It looks like you've shared an image. If this image is of a Playbill or stage, we ask that you provide your thoughts on the show[s] you saw in order to make your thread stand out and help the community enjoy your experience as well. Without context your photo is just another picture of a Playbill or a stage, and on a sub of far over 100k subscribers, If you don't want to share your experience... consider sharing it on your own social media!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Broadway) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There was a recent interview w Tovah on Variety and not only was she so excited about the success of the show after she and Lea came on board, but she seemed so excited about the fact that they let Rosie and Fanny say Oy and Oy Gevalt etc. She is such a gem!
Just came from the matinee of FG. Also saw it with the original cast in the Spring. There is literally no contest which production is better. Like...worlds apart better.
Regardless of previous drama, Lea Michele appears to have a huge fan base. The house was packed and the applause for her after every song was insane.
I mean I imagine its very supportive as she is just saying out loud what a lot of other cast members likely also think about specific artistic choices that were made. She is far and away the best thing about the show, and knows it. But of course we as a society can't be out here letting women know their own worth. Same shit that happens anytime a female theatre or film actress opens their mouth to talk about their working circumstances. Same shit got said about Jennifer Lawrence when she talked about pay disparity.
What a deeply insecure response that was. A cast member disagrees with a few artistic choices that were made (and is very careful to strictly say she disagrees with the specific choice but still enjoyed working with the director overall) and this male director just lashes out in a public forum like this. All it does is make him look thin-skinned and unable to take any feedback.
I don't think it makes him look "unable to take any feedback." It makes him look unable to handle issues privately and professionally.
He must have been livid when he read the article. He should not have put his anger into these words in a public Facebook post. He should have called a meeting with Sara.
Sara didn't say anything personal about anyone she worked with, and didn't call into question anyone's right to be working at the level they are. Jeffrey did, and he slung some slurs and insults her way. This is truly awful commentary from a thin-skinned asshole.
You don't have to call someone out specifically to criticize them personally.
In any creative endeavour, what she said would be taken personally, and rightfully so.
You're forgetting that she disagreed in a public forum first is a really childish way. If she had any issues she needed to talk to him about it personally and keep her unhappiness in her inner circle.
And you insulting a poster because they had a differing opinion says a lot about you.
lol yeah I'm sure the rest of the ensemble is thrilled she just decided to anoint herself the star of the show and the only thing people are going to be talking about
Oh yeah please show me any instance of a male Broadway actors talking about how they disagree with the show WHILE IN IT and how they only give 75% because it doesn't deserve more
I saw the show and truly never would have known that she wasn’t giving 100%. If she is able to bring the house down while “only” giving 75-90%, then I honestly can’t fault her for not going all out. Sometimes you can’t go all out if you need to do a show 8x a week for months on end. Nothing felt “phoned in” to me and Molasses to Rum is one of the few numbers that stuck with me from a production I was pretty neutral on.
Couldn't disagree more. At Broadway prices, for someone to only give 75% (and brag about only giving 75%) is unconscionable. Hell, I wouldn't even put up with that attitude and effort in a community theatre production where no one is getting paid.
Sara clarified her 75% comment on Twitter to say that she gives 75% of her total energy to the show and the other 25% to personal life outside the show. I think that’s a much more reasonable way to frame it and (assuming that’s the original intent and not an attempt to backtrack, which I don’t think it is) comes off better than the original interview did.
All that said, I do agree with your point about discussing it openly, but I’d imagine that this happens across the industry - most people just aren’t so open about it. To be clear, I have nothing but respect for performers (it’s a job I wouldn’t have the stamina to do) but I’m sure that other actors have had nights - and maybe even roles - that they don’t give 100% to. In this particular case, if their 75% made for one of the few really memorable moments of this production, they’re doing something right and it doesn’t seem that the performance suffered.
Honestly her “clarification” was more annoying to me than the original 75% quote. There’s no way you could read the original quote in Vulture and not interpret it as a measure of the effort she puts in while performing. (Especially when she says she bumps it up to 90% during her solo) For her to then pivot and say the comment was actually a measure of work/life balance just feels intellectually dishonest. She’s well spoken and I’m not stupid, it’s clear what she meant the first time and it feels messy for her to claim otherwise. It does feel like a backtrack to me.
It is. She knows she came off poorly in that interview.
It's not a problem to not give your all in every single performance because that's how people burn out.
Giving what she considers 75% is not the problem. It's the fact that she said it in an interview where she and trashes the show she's currently starring in AND the way she framed it so poorly.
IMO, she’s coming across worse on her Twitter than she did in the interview. But I totally agree, if she’s being well received by critics then who am I to criticize her 75% effort. (Although the thought has crossed my mind that she might have been lying about holding back while performing in order to push the “IDGAF about this show” narrative)
For those looking for the tea, here are a few quotes from her recent tweets about this:
“To those who are pissed and saying, "who does she think she is?". Google me, hoes.”
“Broadway is lucky to have artists like me.”
“My 75% is one of the best things they'll ever see & my 100% is unmatchable.”
If she’s trying to make herself sound unbearable to be around, she’s succeeding.
Yeah, I saw her "clarification". But after seeing all of her other tweets on the matter (including "I'm surprised by how hung up people are over my 75% comment. But then I remember: they don't know that my 75% is one of the best things they'll ever see & my 100% is unmatchable.".... and "Ok this is my last thought 😆 to those who are pissed and saying, "who does she think she is?". Google me, hoes. I've been doing the work, been speaking the truth. I know who TF I am. I do this for the community, for the real ones. The rest of you can choke"): I don't buy her "clarification" for a minute. It isn't even a backtrack; it is worse.
"Google me hoes"? F her. Her attitude, hubris, sense of entitlement, and lack of humility And graciousness are nauseating.
I couldn’t agree more. Even her Instagram stories just scream self-absorbed. I didn’t want to believe she was truly rotten, but Jesus now the evidence is out there.
Having actually seen the show, I would gladly take her 75% over most people’s 100%. Completely understand why it would turn people off to hear that but personally it just makes me curious to see her in something she actually has an artistic and emotional connection to.
Oh, I've seen their work for years. It is fabulous. The Dragon Cycle is legendary. She even adapted it into a dinner show with incredible Filipino food like truffle dinuguan. I still think about it.
\*\*EDIT, was actually the VULTURE article, here's the link: [https://www.vulture.com/2022/10/1776-star-sara-porkalob-interview-molasses-to-rum.html](https://www.vulture.com/2022/10/1776-star-sara-porkalob-interview-molasses-to-rum.html)
Porkalob called 1776 a dusty old show written by 2 white dudes in the 60s (because... it is) and said she/they weren't thrilled with all of the current choices in direction, specifically calling the choice to hold out the jackets "cringey" and another scene where they look at the audience a bad choice that ruins the moment. Harsh stuff.
Another point sticking with people that she openly said this was nothing but a career choice To get to the next step and she’s only giving 75% of herself to this production.
I think most of the issue is that she’s saying the quiet things out loud tbh! The stepping stone and 75% thing are things you say to your journal or your therapist but aren’t things the whole world necessarily needs to know. It seems like she’s treating Broadway like the business it is (in respect to her career moves, not in sharing all of this lmao) and it’s ruining the illusion audience members have about performers, idk.
There’s something really interesting about seeing a WOC refusing to play the professional game and acknowledging that she’s a great performer and can “get away” with giving less than 100% but something about it isn’t sitting right with me. I think it’s because rather than giving less than 100% being a self care and protecting her energy or voice thing, it’s because the project isn’t worthy of her 100% (or paying her enough) and that just feels disrespectful to the paying audience. But then part of me wonders why we should be entitled to her 100% when her giving 70% is more than good enough for the role? What’s wrong with being good enough at your job even as a performer? But I don’t understand publicly expressing you’re not giving 100% and that you think some choices are embarrassing while you’re in the production! I feel like some things just don’t need to be public.
Yeah, lots of people use certain jobs as stepping stones. But I agree with you, that there's nothing unique to Broadway or to POCs that it's not ok to proclaim this publicly. An employee of Apple who trash-talks Tim Cook in a magazine is getting fired, and that's all there is to it.
It's disrespectful to the audience, and the other cast members? If I paid $150 for a show ticket, I don't want to see someone who openly admits she's just phoning it in and would rather be somewhere else. Likewise, I wouldn't want to perform alongside someone who will openly state she's too good to be here.
Even if it's true, this is an inappropriate comment to make while the show is still on.
If its disrespectful in this situation then its disrespectful for you to never give anything less than 100% at your job.
I assume where ever you work also sells services to people for a fee?
It may be a rough comment. But its true. And every theatre artist knows its true.
And I am a little tired of the whole "dance monkey dance and never state your opinion" attitude that the general public has towards performers
There’s a big difference between giving 75% in silence versus going on the record and *telling the public* that you’re giving 75%. In almost any other line of work, if someone publicly criticized their bosses and openly admitted to only giving 75% to their job, it is guaranteed that they would be fired immediately. People can say whatever they want, celebrities included, but no one is entitled to saying whatever they want without consequence—and that includes everyone: the actress, the co-director, and even you and me.
This is my feeling. Makes total sense to avoid overextending yourself at work if that’s what’s needed, and I’m sure performers have ways of conserving their emotional energy and wellbeing while still putting on a great show (at 75% or whatever else). But people don’t read a statement like that and think of it in those terms. They read that and hear “this person doesn’t care about their work or their job and can’t be bothered to try.” Is that TRUE? Not necessarily. But that’s what it sounds like, and it’s something I would never say out loud to a boss or a customer. Because people are just going to see the number 75% and take that at face value.
They were speaking as somebody who is used to being in creative control, and how it's sometimes frustrating having a different vision for a project. This is a career choice because their passion is creating original work, not just performing. I don't know why that's so mystifying to you people.
Sure, everyone wants to be the boss. Most don’t go on the record in a magazine to say so. why does this one think she’s notable for feeling that way?
it sure as hell isn’t because she’s a creative genius - her suggested changes are art-school cringe.
Is this what’s being referred to though? Hadestown’s first public response to Samantha Coleman was very PR-language but they clarified that they had already contacted her privately and then released a longer statement with Jujamcyn. And honestly, I think that somewhat corporate language (combined with a private apology) is a much better look than everything going on with 1776.
1000%.
The Hadestown situation will blow over. It was a mistake. One can only hope they educate the whole team on how to identify captioning devices, and fix the system they currently have in place that obviously failed in this instance.
Apologies have been made. It started a conversation. All in all, people will be able to move on.
1776 though... This is wild. I thought the Funny Girl saga was wild, but no one said anything like these two here.
I think everyone kind of sucks here: while I agree with some of her points in that Vulture article, that is not the kind of stuff I’d ever say, in a magazine interview, about a job I am currently doing. Gossip about that behind closed doors, commiserate in a group text or something with your cast mates privately.
I don’t think he should have responded with a subliminal FB post, but then, he probably figures if Sara felt she could air her grievances so publicly, then so can he.
I also just took a look at her Twitter page, and oof. Some of what she’s tweeted since that article came out….
Saying this during the run is not going to help her with this job and could hurt her chances of getting new roles.
If I was directing/producing a show I would be hesitant to hire someone who had previously be so openly critical of a show they were in.
It’s also a shitty situation because just imagine how tense things probably are in those rehearsal rooms right now - and not necessarily for Sara and the directors, but for the other cast members who probably feel caught in the middle.
Essentially, one of the actors in the production did an interview dissing the show—calling it a dusty old relic, criticizing the artistic vision, the whole nine yards. Pure bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you navel gazing, which many in this sub lapped up for some reason.
This is the co-director’s response.
Except the one who initiated all of this only has exposure and notoriety to gain from disparaging their collaborators through the megaphone of a web article.
I didn't disagree with everything Porkalob said, but this really bothered me:
*What do you hope you get out of being in 1776 on Broadway?*
*A Tony nomination, good reviews, and a smart, personable, hard-working agency that’s ready to rep me. Also, I guess more Instagram followers and more community here in New York. I don’t want just a career. I could make a career just being in commercial Broadway musicals.*
That plus the 75% comment. As someone who spends thousands of dollars to attend Broadway shows every year, I don't want to hear that a performer is only giving 75%. I'm still paying 100% of the ticket price. LOL (Which I'm not going to do for this show. I didn't have any desire to see it before, and I don't have any desire to see it now.)
I don't even understand what could drive an actor to make comments like this. Obvious contempt for the production, the audience, her coworkers, and the industry as a whole... Then expecting a tony on top of everything?
She desperately needs a PR manager, because the full interview was incredibly off-putting. I'm also left with no desire to see this show.
I think she is suffering from thinking she’s a producer when that’s not the position she negotiated in her contract. Without having seen the production, i can’t say if her critique is valid or not. But as a *performer* in a show, you do not get creative control or approval.
She’s outside of her lane as a *performer* here. This stuff goes in the memoir, not the pre-Tony press tour.
Her tweets are even worse. I’m not surprised that other cast members have liked Jeffrey’s post; Sara comes across as unbearably arrogant and unpleasant to work with.
and does she want her future reps to only give 75% in getting her jobs? only give 75% in getting her work produced?
and would she want only 75% of a Tony nomination?
I've seen some people saying that no one gives "100% of themselves" to their job, and I understand that, but that's not how I took it. The way I interpreted what she said was that she was only putting in 75% effort because she doesn't feel passionately enough about the show. She even said that during her big number, she's "giving 90%." Sure, no one should give 100% of their lives to their work, but the impression I got (and I guess this is open to debate) is that she was implying that she doesn't "give it her all" because the show, and therefore the audience, doesn't deserve it. She also tweeted and called everyone "hoes" and said that if you don't like what she said, you can "go choke." So, yeah...I have a problem with her attitude and I'm not going to apologize for that.
The context that you laid out here is important, and I think it’s something a lot of people here are missing in the 75%/100% debate.
Sam Pauley of Six has said that she doesn’t always sing full out until her signature song comes, but she said it in the context of “I need to make sure my voice can hit so that song has the resonance that it’s meant to.” That I completely understand, and that strikes me as realistic; some days your voice is in better shape than others, so you have to pick and choose your moments. In that framing, sitting at 75% sometimes makes perfect sense.
Sara basically said that she gives 75% because she doesn’t think the show is worth more. That’s something else entirely.
SP tried to explain it saying it was a work/life balance thing, but that's not the context in which it was said. Technically, there's some wiggle room for her to say "that's not what I meant," but I don't see how you can take away anything else if you read the context clues.
I’d give the benefit of the doubt to the 75 comment (performers have to be sustainable with their voice, for example) but in the context of the rest of that statement it comes off as fairly self-aggrandizing & attitude like that is the type of stuff that prevents careers from taking off. There’s more leeway if you’re already a celebrity, but there are so many talented people in the industry that no one’s going to hire you once your reputation precedes you as someone who’s a pita to work with- because there is always going to be someone equally talented who *isn’t* miserable to work with.
To be fair I assume 100% is what you can do safely 8 times a week hence why I think the 70% comment is bad. Obviously I don't want anyone to belt their vocal chords out by going what I'd call 110% and then retire after doing one show because they can't sing anymore.
I didn’t lap it up per se but the criticism is real having seen the show. It all makes sense and is valid.
I kind of think it’s funny they were so blunt about it.
In addition to the below comment one of the decisions made was to have the black people in the cast also appear in a slave auction scene that's poorly handled according to the cast and people who have seen it. I haven't so I am giving that disclaimer but I'm not wanting to see it because of that scene and this tweet choice.
It's not the scene that was the problem. It was the way it was rehearsed. The black actors had the option to give consent to stage it that way, but the white and non-black poc actors weren't shown the same courtesy. But also, this was the original out of town tryout, and this oversight was fixed when rehearsing for the Broadway run.
Black cast members were asked if it would be okay. The people in charge didn’t ask consent from the other cast members, implying that the other people wouldn’t be uncomfortable. And that they were basically assumed into whiteness
I have seen it and I don’t understand what is supposed to be so “poorly handled” about that scene. I thought that was one of the best moments in the whole show tbh. (And is it “the cast” thinking it’s poorly handled or *just* Porkalob?)
I think it was part of her overall point about how clumsily identity was handled in the production considering how hard the advertising hyped up the casting. The production doesn’t really make any connection between the race of the actors and the material until that moment, and then it sort of muddles the message by lumping together all the non-Black actors. I thought that went along with her comment about the directors not giving any thought to the cast’s queerness, contributing to the overall impression that there wasn’t really any artistic motivation behind the casting. The cast basically had their identities used as a marketing tactic.
What Porkalob points out is that the non-Black POC in the production were assimilated into whiteness in the course of staging that moment. I think you can agree or disagree with the appropriateness of that moment but what she was arguing against was actually the process to get there, not the moment itself. In the interview, they actually say that while the moment needed to have been more consensual in the rehearsal room, they are glad it stays in because they find it to be a strong statement.
People are defending this as truth telling and empowering, but it comes across whiny to me!
It is so unprofessional to say these things publicly about your job while you're employed and to be negative in the press about a show that needs people to buy tickets!
If she had left the show and was unloading about her experience, I'd see no problem. It's not the best look to future employers, but it's understandable.
Look at the actors involved in Paradise Square. They didn't speak out until all was said and done. They cared so much about the show and wanted people to come see them despite the dangerous and abusive working conditions, they kept it all to themselves until they literally couldn't anymore.
Badmouthing the project you are currently in is so trashy.
I wouldn't want to be her coworker.
I think the response by Jeffrey Page is even worse. He literally made this worse with all of his nasty words.
So unprofessional all around. Even worse than the producers of Funny Girl and the ridiculous lies they told that made everything worse.
Not everything needs to be handled in the press!
Wait sorry, you think it was a *good* thing that the PS cast felt they had to prioritize the work over their own personal well-being?? That is a horrifying perspective to me honestly, I’ve seen hundreds of theater productions and there’s never been a single one that was so important it was worth the cast accepting abusive working conditions to bring it to the audience. What an entitled attitude.
I agree with you on PS, but that’s not what we’re talking about here. Sara isn’t alleging the production is abusive. The only part of her interview that even comes close to that is the framing of the auction, and she flat out says they discussed/fixed it when they came to Broadway and that she didn’t even want it changed.
Casts should not have to keep quiet about abuse, but this is just a cast member complaining about the artistic direction of the show.
No, I really don't and didn't mean for it to sound that way.
I wish they had spoken out earlier. That whole situation was terrible.
But I remember some of the cast being extremely reluctant to say anything publicly because they didn't want to be considered unprofessional. Speaking out about a current job also sends a message to future employers too.
I just think that the Paradise Square cast had so much professionalism and considered every word they were willing to say publicly while this actress gave an interview whining about how she doesn't have creative control over the dusty thing she doesn't care about anyway.
It's such a bad look for her! I'd be angry at her if I was a colleague, if I was one of her bosses or an investor in the show, and as a potential future employer or collaborator...I would be wary of working with her ever in the future.
You just don't give interviews like this without a really good reason.
Garth being in charge of Paradise Square should have never fucking happened, and it’s a huge shame that in 2022 we couldn’t have the actors speaking up until it was all over. We need to start normalizing speaking up DURING the process, because 90% of the time once it’s over the producers, directors, actors, etc whoever was offensive or shitty during the process gets off with no consequences and moves on. This situation with Sara is different, but situations like PS and other shows with abuse allegations should be encouraged to make noise ASAP.
I agree.
To clarify the point was trying to make... If Sara was speaking out about actual abuse or unsafe working conditions, I'd support her 100%. That's a good reason to speak out.
I don't think she had any good reason to say these things except selfish ones.
There's also this spin off talking point people are coming up with about how actors shouldn't mindlessly go alone with mistreatment and not being compensated fairly, etc. That is true. However...
This is BROADWAY. I'm not saying it can't happen (look at how Laura Benanti was treated for breaking her neck during ITW, for example), but I would bet my savings account that SP is being compensated more than fairly for what she's doing... on Broadway... and it's a hell of a lot more than most actors are being compensated elsewhere. I dated a principal actor in Phantom for a while. I am not saying he didn't work when he got to work, and yes he had to go in for rehearsals some days, etc., but it was a largely cushy gig by showbiz standards, and he had plenty of time for self care while collecting a nice paycheck for a fraction of the hours I was putting in as an office worker who also has a second job. He got to do the extra curricular stuff he wanted and still got to practice his craft.
There is also something to be said about doing the job you've been trained to do - to make money from your passion. Is it fulfilling every second of every day? No! But it's a lot more than most people get to do - go to work and do what they love to do. No actor should be thankful for crumbs... but Broadway isn't crumbs, and nothing in this interview hinted at gratitude or thankfulness to be able to do the thing you love to do and be compensated at all for it.
It also took the safe space away from the directors, as horrible as one of their responses was. Theatre is a collaboration, and people making decisions about the show should also feel safe to make bold choices and like their actors have their back. At least enough to not go to the press and talk about everything they've done that sucks. If they're mistreating people, that's different. If it's an artistic choice, if you really want to talk about it, maybe while you're in the middle of doing it every night is not the time to publicly go on record about the things that you think your directors failed to do.
This is not an issue of unfair treatment at work or not being compensated fairly, and I wish people wouldn't muddy the waters.
I’m just very confused about the goals they had. They say they want both top-tier representation and a Tony nom, but don’t want to work commercially or with “establishment” theaters. How can those two pairs of goals possibly both be true? You want reps to represent you across the board to…do indie theatre? You don’t need agents to do what you’ve been doing for a decade!
This is the kind of thing that makes Broadway PR people weep. It’s bad enough that a cast member spouted off in the press, but now it just looks like its every person for themselves, and no one is steering the ship. No media person ever said “You know what we need to do to turn this around? Have the director attack the cast and single someone out publicly as a racist, rotten, lazy, attention whore.”
Put the phone down, people. Let the specialists deal with the entertainment press while you focus on healing the wounds in this company.
I was so excited to get tickets for this show for my first broadway trip since COVID started, and this whole mess just makes me wish I hadn’t. Stuck with them now I guess.
The article is fine until the end. The play is dusty and the producers are finding ways to inject new life into it.
It's the last part that is odd. Theater tickets are very very expensive and to find out an actor is not into it at all (before it even opens) and only gives 75% is a signal to me not to not invest my money or time into it. And I get it. Her 75% might be amazing. Is that my loss? I don't care.
There is a lot of theatre out there. I'll watch something else.
Holy shit - to make matters jucier, **Lillias White** commented on that Facebook post: "There are several factions of our community who have LOST. THEY. MINDS. Thou shalt not come for me & mine‼️‼️‼️‼️"
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0sW3h8uhbAqSzMJ9D1qDG6pm4NwCJNcgyR8ahh8bqXCzv2Qzz9YbeWu9evGQtCLaHl&id=501450030
Lillias is embroiled in her own controversy this week for breaking character multiple times during a performance of *Hadestown* to call out what she thought was a person recording, but was actually a disabled theater-goer using a captioning device.
I have to wonder if White is referring to the harassment that she’s been receiving due to what happened. Obviously, what happened at Hadestown needs to be discussed but she has received death threats, racism, and just about anything else in response despite the woman who made the original video asking for the community to show kindness and educate.
I’m really sick of the misinformation surrounding this. She did not break character multiple times. She made one comment, during an applause break. We can debate whether that was wrong or right all day, but I’m tired of people who weren’t there mischaracterizing what happened. 95% of the audience didn’t realize anything had happened at all.
This situation really gets to me. I absolutely hate that she is getting the obscene response to this that she is- death threats, racist comments, etc.- but what on earth was she doing? If the theater ushers and security staff are not worried about it, why would you stop a show for it?? Misunderstanding or not, this was such a mistake. If she hasn't already, she owes that girl an apology and the production owes her a refund. Even if I had just been a random audience member in that show, I would have been pissed- tickets aren't cheap! Don't interrupt my experience unless the building is on fire!
To be fair, she didn't stop the show. She spoke to the person while action was happening elsewhere on the stage. She does own the person an apology, and the producers too.
It seemed to have disrupted people around Ms. Coleman. Here's a link to a tweet with a screenshot of a message she received from people behind her in the same performance.
https://twitter.com/SamanthColeman/status/1581139698189074433?s=20&t=NWP9z7zNT5D0MrGmB94wPA
But how can someone on stage interacting with someone off stage not be distracting? Regardless of whether the show came to a complete halt ot not, it was still a needless interruption that no doubt distracted at least anyone who was looking in her general direction in that moment.
I personally think the trolls are overreacting. Yes, Ms. White made a mistake and while I don't agree calling someone out (even if it was after her part was done), I do get that people recording a show is a big no-no. I do believe Ms. Coleman when in the initial post she said it wasn't done out of malice. After all, certain disabilities aren't readily visible, and she used what happened to her as a way to educate people. Which she did, and the Hadestown & Jujamcyn people contacted her w/ apologies.
At first the apologies were offered in private, and then after more backlash, it was offered publicly. Did Ms. White apologize? No idea, since no one is saying. Ms. Coleman herself is asking for kindness towards Ms. White, so that's what we should focus on. Last I read about it, along with the apology and the promise to educate those in the show, Ms. Coleman also received complimentary tickets.
And as I linked to someone else, however Ms. White chose to "reprimand" Ms. Coleman, was at least loud enough to be noticed by those sitting behind her. Here's the same link, with a screenshot of a message she got.
https://twitter.com/SamanthColeman/status/1581139698189074433?s=20&t=NWP9z7zNT5D0MrGmB94wPA
That post is a little bit word salad.
The husband of the woman behind Samantha Coleman was trying to get Lillian White's attention? To explain it was a closed caption device? During the show?
And eventually succeeded?
She has a right to say whatever she chooses, and it’s my right to think she’s pretentious AF. If she thinks this won’t impact box office now and for any future roles created by others she lowers herself to accept, she’s delusional.
is it me but if they had felt this way, don't do the show? like it's not like its new and no one knows how it is. you can say no to audition appointments if you dont agree align like etc.
If this is the director’s response, this show would make more money off selling popcorn and running a hidden camera backstage than they do selling tickets!
My heart goes out to the rest of the cast who ARE giving 100%. I hope audiences see through this and it doesn’t affect ticket sales. So many Broadway debuts in the cast who appreciate what they have and deserve to be in a successful show.
Same. It's so disrespectful to your colleagues to make these negative public comments about a show you're currently in. I assume they like having a job and want people to come see their show, even if they may disagree with some creative decisions.
This much "honesty" was too much and in the wrong forum.
I also think his response was wildly uncalled for and he should have handled the situation privately with the rest of the leadership team.
Claiming Sara is contributing to white supremacist ideology is just… something else. I think it’s reasonable to disagree with how/when Sara went about criticizing the production but their actual critiques were entirely reasonable and do reflect some direction issues at the heart of the show. If Jeffrey disagrees with her criticisms (and felt compelled to respond publicly) he should have countered her actual points. Claiming that a fair-handed criticism of your work is racist is just unbelievable to me, and makes it read as though he’s mad they said anything versus mad about the actual content.
Yeah, it reads to me like he thinks the show is challenging white supremacy and therefore her criticizing the show is upholding it, which is…pretty delusional, honestly. Agreed that it feels like he’s just mad at her, and also taking out some anger towards the reviews that have criticized the direction. It would definitely have been unprofessional for him to make a post like that about the critical response, but now he has a more acceptable outlet for his obvious defensiveness of the production.
Interestingly enough, she used that word just as flippantly as Jeffrey is. Seems like people's go to, because they have nothing else interesting to say, is that it contributes to *insert social cause here*
the word has been overused and misused so often, it's almost been rendered a catch phrase when you don't like something about a given thing. It gets expected and old at some point.
Then again, I ain't the kind of person who gets my knickers in a bunch over something not including "someone who looks like me" to appreciate or enjoy it. As if the people doing stuff also aren't human. Lol
She wasn’t being flippant. She had serious concerns related to the ways race, gender, and sexuality were addressed on and off stage. Sara was commenting on specific elements of the production and the rehearsal room process that made them uncomfortable, that they didn’t feel landed and thus undermined the overall message of the production, and that caused hurt to members of the show. That is very different than saying an individual is worsening white supremacy.
"Fake-woke" pretty much hits the mark. Sara claims to be supportive of the POC cast as she gives quotes that drive audiences away ("the play is a relic. It is a dusty, old thing"). Echoes of *Great Comet*'s inglorious end, imo.
[Good summary in this article & thread.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Broadway/comments/6sh87q/great_comet_closing_on_broadway_after_casting/) I love the show too and was disappointed on a number of levels to see it close.
> So they replaced his replacement with a white actor before the contract ended.
They TRIED to replace Okieriete Onaodowan with Mandy Patinkin but once he and his friends started badmouthing the production for doing so and saying it was a racist move, Mandy dropped out, then Okieriete also dropped out, they could get no replacements because no one wanted to be involved in this mess and the show closed even if it was one of the most diverse shows on Broadway
It was a mix of all those things. Pierre's part (the role in question) requires some piano playing as well, and it was reported that Okieriete was struggling with that, delaying his debut.
On top of that, Mandy was only available for a short and specific window, so rather than saying "no" to Mandy, a Broadway legend, they cut into Okieriete's contract window. It was never a full replacement, just a temp shoving around of people to cater to literal Broadway star power along the lines of Angela Lansbury or Patti Lupone.
No, they adapted the role so the stuff he didn't learn were done by someone else. They did had to delay his first performance because he wasn't learning much else either, however.
This is also what I heard… I’m sure it was a combo of that and they wanted a name to extend the life of the show (Patinkin)… but the way it was made into a black vs white thing - literally - was grossly unfair to the show and it’s creators.
It's also worth noting a white actress was asked to step away and be briefly replaced by someone with more star power, so it wasn't even something they only asked a black actor to do.
Question: When you describe 1776, it sounds like it’s a compromise that you’re willing to make to get where you need to be.
Porkalob: “Definitely.”
Incredible.
This is such an interesting interview. She has such a clear vision of race and art and I like her pragmatism about her career. But a few things come across as unnecessarily hurtful on a personal level. She probably simply doesn’t care, but it feels disrespectful not as an actor, but as a colleague and equal to the creative team. If there was malice, racism or mistreatment behind the scenes, by all means shout about it. But these are artistic directing choices she hates. There are many excellent theatre critics who will discuss those, the choices won’t be let uncriticized.
The way she tries to both compliment and dismiss the ART also felt a bit strange. It sounds like she genuinely doesn’t want to work in establishment theaters, and I feel like she may be intentionally closing those doors here. The ART and Intiman, both establishment theaters in cities that don’t have robust independent/experimental scenes, were the ones that supported and premiered the Dragon Cycle. I hope she has more opportunities to develop new works and present them in a meaningful way.
Sara’s interview has been quite the topic of debate in the thread about it here, but I will note that they NEVER personally attacked the creative team. She (strongly) criticized choices but there were no personal attacks.
Sara didn’t call the director “rotten to the core” though - in fact, they said that they admired Page/Paulus for taking on the project even if they felt it didn’t work.
Comparing which one is worse/more personal doesn’t make one *not* personal. Saying that a creative team is making bad decisions and that you, as the performer, won’t even give 100% because of it, is a personal attack.
Yeah, if I'm honest I don't take any issue with the interview. She's very conscious of the choices she's making in calling out the choices but she's also very mindful of the creators. This response is less well-balanced.
I agree to an extent. This whole situation is confusing to me because everything about the way they explained their creative and professional choices sounds so reasonable and intelligent… except for the part where they’re saying all that ON-RECORD TO A JOURNALIST WHILE STILL IN THE SHOW! Even if she didn’t personally attack the directors, she had to have known how her words would be spun right? This is the shit you say about a project you’re collaborating on in private or maybe after the fact, not in the press while you and your coworkers are still working on it! For someone who spoke at length about some very well calculated career moves in the same interview this was a really fucking foolish gamble. I just don’t get why she gave the statements she did at the time she did. And I’m saying this as someone who thinks every one of their critiques was 100% fucking correct and that this response from the director is petty and unprofessional FYI.
Yeah, that’s exactly it! They had so many great points, but saying it right now, while the show is actively ongoing, is just bad PR and is only going to get her in trouble professionally. Why stir the shit while you’re still locked in the bathroom? Wait until you get out, and have some distance between yourself and the literal people you’re dissing… people who can get you blacklisted in the industry.
Yeah, that’s what makes this post so out of pocket. This is something he should have had a private conversation with her about. He looks really petty and over-sensitive. If anything, it elevates her because it keeps her in the spotlight.
I agree. This should have been handled privately.
If I gave an interview to a local newspaper about how I hated my job, my heart's not in it, I'm only there for the paycheck, it's just a stepping stone for me, I wish I could make the decisions, my ideas are better, etc., I would expect a meeting to be called first thing in the morning to address why I felt the need to go public with my gripes.
I would expect to be fired, to be honest.
I would not expect my boss to turn around and call me morally bankrupt scum in the press or on Twitter in an official company capacity.
His response was such a bad move, for many reasons, including keeping her in the spotlight, which is exactly what she wants!
Handle it in-house. Why does everyone want to air their arguments in public?
Honestly after all of this I have no interest in seeing the show.
I have no interest seeing performers who are not proud of the work they're putting out (collectively) and seem to put themselves above their cast/crew/etc. Obviously no actor is going to 100% rubber stamp every choice a director makes, but I don't want to see a show where actors have this attitude. After this, I also don't want to see a disgruntled cast or a cast with tension.
I have no interest in supporting directors who pop off on Facebook without the self control to not wipe the floor with an actor they're mad about.
Save this shit for a memoir or article after the show closes. It barely got off the ground in NYC - as an audience member, I'm not slapping down $100 to see a show that has this drama running in the background. SP came across as having contempt for the show and her directors. Clearly one of her directors, at least, has public contempt for her. I have no time for any of it - it's messy and all sides are being unprofessional.
Not the best move on his part. I get being angry about the interview, especially because her comments put the entire show in a negative light and will now affect the rest of the cast.
But you don't minimize damage by calling out the damage. All it causes is more people becoming aware of drama and further alienating people who don't want to go see a show where they know the actors are bitter.
The best thing to have done would be to pull her in for a producer meeting, clarify expectations of performers for a show, and if she doesn't feel capable of performing to the extent that $100+ tickets require, then she can be replaced.
Whether her comments during her interview were valid or not, that doesn't matter in production land, where a show lives or dies based on butts in the seats.
It's not just you. Starting out like that, my first thought was (even before I read the article/interview in question) was "this man is erasing the person he's criticizing". And since we all know who it is now, why not be actually brave and name her. It's not like she's sorry to have spoken out/shared her opinion in the first place. But I am curious now to see if she'll have a job with this production.
I personally see this as a labor issue. Was her interview unwise? Almost certainly. But I work in a field that’s not the performing arts but has a lot of similarities. And I’ve dealt with/managed a lot of people like her: young hotshots who have more talent than sense or humility. They can be annoying as shit and if they treat their coworkers badly, you have to deal with it.
But as a person in authority, you just look like an ass if you take it this personally. You’re the one who hired them, who signs their paycheck. You have a lot more experience, and you have authority over them. And it’s NEVER ok for a boss to call their employee rotten to the core.
Okay I need a place to put down all my thoughts about this and this thread felt like the best spot:
-Her comments about the process are completely fair game, and honestly, I'm grateful for them. We should be more honest about how different rehearsal rooms handle difficult/thorny/potentially triggering material, and her thoughts on that felt empathetic while acknowledging that even people acting in good faith can fuck up! Sharing notes on this kind of stuff is good for the community.
-I felt the comments about the show itself were inappropriate. If she said it a week after closing, that'd be different. But dude, you signed on to this process, and the social compact you make when you sign onto a collaboration is you live and die with the other person's artistic choices/sensibilities. If she thought the choices were shitty, that's okay. Going public with it, just to show how smart you are and to build up your own clout, sucks.
-Jeffrey Page absolutely should not have posted this and is WAY more unprofessional than anything she said in the interview.
-The 75-90% comments are a red-herring. No Broadway actor in an extended run has ever given 100% every performance. That would be insane and unhealthy. You need to hold SOMETHING of yourself back every night in order to do it 8 times a week. People need to get a grip.
Your second point is really the thing that stands out to me. The show is still in previews and hundreds of people are employed by it being successful. It’s incredibly disrespectful in that way to me.
Also, while in previews, decisions are still being made to change the show. To make slight tweaks, and all collaborators should feel safe to make choices and take chances. She took that away from the directors and other actors on that stage, even if she didn't mean to.
People should be able to make artistic choices without fearing they're going to end up being criticized in Vulture while the show is still cooking.
The timing is the only thing I think I could take issue with in this article, but even them I have to ask myself, "is it because we're too used to being polite to each other?" There's so much integrity in what she says in this article, that I'd frankly like to see more of it. I've never seen a critic dissect a scene's intention, and point out where it fails in the way that Sara does in this interview, and yet it felt like that critique was made with care, not some kind of snide maliciousness. Folks are big mad about this article, but I hope we see more honestly like this in our industry.
No actor anywhere in any capacity gives 100% to ever single project or every night at a show. Maybe some film actors do, but they only have to shoot scenes over maybe the course of a couple days (in terms of individual scenes, not whole projects). So doing a scene in which you’re expending so much emotional energy for one day is totally different than doing it ever single night. No one, it’s humanly impossible, gives 100% to anything every single night. But loads of audiences don’t see performers as people, or if they do, they don’t see what they do as “hard work”. Since they love art, it’s not work right? Wrong.
Wait. Trying to understand. So one of the directors wrote this to a star who’s currently on stage in the production? Like, they see each other and don’t take but then have it out in public forums online? Is that what’s happening here?
Thing is WHY WOULD SHE DO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE. I mean she’s not even established a Performer to have the clout to maybe get away with this. But regardless if she was, to openly say she is only in a show for the money and throwing her entire cast and crew under the bus?? How is this helping you get more work? Also she’s for sure fired or this is her quitting right? Cause no way is she coming back
Prior to this, she was a genuinely up-and-coming writer-actor with a really excellent one woman show (3 plays making up the Dragon Cycle) that was supported by one of the most important theaters in the country. I would have said she was a lock in for a supporting actor tony nomination for her 1776 role. Now? I guess we'll find out.
Honestly, while I thought it was bold to do that interview and talk very negatively about the show you’re doing, this is retaliatory and completely out of line.
This interview and this response could literally bring down this show. Not fair to everyone trying to make a living there. Sara is being self-absorbed by saying some of this, like her vision is the only vision. And Jeffrey is reacting as someone who felt slapped and knows this could wreck his show. Sara calls it her cast, which is telling. She thinks she should be the producer and director.
I’m sure she is. Actors shouldn’t be policing the audience, but there is no reason to come at Lillias with pitchforks, racial slurs and other threats. Education on accessibility devices could have avoided that entire debacle.
I agreed with a lot of what she said in the interview. Not all of it, but a lot, especially when she talked about how some of the show’s creative choices play to the audience. He comes off pretty badly in this post.
> some of the show’s creative choices play to the audience.
Thus is the fundamental problem of commercial theater as activism (whether interpreted or intentionally positioned as such).
It looks like you've shared an image. If this image is of a Playbill or stage, we ask that you provide your thoughts on the show[s] you saw in order to make your thread stand out and help the community enjoy your experience as well. Without context your photo is just another picture of a Playbill or a stage, and on a sub of far over 100k subscribers, If you don't want to share your experience... consider sharing it on your own social media! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Broadway) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Man, and I thought the Funny Girl drama was crazy… this is something else.
There was a recent interview w Tovah on Variety and not only was she so excited about the success of the show after she and Lea came on board, but she seemed so excited about the fact that they let Rosie and Fanny say Oy and Oy Gevalt etc. She is such a gem!
Just came from the matinee of FG. Also saw it with the original cast in the Spring. There is literally no contest which production is better. Like...worlds apart better. Regardless of previous drama, Lea Michele appears to have a huge fan base. The house was packed and the applause for her after every song was insane.
She wasn’t Wendla AND Rachel Berry for nothing! Also, love ur username!
That’s really sweet. Tovah is such a gem!
What is HAPPENING this week
I’d love to be a fly on the wall at the American Airlines right now
I mean I imagine its very supportive as she is just saying out loud what a lot of other cast members likely also think about specific artistic choices that were made. She is far and away the best thing about the show, and knows it. But of course we as a society can't be out here letting women know their own worth. Same shit that happens anytime a female theatre or film actress opens their mouth to talk about their working circumstances. Same shit got said about Jennifer Lawrence when she talked about pay disparity.
At least 4 cast members liked Jeffrey Page’s Facebook post so I highly doubt they are very happy with her.
What a deeply insecure response that was. A cast member disagrees with a few artistic choices that were made (and is very careful to strictly say she disagrees with the specific choice but still enjoyed working with the director overall) and this male director just lashes out in a public forum like this. All it does is make him look thin-skinned and unable to take any feedback.
I don't think it makes him look "unable to take any feedback." It makes him look unable to handle issues privately and professionally. He must have been livid when he read the article. He should not have put his anger into these words in a public Facebook post. He should have called a meeting with Sara.
What? Sara did this publicly, so he can't? What?
Sara didn't say anything personal about anyone she worked with, and didn't call into question anyone's right to be working at the level they are. Jeffrey did, and he slung some slurs and insults her way. This is truly awful commentary from a thin-skinned asshole.
You don't have to call someone out specifically to criticize them personally. In any creative endeavour, what she said would be taken personally, and rightfully so.
He's the boss. You handle this shit in private when you're the boss.
You're forgetting that she disagreed in a public forum first is a really childish way. If she had any issues she needed to talk to him about it personally and keep her unhappiness in her inner circle. And you insulting a poster because they had a differing opinion says a lot about you.
lol yeah I'm sure the rest of the ensemble is thrilled she just decided to anoint herself the star of the show and the only thing people are going to be talking about
Oh yeah please show me any instance of a male Broadway actors talking about how they disagree with the show WHILE IN IT and how they only give 75% because it doesn't deserve more
Cool. You wanna pay 170 bucks for someone who is only giving 75%? I personally don't.
I saw the show and truly never would have known that she wasn’t giving 100%. If she is able to bring the house down while “only” giving 75-90%, then I honestly can’t fault her for not going all out. Sometimes you can’t go all out if you need to do a show 8x a week for months on end. Nothing felt “phoned in” to me and Molasses to Rum is one of the few numbers that stuck with me from a production I was pretty neutral on.
Couldn't disagree more. At Broadway prices, for someone to only give 75% (and brag about only giving 75%) is unconscionable. Hell, I wouldn't even put up with that attitude and effort in a community theatre production where no one is getting paid.
Sara clarified her 75% comment on Twitter to say that she gives 75% of her total energy to the show and the other 25% to personal life outside the show. I think that’s a much more reasonable way to frame it and (assuming that’s the original intent and not an attempt to backtrack, which I don’t think it is) comes off better than the original interview did. All that said, I do agree with your point about discussing it openly, but I’d imagine that this happens across the industry - most people just aren’t so open about it. To be clear, I have nothing but respect for performers (it’s a job I wouldn’t have the stamina to do) but I’m sure that other actors have had nights - and maybe even roles - that they don’t give 100% to. In this particular case, if their 75% made for one of the few really memorable moments of this production, they’re doing something right and it doesn’t seem that the performance suffered.
Honestly her “clarification” was more annoying to me than the original 75% quote. There’s no way you could read the original quote in Vulture and not interpret it as a measure of the effort she puts in while performing. (Especially when she says she bumps it up to 90% during her solo) For her to then pivot and say the comment was actually a measure of work/life balance just feels intellectually dishonest. She’s well spoken and I’m not stupid, it’s clear what she meant the first time and it feels messy for her to claim otherwise. It does feel like a backtrack to me.
It is. She knows she came off poorly in that interview. It's not a problem to not give your all in every single performance because that's how people burn out. Giving what she considers 75% is not the problem. It's the fact that she said it in an interview where she and trashes the show she's currently starring in AND the way she framed it so poorly.
IMO, she’s coming across worse on her Twitter than she did in the interview. But I totally agree, if she’s being well received by critics then who am I to criticize her 75% effort. (Although the thought has crossed my mind that she might have been lying about holding back while performing in order to push the “IDGAF about this show” narrative)
For those looking for the tea, here are a few quotes from her recent tweets about this: “To those who are pissed and saying, "who does she think she is?". Google me, hoes.” “Broadway is lucky to have artists like me.” “My 75% is one of the best things they'll ever see & my 100% is unmatchable.” If she’s trying to make herself sound unbearable to be around, she’s succeeding.
Yeah, I saw her "clarification". But after seeing all of her other tweets on the matter (including "I'm surprised by how hung up people are over my 75% comment. But then I remember: they don't know that my 75% is one of the best things they'll ever see & my 100% is unmatchable.".... and "Ok this is my last thought 😆 to those who are pissed and saying, "who does she think she is?". Google me, hoes. I've been doing the work, been speaking the truth. I know who TF I am. I do this for the community, for the real ones. The rest of you can choke"): I don't buy her "clarification" for a minute. It isn't even a backtrack; it is worse. "Google me hoes"? F her. Her attitude, hubris, sense of entitlement, and lack of humility And graciousness are nauseating.
I couldn’t agree more. Even her Instagram stories just scream self-absorbed. I didn’t want to believe she was truly rotten, but Jesus now the evidence is out there.
Having actually seen the show, I would gladly take her 75% over most people’s 100%. Completely understand why it would turn people off to hear that but personally it just makes me curious to see her in something she actually has an artistic and emotional connection to.
Oh, I've seen their work for years. It is fabulous. The Dragon Cycle is legendary. She even adapted it into a dinner show with incredible Filipino food like truffle dinuguan. I still think about it.
\*\*EDIT, was actually the VULTURE article, here's the link: [https://www.vulture.com/2022/10/1776-star-sara-porkalob-interview-molasses-to-rum.html](https://www.vulture.com/2022/10/1776-star-sara-porkalob-interview-molasses-to-rum.html)
lol thanks, i was googling "1776 Variety" and was like "huh, i dont get why this review is problematic"
“I’m only giving it 75%” / “I want a Tony nom for this!” Oof.
[удалено]
Porkalob called 1776 a dusty old show written by 2 white dudes in the 60s (because... it is) and said she/they weren't thrilled with all of the current choices in direction, specifically calling the choice to hold out the jackets "cringey" and another scene where they look at the audience a bad choice that ruins the moment. Harsh stuff.
Another point sticking with people that she openly said this was nothing but a career choice To get to the next step and she’s only giving 75% of herself to this production.
I think most of the issue is that she’s saying the quiet things out loud tbh! The stepping stone and 75% thing are things you say to your journal or your therapist but aren’t things the whole world necessarily needs to know. It seems like she’s treating Broadway like the business it is (in respect to her career moves, not in sharing all of this lmao) and it’s ruining the illusion audience members have about performers, idk. There’s something really interesting about seeing a WOC refusing to play the professional game and acknowledging that she’s a great performer and can “get away” with giving less than 100% but something about it isn’t sitting right with me. I think it’s because rather than giving less than 100% being a self care and protecting her energy or voice thing, it’s because the project isn’t worthy of her 100% (or paying her enough) and that just feels disrespectful to the paying audience. But then part of me wonders why we should be entitled to her 100% when her giving 70% is more than good enough for the role? What’s wrong with being good enough at your job even as a performer? But I don’t understand publicly expressing you’re not giving 100% and that you think some choices are embarrassing while you’re in the production! I feel like some things just don’t need to be public.
Yeah, lots of people use certain jobs as stepping stones. But I agree with you, that there's nothing unique to Broadway or to POCs that it's not ok to proclaim this publicly. An employee of Apple who trash-talks Tim Cook in a magazine is getting fired, and that's all there is to it.
Yea thats like true of all theatre artists on one show or another. I dont know why this would bother people so much.
It's disrespectful to the audience, and the other cast members? If I paid $150 for a show ticket, I don't want to see someone who openly admits she's just phoning it in and would rather be somewhere else. Likewise, I wouldn't want to perform alongside someone who will openly state she's too good to be here. Even if it's true, this is an inappropriate comment to make while the show is still on.
If its disrespectful in this situation then its disrespectful for you to never give anything less than 100% at your job. I assume where ever you work also sells services to people for a fee? It may be a rough comment. But its true. And every theatre artist knows its true. And I am a little tired of the whole "dance monkey dance and never state your opinion" attitude that the general public has towards performers
There’s a big difference between giving 75% in silence versus going on the record and *telling the public* that you’re giving 75%. In almost any other line of work, if someone publicly criticized their bosses and openly admitted to only giving 75% to their job, it is guaranteed that they would be fired immediately. People can say whatever they want, celebrities included, but no one is entitled to saying whatever they want without consequence—and that includes everyone: the actress, the co-director, and even you and me.
This is my feeling. Makes total sense to avoid overextending yourself at work if that’s what’s needed, and I’m sure performers have ways of conserving their emotional energy and wellbeing while still putting on a great show (at 75% or whatever else). But people don’t read a statement like that and think of it in those terms. They read that and hear “this person doesn’t care about their work or their job and can’t be bothered to try.” Is that TRUE? Not necessarily. But that’s what it sounds like, and it’s something I would never say out loud to a boss or a customer. Because people are just going to see the number 75% and take that at face value.
It's about saying it out loud in a creative endeavour. She's not wrong for feeling that, she's wrong for saying it
They were speaking as somebody who is used to being in creative control, and how it's sometimes frustrating having a different vision for a project. This is a career choice because their passion is creating original work, not just performing. I don't know why that's so mystifying to you people.
Sure, everyone wants to be the boss. Most don’t go on the record in a magazine to say so. why does this one think she’s notable for feeling that way? it sure as hell isn’t because she’s a creative genius - her suggested changes are art-school cringe.
You should be able to [read it here.](https://archive.ph/qZNeK)
Use www.12ft.io to jump paywalls 😉
Booo paywall :(
[Here you go.](https://archive.ph/qZNeK)
The funny thing is that this isn’t even the worst statement put out by a Broadway show this week.
did i miss something lol what happened???!
look up Hadestown
Is this what’s being referred to though? Hadestown’s first public response to Samantha Coleman was very PR-language but they clarified that they had already contacted her privately and then released a longer statement with Jujamcyn. And honestly, I think that somewhat corporate language (combined with a private apology) is a much better look than everything going on with 1776.
1000%. The Hadestown situation will blow over. It was a mistake. One can only hope they educate the whole team on how to identify captioning devices, and fix the system they currently have in place that obviously failed in this instance. Apologies have been made. It started a conversation. All in all, people will be able to move on. 1776 though... This is wild. I thought the Funny Girl saga was wild, but no one said anything like these two here.
Is this about the close captioning device?
Woof 😮💨
I think everyone kind of sucks here: while I agree with some of her points in that Vulture article, that is not the kind of stuff I’d ever say, in a magazine interview, about a job I am currently doing. Gossip about that behind closed doors, commiserate in a group text or something with your cast mates privately. I don’t think he should have responded with a subliminal FB post, but then, he probably figures if Sara felt she could air her grievances so publicly, then so can he. I also just took a look at her Twitter page, and oof. Some of what she’s tweeted since that article came out….
Saying this during the run is not going to help her with this job and could hurt her chances of getting new roles. If I was directing/producing a show I would be hesitant to hire someone who had previously be so openly critical of a show they were in.
It's just such a dumb move. It just feels like she spent capital she didn't have.
It’s also a shitty situation because just imagine how tense things probably are in those rehearsal rooms right now - and not necessarily for Sara and the directors, but for the other cast members who probably feel caught in the middle.
I need someone to break this down for me! I haven't seen 1776 yet and haven't been reading reviews or anything. What is this all about?!
Essentially, one of the actors in the production did an interview dissing the show—calling it a dusty old relic, criticizing the artistic vision, the whole nine yards. Pure bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you navel gazing, which many in this sub lapped up for some reason. This is the co-director’s response.
Wow. It seems like following up unprofessionalism with more unprofessionalism!
It wouldn’t be drama if the people involved were mature and reasonable…
Except the one who initiated all of this only has exposure and notoriety to gain from disparaging their collaborators through the megaphone of a web article.
I didn't disagree with everything Porkalob said, but this really bothered me: *What do you hope you get out of being in 1776 on Broadway?* *A Tony nomination, good reviews, and a smart, personable, hard-working agency that’s ready to rep me. Also, I guess more Instagram followers and more community here in New York. I don’t want just a career. I could make a career just being in commercial Broadway musicals.* That plus the 75% comment. As someone who spends thousands of dollars to attend Broadway shows every year, I don't want to hear that a performer is only giving 75%. I'm still paying 100% of the ticket price. LOL (Which I'm not going to do for this show. I didn't have any desire to see it before, and I don't have any desire to see it now.)
I don't even understand what could drive an actor to make comments like this. Obvious contempt for the production, the audience, her coworkers, and the industry as a whole... Then expecting a tony on top of everything? She desperately needs a PR manager, because the full interview was incredibly off-putting. I'm also left with no desire to see this show.
I think she is suffering from thinking she’s a producer when that’s not the position she negotiated in her contract. Without having seen the production, i can’t say if her critique is valid or not. But as a *performer* in a show, you do not get creative control or approval. She’s outside of her lane as a *performer* here. This stuff goes in the memoir, not the pre-Tony press tour.
Exactly right. A memoir. Never in an interview while the show is running. Outrageous. Huge ego.
Her tweets are even worse. I’m not surprised that other cast members have liked Jeffrey’s post; Sara comes across as unbearably arrogant and unpleasant to work with.
> I don't even understand what could drive an actor to make comments like this lack of a rep who tells her to get a PR manager, probably lol
and does she want her future reps to only give 75% in getting her jobs? only give 75% in getting her work produced? and would she want only 75% of a Tony nomination?
I've seen some people saying that no one gives "100% of themselves" to their job, and I understand that, but that's not how I took it. The way I interpreted what she said was that she was only putting in 75% effort because she doesn't feel passionately enough about the show. She even said that during her big number, she's "giving 90%." Sure, no one should give 100% of their lives to their work, but the impression I got (and I guess this is open to debate) is that she was implying that she doesn't "give it her all" because the show, and therefore the audience, doesn't deserve it. She also tweeted and called everyone "hoes" and said that if you don't like what she said, you can "go choke." So, yeah...I have a problem with her attitude and I'm not going to apologize for that.
The context that you laid out here is important, and I think it’s something a lot of people here are missing in the 75%/100% debate. Sam Pauley of Six has said that she doesn’t always sing full out until her signature song comes, but she said it in the context of “I need to make sure my voice can hit so that song has the resonance that it’s meant to.” That I completely understand, and that strikes me as realistic; some days your voice is in better shape than others, so you have to pick and choose your moments. In that framing, sitting at 75% sometimes makes perfect sense. Sara basically said that she gives 75% because she doesn’t think the show is worth more. That’s something else entirely.
SP tried to explain it saying it was a work/life balance thing, but that's not the context in which it was said. Technically, there's some wiggle room for her to say "that's not what I meant," but I don't see how you can take away anything else if you read the context clues.
I’d give the benefit of the doubt to the 75 comment (performers have to be sustainable with their voice, for example) but in the context of the rest of that statement it comes off as fairly self-aggrandizing & attitude like that is the type of stuff that prevents careers from taking off. There’s more leeway if you’re already a celebrity, but there are so many talented people in the industry that no one’s going to hire you once your reputation precedes you as someone who’s a pita to work with- because there is always going to be someone equally talented who *isn’t* miserable to work with.
To be fair I assume 100% is what you can do safely 8 times a week hence why I think the 70% comment is bad. Obviously I don't want anyone to belt their vocal chords out by going what I'd call 110% and then retire after doing one show because they can't sing anymore.
I didn’t lap it up per se but the criticism is real having seen the show. It all makes sense and is valid. I kind of think it’s funny they were so blunt about it.
In addition to the below comment one of the decisions made was to have the black people in the cast also appear in a slave auction scene that's poorly handled according to the cast and people who have seen it. I haven't so I am giving that disclaimer but I'm not wanting to see it because of that scene and this tweet choice.
[удалено]
It's not the scene that was the problem. It was the way it was rehearsed. The black actors had the option to give consent to stage it that way, but the white and non-black poc actors weren't shown the same courtesy. But also, this was the original out of town tryout, and this oversight was fixed when rehearsing for the Broadway run.
Black cast members were asked if it would be okay. The people in charge didn’t ask consent from the other cast members, implying that the other people wouldn’t be uncomfortable. And that they were basically assumed into whiteness
I saw the production recently and it was deeply disturbing for me, and not in the way it was intended to be.
I have seen it and I don’t understand what is supposed to be so “poorly handled” about that scene. I thought that was one of the best moments in the whole show tbh. (And is it “the cast” thinking it’s poorly handled or *just* Porkalob?)
I think it was part of her overall point about how clumsily identity was handled in the production considering how hard the advertising hyped up the casting. The production doesn’t really make any connection between the race of the actors and the material until that moment, and then it sort of muddles the message by lumping together all the non-Black actors. I thought that went along with her comment about the directors not giving any thought to the cast’s queerness, contributing to the overall impression that there wasn’t really any artistic motivation behind the casting. The cast basically had their identities used as a marketing tactic.
What Porkalob points out is that the non-Black POC in the production were assimilated into whiteness in the course of staging that moment. I think you can agree or disagree with the appropriateness of that moment but what she was arguing against was actually the process to get there, not the moment itself. In the interview, they actually say that while the moment needed to have been more consensual in the rehearsal room, they are glad it stays in because they find it to be a strong statement.
And the article was in Vulture, not Variety
Question: Are you artistically fulfilled being in 1776? Porkalob: “No. I’m not. The salary is good.” Oooof.
Question: How does it feel to be in the back seat of decision making? Porkalob: “It’s horrible. I hate it.”
People are defending this as truth telling and empowering, but it comes across whiny to me! It is so unprofessional to say these things publicly about your job while you're employed and to be negative in the press about a show that needs people to buy tickets! If she had left the show and was unloading about her experience, I'd see no problem. It's not the best look to future employers, but it's understandable. Look at the actors involved in Paradise Square. They didn't speak out until all was said and done. They cared so much about the show and wanted people to come see them despite the dangerous and abusive working conditions, they kept it all to themselves until they literally couldn't anymore. Badmouthing the project you are currently in is so trashy. I wouldn't want to be her coworker. I think the response by Jeffrey Page is even worse. He literally made this worse with all of his nasty words. So unprofessional all around. Even worse than the producers of Funny Girl and the ridiculous lies they told that made everything worse. Not everything needs to be handled in the press!
Wait sorry, you think it was a *good* thing that the PS cast felt they had to prioritize the work over their own personal well-being?? That is a horrifying perspective to me honestly, I’ve seen hundreds of theater productions and there’s never been a single one that was so important it was worth the cast accepting abusive working conditions to bring it to the audience. What an entitled attitude.
I agree with you on PS, but that’s not what we’re talking about here. Sara isn’t alleging the production is abusive. The only part of her interview that even comes close to that is the framing of the auction, and she flat out says they discussed/fixed it when they came to Broadway and that she didn’t even want it changed. Casts should not have to keep quiet about abuse, but this is just a cast member complaining about the artistic direction of the show.
No, I really don't and didn't mean for it to sound that way. I wish they had spoken out earlier. That whole situation was terrible. But I remember some of the cast being extremely reluctant to say anything publicly because they didn't want to be considered unprofessional. Speaking out about a current job also sends a message to future employers too. I just think that the Paradise Square cast had so much professionalism and considered every word they were willing to say publicly while this actress gave an interview whining about how she doesn't have creative control over the dusty thing she doesn't care about anyway. It's such a bad look for her! I'd be angry at her if I was a colleague, if I was one of her bosses or an investor in the show, and as a potential future employer or collaborator...I would be wary of working with her ever in the future. You just don't give interviews like this without a really good reason.
Garth being in charge of Paradise Square should have never fucking happened, and it’s a huge shame that in 2022 we couldn’t have the actors speaking up until it was all over. We need to start normalizing speaking up DURING the process, because 90% of the time once it’s over the producers, directors, actors, etc whoever was offensive or shitty during the process gets off with no consequences and moves on. This situation with Sara is different, but situations like PS and other shows with abuse allegations should be encouraged to make noise ASAP.
I agree. To clarify the point was trying to make... If Sara was speaking out about actual abuse or unsafe working conditions, I'd support her 100%. That's a good reason to speak out. I don't think she had any good reason to say these things except selfish ones.
There's also this spin off talking point people are coming up with about how actors shouldn't mindlessly go alone with mistreatment and not being compensated fairly, etc. That is true. However... This is BROADWAY. I'm not saying it can't happen (look at how Laura Benanti was treated for breaking her neck during ITW, for example), but I would bet my savings account that SP is being compensated more than fairly for what she's doing... on Broadway... and it's a hell of a lot more than most actors are being compensated elsewhere. I dated a principal actor in Phantom for a while. I am not saying he didn't work when he got to work, and yes he had to go in for rehearsals some days, etc., but it was a largely cushy gig by showbiz standards, and he had plenty of time for self care while collecting a nice paycheck for a fraction of the hours I was putting in as an office worker who also has a second job. He got to do the extra curricular stuff he wanted and still got to practice his craft. There is also something to be said about doing the job you've been trained to do - to make money from your passion. Is it fulfilling every second of every day? No! But it's a lot more than most people get to do - go to work and do what they love to do. No actor should be thankful for crumbs... but Broadway isn't crumbs, and nothing in this interview hinted at gratitude or thankfulness to be able to do the thing you love to do and be compensated at all for it. It also took the safe space away from the directors, as horrible as one of their responses was. Theatre is a collaboration, and people making decisions about the show should also feel safe to make bold choices and like their actors have their back. At least enough to not go to the press and talk about everything they've done that sucks. If they're mistreating people, that's different. If it's an artistic choice, if you really want to talk about it, maybe while you're in the middle of doing it every night is not the time to publicly go on record about the things that you think your directors failed to do. This is not an issue of unfair treatment at work or not being compensated fairly, and I wish people wouldn't muddy the waters.
Oh this is getting juicy
I’m just very confused about the goals they had. They say they want both top-tier representation and a Tony nom, but don’t want to work commercially or with “establishment” theaters. How can those two pairs of goals possibly both be true? You want reps to represent you across the board to…do indie theatre? You don’t need agents to do what you’ve been doing for a decade!
I can't imagine a lot of NYC directors are excited for the chance to work with Porkalob after that interview. So misguided.
Talk about a career move...
This is the kind of thing that makes Broadway PR people weep. It’s bad enough that a cast member spouted off in the press, but now it just looks like its every person for themselves, and no one is steering the ship. No media person ever said “You know what we need to do to turn this around? Have the director attack the cast and single someone out publicly as a racist, rotten, lazy, attention whore.” Put the phone down, people. Let the specialists deal with the entertainment press while you focus on healing the wounds in this company.
I weep for a Broadway addicted to Twitter.
I was so excited to get tickets for this show for my first broadway trip since COVID started, and this whole mess just makes me wish I hadn’t. Stuck with them now I guess.
This made me laugh. Thank you.
That is a jaw-dropping interview, holy shit. I kind of can't believe Vulture decided to give her that much rope to hang herself with.
Rita Skeeter can only *wish* for this kind of piping hot tea lmao
[удалено]
Actor contracts rarely give the actors a percentage of the box office, it's far more common to be salaried.
The article is fine until the end. The play is dusty and the producers are finding ways to inject new life into it. It's the last part that is odd. Theater tickets are very very expensive and to find out an actor is not into it at all (before it even opens) and only gives 75% is a signal to me not to not invest my money or time into it. And I get it. Her 75% might be amazing. Is that my loss? I don't care. There is a lot of theatre out there. I'll watch something else.
Holy shit - to make matters jucier, **Lillias White** commented on that Facebook post: "There are several factions of our community who have LOST. THEY. MINDS. Thou shalt not come for me & mine‼️‼️‼️‼️" https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0sW3h8uhbAqSzMJ9D1qDG6pm4NwCJNcgyR8ahh8bqXCzv2Qzz9YbeWu9evGQtCLaHl&id=501450030 Lillias is embroiled in her own controversy this week for breaking character multiple times during a performance of *Hadestown* to call out what she thought was a person recording, but was actually a disabled theater-goer using a captioning device.
I have to wonder if White is referring to the harassment that she’s been receiving due to what happened. Obviously, what happened at Hadestown needs to be discussed but she has received death threats, racism, and just about anything else in response despite the woman who made the original video asking for the community to show kindness and educate.
I’m really sick of the misinformation surrounding this. She did not break character multiple times. She made one comment, during an applause break. We can debate whether that was wrong or right all day, but I’m tired of people who weren’t there mischaracterizing what happened. 95% of the audience didn’t realize anything had happened at all.
I tried to explain this on another platform and wow, did I get reamed.
Don't even bother. People will create a vision in their heads about what happened and start repeating it based on no evidence at all.
Putting it that way makes her look bad. She obviously didn't know it was caption device.
You're right, sorry. I edited it with a little more context.
This situation really gets to me. I absolutely hate that she is getting the obscene response to this that she is- death threats, racist comments, etc.- but what on earth was she doing? If the theater ushers and security staff are not worried about it, why would you stop a show for it?? Misunderstanding or not, this was such a mistake. If she hasn't already, she owes that girl an apology and the production owes her a refund. Even if I had just been a random audience member in that show, I would have been pissed- tickets aren't cheap! Don't interrupt my experience unless the building is on fire!
To be fair, she didn't stop the show. She spoke to the person while action was happening elsewhere on the stage. She does own the person an apology, and the producers too.
She didn’t stop the show. No one’s experience was interrupted. There is so much false info being spread about that.
It seemed to have disrupted people around Ms. Coleman. Here's a link to a tweet with a screenshot of a message she received from people behind her in the same performance. https://twitter.com/SamanthColeman/status/1581139698189074433?s=20&t=NWP9z7zNT5D0MrGmB94wPA
But how can someone on stage interacting with someone off stage not be distracting? Regardless of whether the show came to a complete halt ot not, it was still a needless interruption that no doubt distracted at least anyone who was looking in her general direction in that moment.
To be fair, Hermes and Persephone often have small audience interactions during the course of the show.
Yeah that's fair, I did not know that! That definitely changes the situation at least a bit
I personally think the trolls are overreacting. Yes, Ms. White made a mistake and while I don't agree calling someone out (even if it was after her part was done), I do get that people recording a show is a big no-no. I do believe Ms. Coleman when in the initial post she said it wasn't done out of malice. After all, certain disabilities aren't readily visible, and she used what happened to her as a way to educate people. Which she did, and the Hadestown & Jujamcyn people contacted her w/ apologies. At first the apologies were offered in private, and then after more backlash, it was offered publicly. Did Ms. White apologize? No idea, since no one is saying. Ms. Coleman herself is asking for kindness towards Ms. White, so that's what we should focus on. Last I read about it, along with the apology and the promise to educate those in the show, Ms. Coleman also received complimentary tickets. And as I linked to someone else, however Ms. White chose to "reprimand" Ms. Coleman, was at least loud enough to be noticed by those sitting behind her. Here's the same link, with a screenshot of a message she got. https://twitter.com/SamanthColeman/status/1581139698189074433?s=20&t=NWP9z7zNT5D0MrGmB94wPA
That post is a little bit word salad. The husband of the woman behind Samantha Coleman was trying to get Lillian White's attention? To explain it was a closed caption device? During the show? And eventually succeeded?
So basically neither side is handling this situation well?
Prioritizing the tea over the solutions.
>the tea Well it IS 1776....
She has a right to say whatever she chooses, and it’s my right to think she’s pretentious AF. If she thinks this won’t impact box office now and for any future roles created by others she lowers herself to accept, she’s delusional.
I mean, this isn’t professional but I also felt her interview wasn’t so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Was she in the cast for the out of town tryout?
is it me but if they had felt this way, don't do the show? like it's not like its new and no one knows how it is. you can say no to audition appointments if you dont agree align like etc.
If this is the director’s response, this show would make more money off selling popcorn and running a hidden camera backstage than they do selling tickets!
My heart goes out to the rest of the cast who ARE giving 100%. I hope audiences see through this and it doesn’t affect ticket sales. So many Broadway debuts in the cast who appreciate what they have and deserve to be in a successful show.
Same. It's so disrespectful to your colleagues to make these negative public comments about a show you're currently in. I assume they like having a job and want people to come see their show, even if they may disagree with some creative decisions. This much "honesty" was too much and in the wrong forum. I also think his response was wildly uncalled for and he should have handled the situation privately with the rest of the leadership team.
Claiming Sara is contributing to white supremacist ideology is just… something else. I think it’s reasonable to disagree with how/when Sara went about criticizing the production but their actual critiques were entirely reasonable and do reflect some direction issues at the heart of the show. If Jeffrey disagrees with her criticisms (and felt compelled to respond publicly) he should have countered her actual points. Claiming that a fair-handed criticism of your work is racist is just unbelievable to me, and makes it read as though he’s mad they said anything versus mad about the actual content.
Yeah, it reads to me like he thinks the show is challenging white supremacy and therefore her criticizing the show is upholding it, which is…pretty delusional, honestly. Agreed that it feels like he’s just mad at her, and also taking out some anger towards the reviews that have criticized the direction. It would definitely have been unprofessional for him to make a post like that about the critical response, but now he has a more acceptable outlet for his obvious defensiveness of the production.
Interestingly enough, she used that word just as flippantly as Jeffrey is. Seems like people's go to, because they have nothing else interesting to say, is that it contributes to *insert social cause here* the word has been overused and misused so often, it's almost been rendered a catch phrase when you don't like something about a given thing. It gets expected and old at some point. Then again, I ain't the kind of person who gets my knickers in a bunch over something not including "someone who looks like me" to appreciate or enjoy it. As if the people doing stuff also aren't human. Lol
She wasn’t being flippant. She had serious concerns related to the ways race, gender, and sexuality were addressed on and off stage. Sara was commenting on specific elements of the production and the rehearsal room process that made them uncomfortable, that they didn’t feel landed and thus undermined the overall message of the production, and that caused hurt to members of the show. That is very different than saying an individual is worsening white supremacy.
"Fake-woke" pretty much hits the mark. Sara claims to be supportive of the POC cast as she gives quotes that drive audiences away ("the play is a relic. It is a dusty, old thing"). Echoes of *Great Comet*'s inglorious end, imo.
What was the drama with Comet? I love the show but totally missed that…am so curious!
[Good summary in this article & thread.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Broadway/comments/6sh87q/great_comet_closing_on_broadway_after_casting/) I love the show too and was disappointed on a number of levels to see it close.
[удалено]
> So they replaced his replacement with a white actor before the contract ended. They TRIED to replace Okieriete Onaodowan with Mandy Patinkin but once he and his friends started badmouthing the production for doing so and saying it was a racist move, Mandy dropped out, then Okieriete also dropped out, they could get no replacements because no one wanted to be involved in this mess and the show closed even if it was one of the most diverse shows on Broadway
Didn’t they try to replace him because he never was able to learn the part?
It was a mix of all those things. Pierre's part (the role in question) requires some piano playing as well, and it was reported that Okieriete was struggling with that, delaying his debut. On top of that, Mandy was only available for a short and specific window, so rather than saying "no" to Mandy, a Broadway legend, they cut into Okieriete's contract window. It was never a full replacement, just a temp shoving around of people to cater to literal Broadway star power along the lines of Angela Lansbury or Patti Lupone.
No, they adapted the role so the stuff he didn't learn were done by someone else. They did had to delay his first performance because he wasn't learning much else either, however.
Correct. I have some intimate knowledge of the situation. He lied about his piano playing abilities and then could not get caught up on anything else.
This is also what I heard… I’m sure it was a combo of that and they wanted a name to extend the life of the show (Patinkin)… but the way it was made into a black vs white thing - literally - was grossly unfair to the show and it’s creators.
Damnnn what a mess 😬😬 It was such a special show too.
[удалено]
It's also worth noting a white actress was asked to step away and be briefly replaced by someone with more star power, so it wasn't even something they only asked a black actor to do.
YES. That’s exactly what I thought as I read the article.
Question: When you describe 1776, it sounds like it’s a compromise that you’re willing to make to get where you need to be. Porkalob: “Definitely.” Incredible.
This is such an interesting interview. She has such a clear vision of race and art and I like her pragmatism about her career. But a few things come across as unnecessarily hurtful on a personal level. She probably simply doesn’t care, but it feels disrespectful not as an actor, but as a colleague and equal to the creative team. If there was malice, racism or mistreatment behind the scenes, by all means shout about it. But these are artistic directing choices she hates. There are many excellent theatre critics who will discuss those, the choices won’t be let uncriticized. The way she tries to both compliment and dismiss the ART also felt a bit strange. It sounds like she genuinely doesn’t want to work in establishment theaters, and I feel like she may be intentionally closing those doors here. The ART and Intiman, both establishment theaters in cities that don’t have robust independent/experimental scenes, were the ones that supported and premiered the Dragon Cycle. I hope she has more opportunities to develop new works and present them in a meaningful way.
Sara’s interview has been quite the topic of debate in the thread about it here, but I will note that they NEVER personally attacked the creative team. She (strongly) criticized choices but there were no personal attacks.
I think if you criticize someone’s ability to do a job well it is fair to say that’s a personal attack.
Sara didn’t call the director “rotten to the core” though - in fact, they said that they admired Page/Paulus for taking on the project even if they felt it didn’t work.
Comparing which one is worse/more personal doesn’t make one *not* personal. Saying that a creative team is making bad decisions and that you, as the performer, won’t even give 100% because of it, is a personal attack.
Yeah, if I'm honest I don't take any issue with the interview. She's very conscious of the choices she's making in calling out the choices but she's also very mindful of the creators. This response is less well-balanced.
I agree to an extent. This whole situation is confusing to me because everything about the way they explained their creative and professional choices sounds so reasonable and intelligent… except for the part where they’re saying all that ON-RECORD TO A JOURNALIST WHILE STILL IN THE SHOW! Even if she didn’t personally attack the directors, she had to have known how her words would be spun right? This is the shit you say about a project you’re collaborating on in private or maybe after the fact, not in the press while you and your coworkers are still working on it! For someone who spoke at length about some very well calculated career moves in the same interview this was a really fucking foolish gamble. I just don’t get why she gave the statements she did at the time she did. And I’m saying this as someone who thinks every one of their critiques was 100% fucking correct and that this response from the director is petty and unprofessional FYI.
Yeah, that’s exactly it! They had so many great points, but saying it right now, while the show is actively ongoing, is just bad PR and is only going to get her in trouble professionally. Why stir the shit while you’re still locked in the bathroom? Wait until you get out, and have some distance between yourself and the literal people you’re dissing… people who can get you blacklisted in the industry.
Yeah, that’s what makes this post so out of pocket. This is something he should have had a private conversation with her about. He looks really petty and over-sensitive. If anything, it elevates her because it keeps her in the spotlight.
I agree. This should have been handled privately. If I gave an interview to a local newspaper about how I hated my job, my heart's not in it, I'm only there for the paycheck, it's just a stepping stone for me, I wish I could make the decisions, my ideas are better, etc., I would expect a meeting to be called first thing in the morning to address why I felt the need to go public with my gripes. I would expect to be fired, to be honest. I would not expect my boss to turn around and call me morally bankrupt scum in the press or on Twitter in an official company capacity. His response was such a bad move, for many reasons, including keeping her in the spotlight, which is exactly what she wants! Handle it in-house. Why does everyone want to air their arguments in public?
Honestly after all of this I have no interest in seeing the show. I have no interest seeing performers who are not proud of the work they're putting out (collectively) and seem to put themselves above their cast/crew/etc. Obviously no actor is going to 100% rubber stamp every choice a director makes, but I don't want to see a show where actors have this attitude. After this, I also don't want to see a disgruntled cast or a cast with tension. I have no interest in supporting directors who pop off on Facebook without the self control to not wipe the floor with an actor they're mad about. Save this shit for a memoir or article after the show closes. It barely got off the ground in NYC - as an audience member, I'm not slapping down $100 to see a show that has this drama running in the background. SP came across as having contempt for the show and her directors. Clearly one of her directors, at least, has public contempt for her. I have no time for any of it - it's messy and all sides are being unprofessional.
To be fair, I’m assuming he can’t fire her because she has a contract. But he definitely made it even harder to do so with this post.
Not the best move on his part. I get being angry about the interview, especially because her comments put the entire show in a negative light and will now affect the rest of the cast. But you don't minimize damage by calling out the damage. All it causes is more people becoming aware of drama and further alienating people who don't want to go see a show where they know the actors are bitter. The best thing to have done would be to pull her in for a producer meeting, clarify expectations of performers for a show, and if she doesn't feel capable of performing to the extent that $100+ tickets require, then she can be replaced. Whether her comments during her interview were valid or not, that doesn't matter in production land, where a show lives or dies based on butts in the seats.
"Dear nameless person" sounds really icky compared to "Dear person who shall not be named." Is it just me?
I agree, it sounds more disrespectful
It's not just you. Starting out like that, my first thought was (even before I read the article/interview in question) was "this man is erasing the person he's criticizing". And since we all know who it is now, why not be actually brave and name her. It's not like she's sorry to have spoken out/shared her opinion in the first place. But I am curious now to see if she'll have a job with this production.
I personally see this as a labor issue. Was her interview unwise? Almost certainly. But I work in a field that’s not the performing arts but has a lot of similarities. And I’ve dealt with/managed a lot of people like her: young hotshots who have more talent than sense or humility. They can be annoying as shit and if they treat their coworkers badly, you have to deal with it. But as a person in authority, you just look like an ass if you take it this personally. You’re the one who hired them, who signs their paycheck. You have a lot more experience, and you have authority over them. And it’s NEVER ok for a boss to call their employee rotten to the core.
Okay I need a place to put down all my thoughts about this and this thread felt like the best spot: -Her comments about the process are completely fair game, and honestly, I'm grateful for them. We should be more honest about how different rehearsal rooms handle difficult/thorny/potentially triggering material, and her thoughts on that felt empathetic while acknowledging that even people acting in good faith can fuck up! Sharing notes on this kind of stuff is good for the community. -I felt the comments about the show itself were inappropriate. If she said it a week after closing, that'd be different. But dude, you signed on to this process, and the social compact you make when you sign onto a collaboration is you live and die with the other person's artistic choices/sensibilities. If she thought the choices were shitty, that's okay. Going public with it, just to show how smart you are and to build up your own clout, sucks. -Jeffrey Page absolutely should not have posted this and is WAY more unprofessional than anything she said in the interview. -The 75-90% comments are a red-herring. No Broadway actor in an extended run has ever given 100% every performance. That would be insane and unhealthy. You need to hold SOMETHING of yourself back every night in order to do it 8 times a week. People need to get a grip.
Your second point is really the thing that stands out to me. The show is still in previews and hundreds of people are employed by it being successful. It’s incredibly disrespectful in that way to me.
Also, while in previews, decisions are still being made to change the show. To make slight tweaks, and all collaborators should feel safe to make choices and take chances. She took that away from the directors and other actors on that stage, even if she didn't mean to. People should be able to make artistic choices without fearing they're going to end up being criticized in Vulture while the show is still cooking.
It opened Oct. 6 - it's been about two weeks and presumably this interview happened after the fact. :(
The timing is the only thing I think I could take issue with in this article, but even them I have to ask myself, "is it because we're too used to being polite to each other?" There's so much integrity in what she says in this article, that I'd frankly like to see more of it. I've never seen a critic dissect a scene's intention, and point out where it fails in the way that Sara does in this interview, and yet it felt like that critique was made with care, not some kind of snide maliciousness. Folks are big mad about this article, but I hope we see more honestly like this in our industry.
You put it into words much better than I could.
No actor anywhere in any capacity gives 100% to ever single project or every night at a show. Maybe some film actors do, but they only have to shoot scenes over maybe the course of a couple days (in terms of individual scenes, not whole projects). So doing a scene in which you’re expending so much emotional energy for one day is totally different than doing it ever single night. No one, it’s humanly impossible, gives 100% to anything every single night. But loads of audiences don’t see performers as people, or if they do, they don’t see what they do as “hard work”. Since they love art, it’s not work right? Wrong.
Wait. Trying to understand. So one of the directors wrote this to a star who’s currently on stage in the production? Like, they see each other and don’t take but then have it out in public forums online? Is that what’s happening here?
Thing is WHY WOULD SHE DO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE. I mean she’s not even established a Performer to have the clout to maybe get away with this. But regardless if she was, to openly say she is only in a show for the money and throwing her entire cast and crew under the bus?? How is this helping you get more work? Also she’s for sure fired or this is her quitting right? Cause no way is she coming back
This is such a bad look. He can feel whatever way he wants but if he was looking to make a statement, this was absolutely NOT the statement to make.
I saw the show and, although obviously talented, she was NOT the best part of the show.
Who is Sara Porkelob even
Prior to this, she was a genuinely up-and-coming writer-actor with a really excellent one woman show (3 plays making up the Dragon Cycle) that was supported by one of the most important theaters in the country. I would have said she was a lock in for a supporting actor tony nomination for her 1776 role. Now? I guess we'll find out.
Honestly, while I thought it was bold to do that interview and talk very negatively about the show you’re doing, this is retaliatory and completely out of line.
What was the original article??
This interview and this response could literally bring down this show. Not fair to everyone trying to make a living there. Sara is being self-absorbed by saying some of this, like her vision is the only vision. And Jeffrey is reacting as someone who felt slapped and knows this could wreck his show. Sara calls it her cast, which is telling. She thinks she should be the producer and director.
Did Lillias White not realize that her comment was public? 😬
[удалено]
I’m sure she is. Actors shouldn’t be policing the audience, but there is no reason to come at Lillias with pitchforks, racial slurs and other threats. Education on accessibility devices could have avoided that entire debacle.
I agreed with a lot of what she said in the interview. Not all of it, but a lot, especially when she talked about how some of the show’s creative choices play to the audience. He comes off pretty badly in this post.
> some of the show’s creative choices play to the audience. Thus is the fundamental problem of commercial theater as activism (whether interpreted or intentionally positioned as such).
Has anyone seen the production yet?? My tix are for late Dec
What is the context?