protections because "such-and-such production could do it." Though the pay grade for "London Rocks" sounds aaaaalmost close to a small theater role ($414.96/week for a lead doing 42 shows; I believe Equity guidelines for a small professional theater say an actor should get $500/week PLUS benefits for a traditional 8-show week...are my numbers right?), the reality is that these performers are spending way more time and energy than they would in a traditional theater setting because of the "always-on" nature of their work. More the reason to protect them!
That being said, I had no idea that such well-renowned composers were writing for these shows, and I'm impressed! That in itself is also a lesson in how artists (especially writers/composers/lyricists) need to diversify their portfolios in order to keep working and keep up with the industry.
I personally have never seen a show at an amusement park or Disney, except for extreme diving or a circus performance. I wouldn't have expected that caliber of the performance is equal to a Broadway show. I have always assumed that the shows at parks are created for children and that the performs were people who acted on the side. I guess I need to go to a nicer park than the Great Escape by my place at home. Talk about stamina and repetition, doing as many as 42 shows per a week is insane, that is six shows a day. Six times you need to get in and out of rehearsal, mic, makeup, hair, warmup your body and voice, have high energy. I don't know how exhausting that job could possibly be. Next time I go to a big park, I will make the effort to see a show, but ultimately I'm there for the rides.
I totally agree with this article! As someone who went to Disney throughout their child and grew up watching the Disney channel religiously I would definitely credit a major portion of my love for theatre to Disney. I feel that the company as a whole is able to do this because they are such good story tellers. I know who to bring an audience into the world and keep them there to hear the story. They know how to use song and dance and other theatrical elements to increase the effectiveness of their craft. I will continue to applaud the work they do, and I know that my kids (when I have them) will grow up also with Disney.
Post a Comment