The Royal Ballet: Frankenstein, March 2019

[ninamargaret]

4 minutes ago, alison said:

Sheer b*****mindedness?

 

(Although, has anyone tried doing a walkup and seeing what's on offer?)

 

(And why are ads galore for Don Q still appearing on my screen when it's sold out?  Why not Frankenstein?)

Perhaps the Marketing Department has heard of Don Q,but have no idea what Frankenstein is!

[Dawnstar]

1 hour ago, Tony Newcombe said:

Times have certainly changed. In the early Nineteen Nineties unsold tickets were put on sale a couple of hours or so

before the performance. Turn up at the Bow Street entrance and pay twenty pounds for a good seat in the stalls.

 

That must have been fantastic. Unfortunately the 50p a week or so pocket money I was getting in the early 90s as an under 10 year old wouldn't have got me very far!

 

17 minutes ago, alison said:

Sheer b*****mindedness?

 

(Although, has anyone tried doing a walkup and seeing what's on offer?)

 

 

I do that at WE theatres sometimes, with a reasonable success rate, but I don't think I'd have the nerve to try at the ROH.

[Mary]

10 minutes ago, Dawnstar said:

 

 

 

 

I do that at WE theatres sometimes, with a reasonable success rate, but I don't think I'd have the nerve to try at the ROH. 

 

Give it a try Dawnstar. The Box Office staff are lovely- they often seem pleased to see anyone, stuck in their little cubby-hole. No need for nerve to ask if there are tickets and whether there are any offers- I've done it and once or twice had success.

 

 

[capybara]

The number of tickets available remains astronomical (with Monday, 18th March the worst sales position I have ever seen a week before a show).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by capybara

[Dawnstar]

59 minutes ago, Mary said:

 

Give it a try Dawnstar. The Box Office staff are lovely- they often seem pleased to see anyone, stuck in their little cubby-hole. No need for nerve to ask if there are tickets and whether there are any offers- I've done it and once or twice had success.

 

I can only go to the last performance so I'll be keeping a close eye on what's happening ticket-wise between now & then & see how it's looking just before the Friday rush the previous day. (And I hope that by that time they've announced who will be playing the Creature too as I don't like booking for anything without knowing casting.)

Edited March 11, 2019 by Dawnstar

[penelopesimpson]

3 hours ago, Dawnstar said:

It's infuriating to read this when I'm going to have to pay £43 for restricted view row C side stalls circle in the rush after next, from where I gather I'll miss significant action. If the tickets aren't even selling at the massively reduced student rates then why oh why can't they do a general public discount?

Wrong kind of public

[penelopesimpson]

2 hours ago, capybara said:

The number of tickets available remains astronomical (with Monday, 18th March the worst sales position I have ever seen a week before a show).

 

 

There are only 102 Stalls Tickets sold and hardly any in Stalls Circle.  They could fit everybody in the Stalls.  What a triumph for Marketing -  disastrous combination of too many performances at far too high a price.  

Edited March 11, 2019 by alison
To sort out quotes

[alison]

Penelope, I hope I've edited your post correctly?

 

It used to be claimed that the House might make remaining tickets available at half-price a few hours before the performance - but of course we no longer have the booking guide, so there's no way of checking any more.

 

I just don't know why on earth they haven't offered discounts: the implications of such poor sales on the ROH's financial position are pretty horrendous.  It's surely better to sell at a discount than not to sell at all?  But they seem to be obsessed with "we don't discount tickets" at the moment, as far as I can see.

[ninamargaret]

I pity the cast, orchestra and stage staff - it must be totally soul destroying to perform in front of such small audiences. And being a member of such a small audience is pretty dispiriting. it doesn't bode well for future performances of ballets that are less palatable to the general public. I suppose there's a very small chance that they will look at the pricing of tickets, but it may lead to sure fire sellers like Swan Lake becoming out of normal ballet goers price range. Frankenstein has probably suffered from not having 'big names' in it, although to.my way of thinking all the casts offered are excellent. The Open Up project does not seem to have done much to encourage new audiences. 

 

 

 

[alison]

Indeed not.  I guess that having things like posters in the newly opened-up parts doesn't chime with the new "feel" (although the likelihood is I suspect that it would be more environmentally friendly than continually showing video for 12 hours a day or more!)

[Bruce Wall]

Absolutely stellar performance this evening in front of a selective, true, but hugely appreciative audience.  What a genius Laura Morera is; she weaves a full bloodied character into a role in search of such.  In lesser hands Elizabeth could be (I fear) a cipher.  Not here.  Scarlett's faith is well apt.  Bonelli too coloured his spaces magnificently .... Victor's turmoil was always finely wrought be it in black or white .... (Would that we could see the two of them in Aston's A Month in the Country. That WOULD be something to celebrate.)  Wei Wang was incendiary throughout, equally ripe in anger and hurt:  Both made him vulnerable and searing with precision placement added for doubled delectation.  I am convinced that James Hay is a dance actor for the ages.  Whatever he now does zooms into an abiding focus that lights a path for not only those about him - but those to come as well.  How lucky we are to have such genius in our midst.  Potolemy Gidney defines potential.  The entire company were alight.  This windfall was a definite boon.  

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Bruce Wall

[FLOSS]

It would be interesting to know exactly who decides the number of performances each ballet  programme is to receive and the factors which are considered in arriving at that  decision. Presumably previous demand is a significant factor and unfortunately whoever it is who decides has got their calculations wrong with both Don Q and Frankenstein. I just hope that the failure does not have the effect of reducing the AD's autonomy in making decisions about what ballets to programme at a time when it seems the Marketing Department is out to generate income at all costs.

 

Frankenstein is a flawed work but I don't think that it would have helped if Scarlett had created a one act Frankenstein and had subsequently added a further two acts to it. The three act Anastasia was created in that way because MacMillan wanted an instant three act ballet for the company and his solution was to add to a one act work he had created for Berlin. It is not that good a ballet and it depends on the performance of the dancer cast as Anastasia for its success. His successful full length works are far less dependent on a single performance. Anastasia is not revived that often because without an outstanding dance actress to carry it there is little of interest in it. The  choreography for the supporting characters contains little to distract you from the performance of  the title role while the Kschenssinska pas de deux provides more challenges than most dancers can cope with. Watching the pas de deux performed is rarely a pleasurable experience. Frankenstein may not be a perfect ballet but how many full length works are? It is not as if the work is a complete disaster in the way that MacMillan's Isadora certainly was. Three act narrative works can take several revivals and revisions to settle into their final familiar form. MacMillan and others provide evidence that even experienced choreographers are capable of making one act and full length turkeys.However I am far from believing that this work is an out and out turkey. I see it as an interesting apprentice work.

 

One of the ballet's  principal weaknesses, it seems to me, is that Scarlett loved the original novel too much to be an effective and ruthless butcher when it came to transforming the literary work into a serviceable libretto for his ballet. But he is not the first choreographer to fail to cut characters or scenes which are inessential to an effective retelling of a story in balletic terms. The fact that the ballet needs some serious pruning has not put me off going to see this revival.The problem with the initial scenes is that they go on for far too long. The prologue is unnecessary while the choreography for Victor and Elizabeth does little to develop their characters pr to develop our understanding of their relationship. Although the steps alter from act to act the overall impression is that the same pas de deux is being performed in each act.For me the ballet only starts to work as a piece of theatre from the point at which Victor brings the creature to life and then rejects him. Once you get beyond the numerous introductory scenes and get to the heart of the story, the choreography for the named characters works after a fashion but it is not enough to make to turn Frankenstein into an effective piece that deserves a place in the repertory.

 

 Scarlett still has not made enough changes  to shift the focus onto Victor's rejection of his creation and give us an understanding of why  the Creature behaves as he does. The designs are strong. While the music is more like a film score than anything else it is serviceable and it does its job of supporting the action of the ballet. By the time we arrive at the nightmarish ball in the final act the score has morphed into Prokofiev. A flawed work? Yes. An interesting work?  Perhaps, but only as an apprentice work.Yes. Just bear in mind if this revival fails to sell enough tickets the blame is unlikely to be attributed to the Marketing Department's decisions on pricing.

 

As far as casting ballets with the company's best known dancers is concerned it might well sell tickets but it would be no guarantee that the audience would see an outstanding account of the ballet in question. I am far from convinced that the presence of Nunez and Muntagirov in its initial season would have improved the ballet as she is not much of  a dance actress. The ballet's problems seem to me to be ones of structure and focus and those are things which no dancer however stellar their reputation or however large their fanbase is, can remedy..

Edited March 12, 2019 by FLOSS

[Mary]

Wise words as usual from Floss.

(Though there are so many well deserved criticisms that it does rather add up to an explanation of why many of us are not going to see it. I had forgotten the awful lab scenes with dancing technicians- I don't think they come from love for the novel, they are an entirely false note.)

 

ROH marketing is incomprehensible. Why is it that - I am getting emails encouraging me to book  opera ( when I v rarely book opera as I can't afford it ) - most of which is almost sold out anyway- yet, given I go to every RB production but haven't booked this one, they haven't emailed me about Frankenstein at all? And friends who go to ROH sometimes but not regularly, when asked, don't even know it's on?

 

It doesn't argue a very targeted approach or even the barest minimum common sense- does it.

 

 

[Vanartus]

I’m starting to feel a little guilty about not seeing it again, but the pull wasn’t strong enough to get me trek from Berlin. I also thought he would have pruned the start and beefed up the initial meeting with his creation. That disappointed me. Re marketing...I’m a basic (?!) Friend and have liked ROH on Facebook and I’ve never received any “buy this” marketing. All I get (and it’s interesting) are bits and bobs - some nice stuff re Woolf Works was the last one!

[capybara]

I 'like' posts on Facebook too but I never get ANY marketing e-mails - just the old-style, meaningless post-performance surveys.

A swift search through their records would show them that I, along with many others on here who make multiple bookings for most programmes, have booked for none, or one, Frankenstein. Maybe an offer in the direction of such regulars could have whipped up a bit of trade. [But, I forgot, wrong target market!]

[penelopesimpson]

I haven't had one email about Frankenstein (in dire need of ticket sales) or any pop up ads but have been deluged with DON Q (not in need of ticket sales).  This is targeted marketing is it?  Does KOH know how little effort has gone behind Frankenstein and how much wasted effort has gone in to Don Q?

 

As for bringing in new audiences, I seem to remember the Chairman making noises about opening up the Opera House so that people could visit it and have coffee or whatever.  I don't actually remember anyone ever saying anything about actually attending an opera at the Opera House.  I think management at ROH have very little strategy beyond vacuous statements about inclusivity and Open-up.  They continually tell us how cash strapped they are but, seemingly, do little about increasing revenue other than using the blunt instrument that is raising ticket prices.  And we've all seen how well that has worked with Frankenstein.

[Richard LH]

4 hours ago, FLOSS said:

unfortunately whoever it is who decides has got their calculations wrong with both Don Q and Frankenstein

 

Frankenstein maybe, but Don Q has been pretty much  a sell out. Unless by  wrong calculations you mean Don Q has been over-advertised, under-priced or under-provided in the  number of  performances? 

Edited March 12, 2019 by Richard LH
thought of something else

[zxDaveM]

7 minutes ago, Richard LH said:

 

Frankenstein maybe, but Don Q has been pretty much  a sell out. Unless by  wrong calculations you mean Don Q has been over-advertised, under-priced or under provided in the  number of  performances? 

 

indeed - surely large scale advertising for a virtually sold out run of DQ (whether underpriced, or too few performances, or not) is squandering cash, which rather refutes the claim they have none. That would surely lead to punter frustration at seeing something advertised that they cannot get a ticket for. Unless the aim was then to generate a want, so they would book something else. Well, something else that wasn't Frankenstein as they wouldn't have known about it.

[Lindsay]

I think that the usual 'repeat' audiences are sitting out Frankenstein in large numbers and that is a huge contributing factor to the drop in sales.  I know from friends working at the ROH that the ballet 'faithful' attend far more performances of a production than the opera 'faithful' (understandably since they want to see different casts) so repeat business is currently more important for ballet sales than it is for opera.   I'm afraid that I am less generous than Floss and think this Frankenstein is an out and out turkey, which I resented sitting through even once.   And I suspect that I am far from alone in that. So, while I might have gone and taken friends to see one or two casts if I had enjoyed the first run (meaning two seats on one or two nights 'unsold' because I'm sitting it out) I'm guessing there are many others who would have gone to most performances and are leaving far more seats unsold that would have been occupied by 'faithful regulars' in the usual course.  The marketing does seem extremely disorganised but it wouldn't have made any difference to me or to others I know if they had bombarded us with Frankenstein PR from morning til night - the ballet is just not good enough. 'Nothing' music, derivative choreography and utterly inept storytelling.

[alison]

I'm not sure the prologue is totally unnecessary (although it's by no means as informative as, say, The Winter's Tale's): without it, wouldn't we be assuming that Victor and Elizabeth were brother and sister?  We at least need to see that they aren't actually related, in some form, don't we?  But yes, I agree that the focus needs shifting.  Unfortunately, I assume that would require a major rewrite of the score as well.

[ElleC]

Well, I loved this ballet last time around, and love it even more this time.  Morera and Bonelli are as wonderful as ever, Morera really revelling in the melting choreography that Scarlett has created for the gorgeous pas de deux for Elizabeth and Frankenstein.  Wei Wang makes an excellent Creature, in turn both heart-breaking and menacing – a very powerful dancer. (I would still love to see William Bracewell in this role though – hopefully next time!). And, of course, James Hay is simply fabulous as Henry – so glad he got first cast.  I know many think that the ballet needs "pruning" but I don't agree – for me, it conveys the story clearly, and keeps building and building to it's terrifying but heart-wrenching crescendo, aided by the score from which Barry Wordsworth wrings every drop of drama (the music seemed much more nuanced under his direction).  Again, the audience on the two occasions I've attended have been very enthusiastic.  I'm very much looking forward to seeing what Alexander Campbell and Meagan Hinkis bring to these roles this evening – I have high expectations!

[Richard LH]

1 hour ago, zxDaveM said:

surely large scale advertising for a virtually sold out run of DQ (whether underpriced, or too few performances, or not) is squandering cash

 

I see what you mean, only I am not sure that is what FLOSS was arguing, nor I am sure that it is fair to  assume any significant  cash has been "squandered" on advertising Don Q, given that these things presumably have to be planned out sometime before, and as I recall the fear or complaint of some at the outset was the opposite, i.e.  that Don Q was not going to sell well. So it might be that the advertising for Don Q has proved very cost effective.

 

Also, don't things like automatic email / pop-up adds, once instigated as an algorithm at an earlier stage,  tend to have a bit of a life of their own, independent of cost? Not that I have noticed any particular deluge of these, for any RB production, in my own internet usage.

[penelopesimpson]

You are certainly right about Don Q Richard.  I was totally wrong on this one and said I thought there were too many performances.  So much for my knowlege!

 

However, I still think there are far too many of Frankenstein and that, combined with the high ticket prices, has killed it.  I am with Lindsay in not liking it at all, but I can understand that others might, especially if it has been reworked.  What is strange is that despite mixed reviews when it was premiered, it has been given the same lengthy second run that Winter's Tale and Woolf Works got, both of which generated far more successful reviews than Frankenstein.

 

I just did a quick count.  Next Monday you could easily fit everybody in the Stalls.

Edited March 12, 2019 by penelopesimpson

[Sim]

1 hour ago, Lindsay said:

I think that the usual 'repeat' audiences are sitting out Frankenstein in large numbers and that is a huge contributing factor to the drop in sales.    I'm guessing there are many others who would have gone to most performances and are leaving far more seats unsold that would have been occupied by 'faithful regulars' in the usual course.  

Agree.  Maybe the marketing people should re-think their plans to push us out;  our bucks do make a bit of a bang, and when many of us desist from attending (like Lindsay and many others, I am skipping Frankenstein altogether this time because I don't think any amount of changes would entice me to sit through it again) the financial implications can be felt.  It may only be a few hundred pounds, but when the House is half empty, those pounds make a difference.  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lindsay said:

I think that the usual 'repeat' audiences are sitting out Frankenstein in large numbers and that is a huge contributing factor to the drop in sales.  I know from friends working at the ROH that the ballet 'faithful' attend far more performances of a production than the opera 'faithful' (understandably since they want to see different casts) so repeat business is currently more important for ballet sales than it is for opera.   I'm afraid that I am less generous than Floss and think this Frankenstein is an out and out turkey, which I resented sitting through even once.   And I suspect that I am far from alone in that. So, while I might have gone and taken friends to see one or two casts if I had enjoyed the first run (meaning two seats on one or two nights 'unsold' because I'm sitting it out) I'm guessing there are many others who would have gone to most performances and are leaving far more seats unsold that would have been occupied by 'faithful regulars' in the usual course.  The marketing does seem extremely disorganised but it wouldn't have made any difference to me or to others I know if they had bombarded us with Frankenstein PR from morning til night - the ballet is just not good enough. 'Nothing' music, derivative choreography and utterly inept storytelling.

Resentment was also my feeling, for the reasons you have highlighted, Lindsay. 

[penelopesimpson]

The catering concessions are going to be most unhappy

[FLOSS]

If the ticket prices and advertising are anything to go by the Marketing Department underestimated the demand for Don Q while it overestimated the likely demand for performances of Frankenstein. I assume that its estimate of likely demand was based on tickets sales in their initial seasons . The problem is that while the bulk of the ballet audience may have resigned themselves to a not entirely successful staging of Don Q when the management offered the prospect of some very interesting casts the same magic can not be worked on a ballet which had some very serious problems of structure. focus and pace when it was new and has been revived with none of its weaknesses addressed. In its first season it was a new ballet which excited interest because it was the first full length work of a young choreographer. However the ballet has not generated interest because it is no longer a novelty and it is now clear that its weaknesses have not been addressed in an effective manner. If Scarlett could have brought himself to make the cuts that were really needed then perhaps word of mouth and a few really positive reviews would have generated  better ticket sales for the performances scheduled after the first night. Unfortunately the changes which were made did not really involve the work's structure or its focus and the result is unsold seats. Perhaps something positive may come of this if it dissuades the Marketing Department from setting such "dynamic" ticket prices for ballets which are unknown quantities as far as ticket sales are concerned. Perhaps, but this is too much to hope, they might revert to a simpler approach to ticket pricing like the one the ROH used to use. if the hike in prices is a result of the cut in the ACE subsidy it would be fairer to everyone if the ROH said as much rather than allowing the antics of the Marketing Department to alienate a large number of the resident ballet company's loyal followers.

Edited March 12, 2019 by FLOSS

[Richard LH]

57 minutes ago, FLOSS said:

The problem is that while the bulk of the ballet audience may have resigned themselves to a not entirely successful staging of Don Q when the management offered the prospect of some very interesting casts the same magic can not be worked on a ballet which had some very serious problems of structure.

 

Surely it is more reasonable to assume that  Don Q sales went well because "the bulk of the ballet audience" does regard this staging of Don Q as a success!

[Rob S]

With two rows of empty seats in front of a large number of the stalls circle standing places tonight I wonder if I’ll be invited to sit down 🤔🙂

Edited March 12, 2019 by Rob S

[alison]

23 hours ago, alison said:

(And why are ads galore for Don Q still appearing on my screen when it's sold out?  Why not Frankenstein?)

 

Plenty of ads for Romeo & Juliet, too.

 

3 hours ago, Richard LH said:

Also, don't things like automatic email / pop-up adds, once instigated as an algorithm at an earlier stage,  tend to have a bit of a life of their own, independent of cost?

 

I'm certainly getting that impression.  It would explain why I used to get ads for productions that were completely in the past.  Can't they be "recalled" once they're no longer needed?

[JennyTaylor]

I'm sitting in the Paul Hamlyn Hall right now (6:30pm), a favourite haunt of mine before a performance.  Curious to note - NO pre-booked tables for food / drinks: I don't think I can ever remember this.  Half of the Balcony restaurant occupied.  So, it's not only ticket sales but also the associated profit making catering that has also been affected it seems. 

 

…...and even the unreserved tables have yet to fill up. On other occasions, I've made sure I'm here before 6pm to secure a chair/ table. Last year, I sat on the floor several times. 

[alison]

Ouch  

[aliceinwoolfland]

They're literally giving tickets away - I won a Royal Ballet competition and they gave me 2 central front row amphitheatre seats for Friday's performance! Very excited, but would not have paid £70 each for them.....