The hardest-working person in theater

Here’s another chapter in the making of a play – notably mine – GOING GOING GONE, currently playing at the Hudson Theatre in Hollywood.

Now the play is up and just clicking along. Getting to this point was not easy. The week before opening we had two dress rehearsals and then two previews with audiences. The first one was a disaster. The air conditioning in the theatre went out. There’s a reason David Letterman kept his studio in the 60’s and not 90’s. The first rule of comedy: People don’t laugh when they’re having a heat stroke.

The second preview went better although there were sound problems. But hey, that’s what previews are for. By opening night, everything worked and we were on our way.

To give you an idea of what goes on behind-the-scenes I want to focus today on the hardest working person in the production. No, it’s not the director, or producer, or even playwright (although he in particular is VITAL). It’s the stage manager.

Emyli Gudmundson is ours, and despite the bizarre spelling, is the one person that keeps the show going.

Here’s a list of just some of the things she does:

Organizes the rehearsals. Sends out notifications to the actors, prints out scripts, and prepares the rehearsal hall (setting up tables, chairs, props, etc.).

During the rehearsals she keeps track of all the blocking and makes notes of things the director or cast might need. She also keeps track of when the actors are required to go on a break.

After each rehearsal she has to file a report that goes to the producers, director, me, and I’m sure Putin. It lists what exactly was rehearsed and what additional requests the cast or director might have.

She then coordinates with the set designer, sound designer, lighting designer, costume designer – anyone who has “designer” in his or her title – along with the prop director and theatre representatives. She coordinates the building of the set.

She makes sure actors have suitable dressing rooms, props and sets get stored properly, and there are water bottles.

Before each show she dresses the stage, setting up the props. If there is food involved (like there is in my play), she arranges for the groceries and a microwave to cook them in. After each weekend she takes the costumes to the cleaners and picks them up before the next weekend’s shows.

After opening night the director generally disappears. The stage manager is then the de facto director. She leads the cast through a read-through before the first performance of the weekend. If there is a fight on stage Equity requires a fight rehearsal before every show. The stage manager runs that.  If the director phones in notes for the actors it is the stage manager who delivers them.  Not me.

Sometimes there are critics or VIP’s that request specific seats. The stage manager sets that up.

The stage manager also checks levels and lighting cues before each performance.  

If there are any technical problems the stage manager does the trouble-shooting , and in Emyli’s case, she solves most of the problems.

All of the sound and lighting cues are built onto a computer program and during the actual show someone has to trigger all of those cues? Guess who that is? Yep.

One night she had to fill-in and usher.  

During the performance, Emyli is in the booth having to pay strict attention to every second to the play so she can execute the cues. I’m getting tired just writing all of this.

After the show she stores the props and makes sure everything is put away properly. Then she writes a detailed report on the performance – the audience size, whether they were attentive, any screw-ups with explanations why, any instructions for the forty-seven “designers.”

Emyli is always the first to arrive and last to leave. Writing the play was easy compared to what she does. So my eternal gratitude to Emyli and all the stage managers that lurk in the shadows but keep theater alive.

Writing alone

Writing alone is a lonely enterprise and having the social interaction of a partner or writing room can make the process a lot more fun and (if you have the right partner/room) expedient.

But what if you have to write alone? How do you develop the discipline to face the tyranny of the blank screen?

This is a task made even more difficult these days because we have the internet and worse, Pokeman Go. 

There’s no right answer; just various methods and tricks others have used. You have to find the one that’s right for you. But here are a few options:

Pick a specific time of day and force yourself to sit down and work at that time. Could be early morning or the middle of the day while the kids are at school. I’m a night person. I will tend to write late at night when the house is quiet and there’s nothing on TV but infomercials and GOLDEN GIRLS reruns. Many like to get up early, get their writing out of the way and be done for the day.

Pick a specific amount of time. An hour, several hours. Writer/goddess, Jane Espenson goes on half-hour or hour “writing sprints” where she clears the deck and works non-stop during those periods. 

Some people need goals. They have to write a certain number of pages or scenes before they step away. If they finish that script by Tuesday they'll treat themselves to a Thai massage at that new parlor next to the bail bonds place.

I will tend to write until I'm stuck on something. I'll then stop, even if it's in the middle of a sentence. I'll put it down for the night. Usually, if I allow my subconscious to work on it overnight I will come up with the solution in the morning. Then I can go back to work and have a head start. Others must power through until they finish a scene, regardless of how long it takes. They need that sense of closure. Can't fault 'em for that. It's just not the way I personally work.

Finding comfortable conditions is key for some writers. Are you a “must be isolated with no noise whatsoever” kind of a person? Or are you a “must be in public where there’s activity and energy all around” kind of guy?   Proust used to write in bed.  If Shakespeare were still alive I'm sure he'd be a Starbucks man. 

Does music provide some inspiration? A noted poet friend of mine has Jackie Wilson records blaring while she writes poetry. They all end up reading like “Lonely Teardrops” but still.

One method I don’t recommend but writers have been using it for centuries is getting completely shit-faced before writing.  Get your supplies at Staples, not BevMo. 

Another method that works for some (but not for me) is waiting until the last minute and then just blasting forward. They need that self-imposed pressure and prelude to their next heart attack.

Look, writing is hard. If it wasn’t then Kim Kardashian would be doing it (especially if she could do it in bed). But if you find the right way to work (for you), it can make the process far more manageable. Personally, I’m not the best person to ask. I checked my email twice while writing this post.

But how do you work and why?  If we can't all write together, we can at least tell each other how we do write.  

Come to my Theatre Party!

This Friday night, if you come to my play, arrive early for a little reception at the Hudson Theatre Cafe.  I thought this would be a great way to meet and thank some of you for supporting this blog over the last eleven (yes, eleven years).  And you get to see my play, GOING GOING GONE, which is getting boffo reviews.  Like last week, I am making a special offer for readers.  Half-price tickets.  Just go here, type in the Promo Code 008, and order tickets for Friday night.  Seating is limited.

If schmoozing with me isn't enough, here are a couple of reviews.

Ron Irwin-- LA. Examiner

Suzanne Birrell -- Discover Hollywood

Thanks much.  Hope to see you Friday night.  Now back our regularly scheduled post. 

PITCH

A lot of readers have asked what I thought of the new Fox series, PITCH – especially since I have a real familiarity with the world it lives in.

The short answer is I like it.

I have the problem that lawyers have with legal shows, doctors have with medical shows, and vampires have with post-apocalyptic shows.

There are a lot of technical baseball points they get wrong that as an insider I notice, but I doubt most viewers would. And I totally get the notion of creative license.

A few things do bother me though. When Ginny Baker arrives at the clubhouse none of the Padres players know her. But if she came up through their organization (which they said she did) then she would have played with most of these guys somewhere along the line in the minors.

The characters in general are kind of stock. Dan Luria plays the gruff but lovable rumpled manager. You’ve seen that guy in a hundred baseball movies. A lot of managers are young today and relate differently to the players. And Bob Balaban plays his usual weasel asshole. He’s such a good actor. Just once I’d like to see him in a role where I didn’t want to punch him in the face.

Kylie Bunbury is fine as Ginny Baker. I believe her way more than that movie where Reese Witherspoon was supposedly an Olympic Gold Medal softball player. And Mark-Paul Gosselaar is equally fine playing Kevin Costner in BULL DURHAM. I’m not an Ali Larter fan but never have been. To me she’s the bad version of Rhea Seeehorn.

My big question is where is the series going? After awhile Ginny either fits in and just becomes a part of the team, or she doesn’t and she’s released. After they do the stories about her breaking in, her notoriety, and adjusting to life in the majors then what?

I guess they’re kind of going for a Jackie Robinson type scenario but the stakes and hatred was off the charts for Jackie. Ginny gets to go on KIMMELL.

Still, I love the game action sequences, seeing actual big league stadiums, and I’ll always have a soft-spot for series that employ baseball announcers. Especially for the Padres (since I was once one). If I have one quibble – use the radio guys. Give Jesse Agler and Ted Leitner some love.

For now I’m on board with PITCH. And I’m sure once December and January roll around I’ll be thrilled just to watch a show about baseball. And I can’t wait for them to do the episode where Ginny takes steroids and they swap out Kylie Bunbury with Barry Bonds with a wig.

CAA

There’s a new book out called POWERHOUSE: THE UNTOLD STORY OF HOLLYWOOD’S CREATIVE ARTISTS AGENCY by James Andrew Miller.

It’s an oral history of CAA and author Miller (as opposed to Arthur Miller) managed to speak to practically everyone involved, including Michael Ovitz and Ron Meyer (the two real spearheads of the agency).  Very impressive of Mr. Miller to track all these players down.   Especially in a town where no one takes anyone's calls. 

I found the book fascinating, but I also had the advantage of living through that period and knowing a lot of the profiled young turks personally. Not sure if the average “non-pro” (the Hollywood Reporter’s description of someone not in the entertainment industry. Osama Bin Laden was a “non-pro.”) would enjoy it as much. And it is 752 pages. (I bet no CAA agent has actually read the book. They’ve scanned the coverage.)

But maybe you would like it. It’s a Shakespearean tale of blind ambition, greed, betrayal, politics, business savvy, inflated ego, and gift baskets. It’s also a look back at an industry that has changed radically since those days when one high-powered agent could control all of Hollywood. Now it’s Marvel Comics.

My partner and I were with CAA for one year. It was not a pleasant experience although we do like many of the agents who work there. What became very clear to us, and the book confirmed countless times, was that the agency always placed their needs over yours. Your career was to best serve them. So if you wanted to get more into the feature world, but they saw you as a TV showrunner who would allow them to put together a rich package deal, that is where they steered you whether it was your preference or not.

And look, the truth about ALL agencies is that if you’re hot they love you and send you gifts and treat you like LeBron James. If you’re not hot, good luck getting one of them to call you back before Haley’s Comet next returns.

My favorite CAA story is this:

Remember when you were a kid in school you would hold a book open but have a comic book inside? The teacher thought you were reading OF MICE AND MEN when you were really reading Wonder Woman? I was on vacation in 1982 at the Kahala Hilton in Hawaii. Michael Eisner, then of Disney, was there with his family. Several CAA agents were staying at the Kahala as well.

One afternoon I went to the pool and three CAA agents were reading scripts; all with the standard red covers and CAA lettered in white. But inside their scripts they were reading books. God forbid a CAA agent would be caught reading actual literature! Better the world should think he’s using his precious time to read SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT 3.

So you can read 752 pages, but that one story pretty much tells you all you need to know about CAA.

How to memorize scripts part 2

Here’ the final  installment in how actors memorize scripts.  Part one was yesterday.  These come from actors you know. As you’ll see, no two methods are even remotely similar.

Actor 1:

The repetition from rehearsals is very helpful. But, of course, on "Cheers" we had lots of changes. That's why starting in the middle of the week was so constructive.

I could study during the weekend. I would mark the common consonants, like the "t"s or the "s"s or whatever. Sometimes the letters were near alphabetical, but even if they weren't the consonants gave me a landmark in my long paragraphs.

********************************

Actor 2:

When memorizing lines, I make it a rule to lay off xanax or klonopin.

Most shows aren't that good, so it's difficult to stay awake anyway. Usually, I read the whole script first so I understand the story. Then, I sit in a chair in the corner of my bedroom and literally memorize page by page, reading each line and the cues, and then by putting my hand over my lines (i.e. covering up my lines) and trying to say them. It helps me to say them out loud.

I stay with each page until I can do the whole page and then move on. In a long play, I aim at only five pages a day. For plays, I also like to know my lines as soon as possible, even before we start, even though a lot of directors don't approve of that (because, they believe, you get locked in to line readings. I disagree- particularly in a really wordy play. I think if you know the lines really well you can say them in any way that occurs to you during rehearsal.

I also like to go over my lines in my head wandering around the street - if I can do them with all the distractions of the city - then I really know them, even though you look pretty stupid to all the people passing you by .

It has to be a little faster for film and tv - although I do the same things. It helps me to imagine the blocking, even if what I imagine doesn't always turn out to be correct.

Honestly, I'm not particularly good at memorizing. I know people who are dazzlingly fast - they can read down a page and they've pretty much got it. They almost never sit in a corner somewhere and work on it... just by rehearsing and osmosis they get it. Alec Baldwin's ability to memorize fast is astounding. Somehow, they see the page in their head.

A bunch of people hire assistants to constantly grill the lines - I don't usually do that but it's really common.

**************************

Actor 3:


Hi Ken,

It is fairly easy for me to memorize lines at this point.

Normally, there is an objective to whatever I am saying in a scene (ie: I know what I want to say) so the lines are obvious to learn.

Sometimes it is harder when there is a long speech. That is harder to learn - I have to make sense of it for me then just say it over and over until I know it in my sleep.

I have little clues for memorizing too: if I have to remember a list of things in a speech I remember the first letter of each word.

The hardest lines to remember are those in another language.

**************************

Actor 4 (a soap opera star):

A great deal of it depends on certain skills that you're either born with or you're not. If you are born with the capacity to memorize, so much the better for you. However other factors do come into play. One of those is your comfort and familiarity with the character you're portraying. If it's new and you're just kinda feeling your way along, might be slightly difficult at first. However, if it's a character with which/whom you are completely familiar and at ease then you know, almost before the writer puts it on the page, what you'll say and how you'll say it. Another factor is the leeway, if any, that an actor is given with his/her lines. On a soap, for instance, with sometimes PAGES of dialogue or (heaven help us) a monologue, you (more often than not) will be given a little room to ad-lib. Get all the correct information out, give your partner their correct cue and make it sound natural and real...and you can get away with a lot.

Stage trained actors usually fare much better on the screen than the other way around with regard to memorization. There's very little ad-libbing tolerated in the theatre and so that training is invaluable when making the leap to TV or film. However, the advantage of doing live theatre is the rehearsal process, which can take weeks of doing the same scene over and over...and THAT'S where much of the memorizing is done for the stage. For the screen, big or little, if you are just not a good memorizer, the only thing you can do is go over and over and over and over...and over it with a partner or in the mirror. Sentence by sentence if you have to.

****************************
Actor 5:

Years ago I was taught a method called the "key word" method for memorizing commercial copy quickly when auditioning for commercials in NY where the copy is presented to you when you get to the audition. You only have a few minutes to look at it before you're whisked in to go on camera. The "key word" is the word that jumps out at you when you are reading a line and is different for everyone, but hopefully is the "heart" of a sentence. You circle it and memorize it. Then in theory you have a list of "key words" that bring up the complete sentence when needed.

Now, my actress wife has also influenced me and her method is one that I have used more and more the older I get. Seeing a picture in my mind of the sentence and matching an action to it at the same time.

An actor also has an action for each line. Actions being verbs. For example, in typical arguments between two romantic leads in a scene, often one character will get to a point where they "present", "list", "defend" (all active verbs) their P.O.V. with a "laundry list" of idea. In the actor's mind when you get to that place in the scene in my mind I know what is to be said is the "laundry list", and I match that to my action/verb "defend my P.O.V.", "present my reasoning", "list my reasoning", etc.

The process typically gets harder the older you get because for most of us our memory begins to go, but with these tools and techniques, hopefully we can stay adept at memorizing for more years than we should. They are good brain exercises too. All memorization ... jokes, poetry, speeches, etc. are good for our brains.

******************
Actor 6:

I'm what is called a "quick study" -- I can learn pages in a few minutes. Apparently, that has to do with what side of the brain you work on -- and that's not a choice!

I learn through images. I see a line and I see the picture of the line. For example, "I love you, you're the greatest man I've ever known, but if you don't clean up that office, I"m going to leave you!"

I see the man I love standing in a room full of paper which he is not putting in a trash can and then I see myself leaving.

The picture -- to the action -- to the line.

Sometimes, there is a word I get caught on and then I use a muscle memory technique. The brain is a muscle and if you lift 20-30 times all the other
muscles (the tongue etc.) remember. So, I repeat by rote over and over and over until the muscle remembers and then I don't have to think about that word -- it comes -- the muscle just
does it.

Finally, my acting technique, Meisner, learned in grad school -- lines are just an extension of the physical action. So when you are working out the part you are in motion moving from
set piece to prop to person etc. and it's like a dancer with choreography you just know what the action is your playing and you move in that direction and the lines come because you know where you are headed based on the intention and action of the scene.

Thanks again to all the actors who participated.  

How to memorize scripts

I'm forever amazed at how actors can memorize entire plays and TV scripts.  I've been reminded of that recently watching my cast of GOING GOING GONE memorize a 90 minute show.  (Half-price tickets are still available for Sunday.   I take any opportunity to plug it.  Just go here.)   But it prompted me to re-post a two-part series I did almost four years ago on memorization    I surveyed a number of very successful actors and actresses to learn how they memorize scripts. Their answers were all fascinating and wildly different. There were too many to squeeze into one post so tomorrow I’ll share the rest. I’m sure a few of you have methods of your own. My thanks to these actors for their generous participation. Memorization is just one of the many skills I don't have to be an actor.

Actor 1

Read the scene a few times. Try not to read it out loud a lot. Then get a pad and scribble your dialogue as quickly as possible without worrying about being able to read it back later...no punctuation. Write as fast as your brain goes. Keep doing that until the lines come fast.

Then have someone read the scene with you a few times, or do it yourself covering the dialogue with something until you get to it.

If they're good lines it'll go quickly. If they're crap lines, do the same thing but curse a lot while you're doing it.

******

Actor 2

I have a lousy memory. And it isn't - for me at least, though I expect this may be generally true - something that gets easier with time, since, with time, one's memory declines.

I HATE memorizing.

Then, there are 2 categories of memorizing: 1) Theater - must be word perfect. Them's the rules, since the script is "rented" from the owner, not purchased. 2) tv/film: depending on who the producers are, who the director is, how much clout the writer has (lots if he's a producer - as you know), one may be able to get away with a bit of paraphrasing...or "improving". More in drama than comedy, I think.

Here's how I memorize, and it's totally obsessive/compulsive.

I number all my lines. If there is more than one scene, and the scenes do not immediately follow each other, than I treat each scene separately. After numbering, I go through the scene, making sure I can do each line by memory. Then I make sure I can do each pair of lines by memory. 1&2. 3&4. 5&6, etc. Then I do 2&3, 4&5, 6&7, through to the end. Then by 3's. 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, etc. Then 2-4, 5-7, 8-10, etc. Then 3-5.... Then by 4's, 5's, 6's, until I'm doing the entire scene's lines from memory. If there are lengthy speeches, I also treat them as separate entities with this method. This is a method of my own devising, and probably a rotten way to go about it. Some people simply look at dialogue and remember it. Some people should not ever step in front of my car.

And that's how I do it. If working creatively is heaven, then my process is hell.

Oh, and one also has to memorize cues...or just wait until there's a lengthy silence and then begin speaking. Cues, sometimes, are actually more difficult, unless they actually "cue" the next speech.

Friendly cue: What time is it?
Unfriendly cue: I'm feeling kind of...mushy.

******

Actor 3

Hmmmm.... Good question. It just comes from a combo of looking it over and the repetition of saying the lines. I think I'm a visual learner because if I can visualize the type and where it was on the page, the words come. It's probably second nature at this point. It's also really great for me to have at least one night of looking at it just before bed. Then, somehow, the next day ...as if by magic....it's there. ( I go into a terrible panic when handed pages on the set!)

Overall, I would say that the more often someone practices the skill the better they become at it. I'd advise a new actor to work on various monologues regularly .....just to become easy with the skill (I'd recommend Shakespeare.)

I do have to say that good writing is easier to memorize. Bad writing can be a real struggle. CSI is a nightmare!

**************

Actor 4

The truth is that the only time I actively memorize is when the lines are awkward or poorly written. Then it is sometimes necessary to go over the words again and again until you find a way to make them 'fall trippingly off the tongue'.

When doing a play, where everything must be learned at once, I usually find that by the time I have studied my way through the script several times I have already picked most of them up. The thing that seals it is the blocking process; suddenly you just know that when you cross down stage left and pick up that glass you say "X".

The same is true when you are shooting movies and long form TV. You just do it scene by scene, and working with the other actors makes it all come alive and be much easier.

Now sitcoms - that can be a real challenge since those darn writers just keep fussing and adjusting up until the moment they are thrown off of the sound stage by the janitor after the final taping. I made the mistake of telling the Charles Brothers that I was a very quick study. It got to be a sort of game with them to give me brand new lengthy orations just as the stage manager was counting down. Certainly kept me on my toes!

Tomorrow the rest. Hope you find this topic as fascinating as I do.

Friday Questions

Week two of my play. Come see it. Half price tickets for tonight.  Use Promo code  008.  And now, for some Friday Questions.

Jahn Ghalt leads off with a question about my book.

This reminds me to encourage you to write another memoir as a follow up to

The Me Generation.. by ME

Why not make this a Friday Question:

Ken, how is your outline coming along for the next volume in your Memoir Series?

It may seem contrived, but doing one book for every decade looks like a winner for me - I'd buy several copies for me and all my sufficiently aged, worthy friends.

Thanks so much for the support. Unfortunately, the amount of time it took to write vs. the sales didn’t propel me to just jump right in and begin the next decade. Too bad, because lots of neat stuff happened in the ‘70s. Maybe if I sell a few more copies of THE ME GENERATION…BY ME I’ll feel differently, but for now I’m writing plays.

From Don R:

The basic premise of CHEERS was that Sam Malone was an alcoholic who owned a bar. To my knowledge, there was never a story that had him falling off the wagon, or getting close. Was that a deliberate decision by the producers?

Yes there was. Season one. “Endless Slumper” written by Sam Simon.

Jeff Alexander asks:

When is a "spinoff" not a "spinoff?"

When "Cheers" ended and Dr. Frasier Crane started the 1993-94 season with his own, enormously popular "Frasier" series, that certainly was a spinoff.

But is it a "spinoff" when a series introduces one character as a guest shot and then. lo and behold, next year, that character has his/her own series? I'm going all the way back to "All In The Family"/"Maude" for this one -- Bea Arthur was on AITF twice, first visiting the Bunkers, then in the second spot at her own home in Tuckahoe with husband Walter (Bill Macy) and daughter Carol (played there by Marcia Rodd).

My point is that seemed more like a pilot for the series than a spinoff.

I've read that "Maude" was considered a "spinoff" but disagree. Still, I may be splitting hairs with a meat cleaver, but I'd like to read your thoughts on that, Mr. Levine.

Technically, if a series is launched from another series, even if it’s a one-shot appearance, it’s considered a spin-off. Mork was introduced on HAPPY DAYS. THE ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW was technically spun off from THE DANNY THOMAS SHOW. In one episode Danny winds up in Mayberry and encounters Andy Taylor.

Obviously though, that’s not the spirit of the term spin-off. Rhoda and Phyllis were integral characters of THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW before they were given their own series. The Jeffersons lived next door to Archie and George, Lionel and Weezy made appearances at the Bunker home. Maude was Archie’s relative. And when MAUDE was spun off, her maid, Florida then got spun off on her own (GOOD TIMES).

You see fewer spinoffs from sitcoms these days because quite frankly, there are so few that are big enough hits to warrant it.

Speaking of spinoffs (gulp), Ray has an AfterMASH question regarding credits and Larry Gelbart.

I watched the AfterMASH clip. I remember watching it was on after the original's run, and remember wanting it to succeed just because I'd come of age with so many of the characters. It did raise a Friday-questionish question in my mind, though:

The clip shows Larry Gelbart getting a "developed by" credit. Although I probably didn't pay attention as the years were unfolding, I later interacted with "elsig" on MASH newsgroups and learned that he had little to do with the original series after the first few seasons. So was this development credit for AfterMASH a homage, a negotiated term, or did he have actual input into the production of the sequel?

First of all, Larry had a big involvement in season one. He conceived the series, wrote the one-hour pilot, spent two or three days a week with us, directed some episodes, and helped us break stories and rewrite scripts.

As for the “Developed By” credit: There is a WGA credits manual that specifies the difference between actually “creating” a series and “developing” one. Certain conditions have to already exist in Writer A’s script so that when it is significantly changed by Writer B, Writer A gets Created By credit and Writer B gets Developed By credit.

As for the MASH/AfterMASH situation, I am purely speculating, but Larry Gelbart on MASH got a “Developed for Television” credit (which is somewhat unusual). But of course the characters were already established in the original movie (and the novel that led to the film for that matter).

So for AfterMASH, since some of the same characters were used from MASH, I suppose Larry was only entitled to a “Developed By” credit. However, you’ll notice there is no “Created By” credit in either series. So I’m guessing that’s why. But I can assure you Larry and Larry alone created and wrote every word of the AfterMASH pilot, regardless of his credit.

What’s your Friday Question? And thanks in advance for any of you who do come out and see my play. I’ll be there all weekend, so please say hi.

Another great review...

... for my new play GOING GOING GONE.  You can read it here.   Ten half-price tickets still remain for tomorrow night and are few are left for Sunday.  Saturday night is sold out.  So grab 'em while you can.  Just go here and type in Promo Code 008.  

Now back to today's regularly scheduled blog rant. 

This guy is a fucking idiot!

And surprise – I'm not referring to a political candidate!

It’s Mike Lazzo, the executive vice president and creative director of Adult Swim.

He was accused recently of purposely not hiring women creators or showrunners because (are you ready?): “When you put women in the writers room, you get conflict, not comedy.”

What an asinine, idiotic, short-sided, WRONG thing to say. Seriously, how does this moron have this job?

It’s such a staggeringly ignorant statement that it almost doesn’t seem worthy of argument.

Let me just say this: Female writers are every bit as good and funny as male writers and in many cases better.  Period.  Unlike this buffoon, I’ve been in writing rooms with women writers. I've hired women writers.  I've relied on women writers.  My statement is a fact.

According to a Buzzfeed report, Adult Swim employs the lowest number of female writers of any network. 1 in 34 are women. And according to Buzzfeed based on information passed on by employees, it is Lazzo who is responsible.

On Monday he tried to clear it up. Here’s what he said: “Women don’t tend to like conflict, comedy often comes from conflict, so that’s probably why we (or others) have so few female projects.”

Okay, so compare that to his earlier statement where he said the problem was women give you conflict, not comedy. Now he’s saying the problem is women don’t give you conflict.

It's just mind boggling.

And he’s proud of his assertion and his policy.   Even if it's just lip service, you think he would apologize and promise to hire more women.   But no, not even that. 

There’s been a big push to increase diversity in all ranks of television, which is far overdue. But when you see how few women writers are being hired – in general, not just on Adult Swim – make sure you include them in the diversity category.

And you can see why it’s so difficult for them – backward-thinking executives like Mike Lazzo are in positions of power.

Oh, and by the way, it’s also why television is not nearly as good as it could be.

Special offer to see my new play!

I want as many of you who live in Southern California to see my new play, GOING GOING GONE.   It's getting great reviews (like this one).   So this week I am offering tickets at half-price to you loyal readers.  Some good seats remain for this weekend -- Friday & Saturday night and Sunday matinee.   Comedies are always more fun when there's a packed house.   So join us!

You just go here.

And type in promo code: oo8.

You can then buy tix for half price.  

It's a very funny play with a great cast.  And I'll be there if you want to say hello or ask me about the Infield Fly Rule. 

My all-time favorite GONG SHOW act

You know television -- one show becomes even a modest hit and every network scrambles to put on seven just like it.   This summer ABC ran a series of rebooted vintage game shows.  ($25,000 PYRAMID, MATCH GAME, etc.) and I guess the numbers were decent (i.e. anyone was watching) so now they're going back and seeing what other retro game shows they can raise from the dead.

First up:  THE GONG SHOW. 

For those who don't remember the original from the '70s and '80s, it was essentially AMERICA'S GOT TALENT but with idiots.  Most of the performers were awful and got "gonged" off the stage.  I don't think you were allowed to join the improv group, the Groundlings unless you had been on that show six times.  Most of the non-traditional talents were goofs (or at least I'd like to think so).   It's the kind of thing that's funny for like three episodes then YOU give them a gong.  

Show creator/CIA operative Chuck Barris produced and hosted.  At the time he was considered a clown.  Today he'd be the Republican candidate for president.   There was even a movie about him that George Clooney directed called CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND.  

Personal note:  He's also the guy who threw me off THE DATING GAME. 

But with the prospect of this show reappearing (ABC bought it with Will Arnett directing) I thought I would share my all-time favorite GONG SHOW act.   This aired in September 1977 but only on the east coast.  You'll see why.   They won't let me embed it so you'll have to click here and go to the link.  It's worth it.

Stay for the whole thing because panelist Jaye P. Morgan has the line of lines. 

I can't imagine how the new version could possibly be an improvement over this.

Ve are making MOVIE MAGIC here!

I recently showed an episode of ALMOST PERFECT that centered around the production of an hour cop show. My friend, Lee Goldberg good-naturally pointed out some inaccuracies. I reminded him of how on terrific shows like THE GOOD WIFE, cases go to trial in one day, and thus began a fun exchange of the creative license that shows and movies take.

In the past, I wrote about the things we did in CHEERS that required a suspension of belief (in some cases, a MAJOR suspension of belief). You can find that here.

Creative license is part of storytelling. The one day I was on the set of a Billy Wilder movie (BUDDY BUDDY), Mr. Wilder wanted a wall heater to turn on and instantly glow. One of the technicians told him it took thirty seconds for the filaments to get hot. Mr. Wilder then replied in his distinctive accent: “Young man, ve are making movie magic here! Did you ever notice there is always a parking space right out front and couples always get the best window table? Movie magic!” The wall heater glowed instantly upon turning it on.

The problem arises when the arena is something you yourself are very close to. Lawyers cringe watching legal shows. Doctors have big trouble accepting the shenanigans that go on in medical dramas. So the inaccuracies really stick out whereas the average viewer just goes with it. A doctor friend of mine said he was always able to diagnose the mystery ailment in HOUSE by the first act break. (My problem with HOUSE was the patient rooms all being glass cubicles. You really want to use your bedpan with strangers walking by.)

On MASH, we had a medical consultant, a nurse on set, and a military advisor and we still took some liberties (like them being there for eleven years when the Korean War was just over three).

As a former radio disc jockey, I had lots of technical issues with WKRP IN CINCINNATI but was able to get past them all because Jan Smithers was in the show.

But my favorite example is going to see the baseball movie, BULL DURHAM with a professional ballplayer. I was broadcasting for Syracuse at the time of the movie’s release and went to see it with a few players to kill some time on the road. I loved the movie (still do). But as we walked out one of the players said, “What a piece of shit!” He had even thought of walking out. “What was your problem with it?” I asked. “There was that scene where the count was 2-1 and the catcher called for a slider. That would NEVER happen.” Amazingly, that glaring inaccuracy did not bother the rest of America. (Of course this is the same player who hated WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT because he thought Toontown wasn’t realistic enough.)

We all walk a fine line. There’s an old expression “Never let facts get in the way of a good story,” but there’s also the obligation to be as accurate and realistic as you can. Still, aren’t movies long enough without having to watch Julia Roberts drive around for ten minutes looking for a parking space and then walking two blocks to the restaurant? Imagine 24 if things really took place in real time. “Tonight Jack Bauer drives from CTU to Van Nuys and gets as far as Coldwater Canyon.”

VE ARE MAKING MOVIE MAGIC HERE.

Thanks!

Opening night of my play GOING GOING GONE came off without a hitch.  No chandeliers fell on the audience.  No one was injured doing flying stunts.   No one forgot the lyrics to any song (forget that it wasn't a musical).   Somehow everything came together.  To the entire creative team, my sincere thanks for a boffo show and I look forward to five more weekends with you all.

Sunday was emotional because it was Vin Scully's final broadcast after 67 years.  My play, set in a pressbox, is dedicated to Vin.   The above photo is of me, my amazing cast (Troy Metcalf, Dennis Pearson, David Babich, and Annie Abrams), and the man of the hour.

"Hope you'll make your plans to come on out and see us," as Vinny would say.   Performances Friday and Saturday nights at 8:00 and Sundays 3:00.   We close November 6th. 

You can go to Goldstar or Plays411 for tickets and information.   It's a small theatre and seating is limited so drop everything you're doing and get your seats now.   Thanks much.  We now return you to today's regularly scheduled post.  Just scroll down or click here. 

The one question I'm asked more than any other

I’ve answered it a couple of times but it always bears repeating, especially since it’s a question on any young hopeful writer’s mind.

Jerod Butt is the latest to ask:

How does someone begin to figure out whether or not he wants to get into sitcom writing, and what to do about that if he lives in the middle of Nowhere, Midwest; has a crappy, break-even job; has a sizeable amount of college debt; and needs to see either Dr. Hartley or Dr. Crane about the direction of his life but cannot because of expensive insurance?

You could always call Dr. Crane on the radio.  

But seriously, I’ll give you the good news first and then all the hurdles. It doesn’t cost anything to see if you want to become a sitcom writer. You want to be a director? Get out your checkbook. Even short films on iPhones require some moolah. Want to be an actor? Either someone has to hire you or you have to help finance a production.

But writing only requires your time and a computer. And if you’re reading this post I assume you already have a computer.

Bonus good news: If ultimately what you write sucks you don’t have to show it to anybody. If I’m helping finance your short film, Mr. Spielberg-wannabe, I want to see the finished product. Bad scripts can hide at the bottom of drawers or disappear with one key stroke. And since our first efforts doing anything tend to be bad, you can improve in relative obscurity. Learning to do baseball play-by-play I was not afforded that luxury. I’d be calling games into a tape recorder at Dodger Stadium while drunks would taunt me and offer unsolicited critiques.

So if you’re unsure as to whether sitcom writing is for you, take a shot. What have you got to lose? Probably the best first step, after maybe reading a how-to book or two (and going through my archives) is to write a spec script of an existing show. What’s your favorite sitcom? Which show best jibes with your comic sensibilities? Study that show. Watch multiple episodes. Figure out how they tell their stories. And then write one.

It will more than likely be terrible. But did you love writing it? Are there elements in it that are good – maybe some great jokes, or fun ideas? I guess the big question is whether you enjoyed the process and were encouraged enough to write another?

If so, keep going. Every script will be better than the previous one. Delve deeper into comedy writing. Is there a college course you could take? Helpful videos on line?

And this brings me to your next concern? Can you break in to sitcom writing if you live outside of LA? Yes. But it’s much harder. MUCH harder. You may write a great script, enter it in a contest, win, and get the attention of agents or executives. But it sure helps if you’re out here. For one thing, you can network. You can make connections.

There are writing seminars and industry people appear at WGA Foundation programs or college programs. You can meet showrunners and craft services people.

You can also put together a support group of other hopefuls. There are plenty of other young scribes just like you. When you’re in Wisconsin and have the burning desire to be a sitcom writer you’re somewhat isolated. You can’t throw a dead cat in a Studio City Starbuck without hitting five of them.

But now comes the hard part. Should you take that leap and move to LA? All of a sudden the pursuit is no longer free. And there are no promises of success.

This is the point where you really have to look into your soul. How badly do you want this? How feasible is it realistically (especially if you have college loans or worse, owe Mastercard)? Only you can answer that question. You can get feedback on your scripts. Do people think they’re awesome? But at the end of the day, you have to decide whether it’s worth it to take the big plunge. You will struggle. At times it will be very discouraging. It's not cheap out here.  But at least the weather is nice.

So that’s the good and bad. Practically every writer whose name you see on sitcoms faced the same dilemma. They wrote their specs, impressed someone, and eventually broke in. Many had to relocate to Los Angeles. It can be done. It has been done. Will you be next?

Hope that helps.   And whatever you decide, best of luck.  

The pilot you will never see

If you do, I'll have to kill you.

This is one of those posts where I will ask you to kindly indulge me. There’s no great point. No major lesson. This is just a chance for me to vent and get something off my chest. When you read why you will surely understand. Thank you for humoring me today.

Okay. Here we go…

I owned one of the first home VCR’s. Bought it in the mid ‘70s. It played 3/4 inch tapes in cartridges that were the size of today’s Mini Coopers. The machine weighed a thousand pounds. You needed two people to lift one. It cost $1500 in 1976. I bought it to tape shows David Isaacs and I wrote. The salesman was showing me all the nifty features. It had a pause button. I could freeze-frame. There was also a slow-motion feature that allowed me to advance the tape frame by frame. Now, I thought this was fine for me. I could freeze-frame my credit, but why on earth would anyone else want these features? The salesman said, “Schmuck, why do you think people buy these damn machines? To watch porno!” The slow-mo suddenly made perfect sense.

A few years later VHS became the standard. The tape was 1/2 inch, would record up to six hours of content, and the cartridge size went from Mini Cooper to Mini Mac. I bought one of those and my 3/4 inch machine became obsolete. I eventually gave it away. Let the Council of Jewish Women figure out what to do with the freakin’ thing.

But I kept the 3/4 inch tapes I had recorded. And of course I haven’t played any of them for years. God knows how much they've deteriorated over time? At best the color would be smeared and washed out. At worst I’d be looking at dust. Recently, during a spring-cleaning project I discovered a box of these clunky relics. Most were MASH episodes. I now had DVD copies that were far superior in quality to those musty cartridges and took up a fraction of the space so I got rid of them.

But there was one tape I kept – the first pilot David and I were ever associated with. We wrote it for NBC through Universal for the 1976/77 season and it didn’t go. Back then networks aired their unsold pilots in the summer. We used to call this programming FAILURE THEATER. On July 20, 1977 our pilot aired on NBC.

A little backstory: During our early freelance period we met a certain producer who took a liking to us. He had a development deal at Universal. He said if we ever had a pilot idea to bring it to him. We were newbies at the time and couldn’t get in to pitch networks ourselves, but if we were under the umbrella of this veteran writer/producer the networks would hear our spiel.

SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE had recently premiered and was a huge hit with the younger generation. Our idea was to do a cross between SNL and THE DICK VAN DYKE SHOW – a local late night comedy sketch show in San Francisco where the cast also wrote the material. The sensibility of the humor would be very edgy (like SNL).   We were 30 ROCK and STUDIO 60 only 30+ years earlier.

This producer liked it. We took it to NBC and we sold it in five minutes. We came back with an outline that they approved, and a first draft that they loved. Minor notes, a second draft, and based on that script NBC greenlit the pilot. Gee, this pilot stuff was easy! 

At that point we were cut out of the process completely. A producer was brought on board, Bo Kaprall, and he did a page one rewrite, keeping only our premise, basic story structure, and characters. Let’s just say we weren’t thrilled with the results. The casting was terrible. Not that the actors themselves were bad; they were just miscast. (One of the actors we later hired for MASH.)  We had a character who was supposed to be an old Jewish Catskills writer. They hired Pat McCormick. You get the idea.

We were invited to the taping (how nice of them). And I just remember being horribly disappointed with the final result. But that was then. Would time be kind to our first official television pilot?

I have a good friend, Stu Shostak who has the facilities to digitize old tapes. (If you have stuff you want digitized this is your man.) So last week I brought him probably the only remaining copy of THE BAY CITY AMUSEMENT COMPANY and as he made a digital copy I got to screen it again for the first time in 35 years.

OHMYFUCKINGGOD!!!

This was easily the single worst piece of shit I have ever seen. Watching this travesty was like having your wisdom teeth removed without Novocain. And our names were on it. And not just that. Kaprall tried to get shared writing credit and we fought him and won in arbitration. We went to great effort to get our names on this stinkburger. (Why? Because creator credit means royalties for every episode and we didn’t want to surrender any of that, especially to someone who had made the show worse).

The direction was atrocious. Everyone was playing so big and burlesque you wanted to crawl under a chair. Mugging, double and triple takes for every clam joke.  Imagine Jerry Lewis at his most insane wacky zany nutty maniacal  – he was Ben Stein compared to how these actors were asked to perform.   The also wore gorilla suits, loud jackets, cowboy outfits, and were pulled around by their neckties.  I guarantee they tested worse than the Manson Family.

And our names were on it. And back in those days there were only three networks so even if the show finished last in the ratings, more people saw it than last week’s AMERICAN IDOL.

I will give you two examples of actual jokes used in this pilot. Our idea was to have the level of humor edgy and hip like the original SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE remember? Instead, these were the types of gags that made it to air.

The owner of the station was a Gene Autry type. When he tells the writer/performers that he has a problem one says to him (and this is verbatim): “Did your horse make doo doo in the house again?”

Our names are on this!

Later at one of the character’s apartment everyone barges in around dinner time. One asks: “Is that a roast?” And another answers: “No, it’s a chicken in blackface.”

Kaprall WANTED his name on this?! Holy shit!

You will never see this pilot. No one will ever see this pilot. I will never see this pilot again. And I will never say another bad thing about 2 BROKE GIRLS ever again.

It's Opening Night!

Well, this is it. Opening night. It’s the day my emotions always swing back and forth between “this is what it’s all about!” and “why the fuck did I do this?”

But mostly (this time) I’m very excited. I loved writing this play. It’s usually a good sign when I don’t get to page five and realize there’s no play here. Or I get to page seventy and realize I’ve accidentally written CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF.

I’ve surrounded myself with a great cast, director, and crew. On the one hand, that makes me feel very secure. On the other, it means that if the play fizzles it’s all my fault. If jokes don’t get laughs I can't blame Lester Holt.

We’ve been rehearsing for a month. When rehearsals begin you think a month is an eternity. Then you blink and people are filing in.  But the actors are ready and the air conditioning works. 

So what’s left is just the normal first night jitters. If anyone in a theater production doesn’t have them there’s something wrong. That’s what makes live theatre so great. I’m going to keep telling myself that all day.

Tickets are available for all remaining performances. A few half price tickets are still available for tomorrow.  Come see if I’m really funny. Now through November 6th at the Hudson Guild Theatre in glamorous Hollywood (as OFF Broadway as you can get without being in the ocean). 

Good luck tonight to everyone involved. Love you all.

Friday Questions

Friday Questions on the last night of previews. Hope you come see my play. It opens officially tomorrow night.

Mark gets us started with a question about GOING GOING GONE:

Can you tell us about the audition process? How did you find the actors and how did you select them? What were you looking for? I sort of have a limited sense of how it happens for tv and movies but not for theater.

We hired a terrific casting director, Michael Donovan. I met with him and discussed how I envisioned the characters. He then reached out to agents, managers, and I think listed the qualifications in breakdown services and selected a group of actors for each part he thought would be right.

We then had casting sessions at the theatre with me, the director, and producers. Michael did an amazing job. We cast the whole play in only two casting sessions.

One difference between casting theatre and television is that for TV the actor stands only a few feet from the people doing the casting. For theatre the casting people sit way back in one of the back rows. They want a better sense of how the actor will project. Projection isn’t important on film. Everyone is miked.

From -30-:

Why don't you direct your own play? It's not like you have no experience.

At some point I will, and I have directed one acts. But entire plays are a different animal and I find I’m learning a ton from Andy Barnicle.

In TV everything has to move quickly.  You block the show the first day and by mid-afternoon have to be ready for a runthrough.  Four days later you shoot the show.  For plays you generally have a month of rehearsals   So there are time management issues, dealing with all the tech demands – I’m sure I could do it, but would probably make mistakes that would hurt the play. Better to let someone who really knows what he’s doing direct it than myself.  Plus, it's nice to have an outside eye evaluating the material. 

My technical skill set is dealing with cameras. I’m sure if Andy had a multi-cam pilot that needed directing, he would ask me to step in.

Peter asks:

Is there any movie that you hated the first time you saw it but grew on you in subsequent viewings to the point it became a favorite? I hated Rosemary's Baby the first time I watched it. I thought it was slow and dull. But it's now one of my all time favorites?

THE CAINE MUTINY. Saw it as a kid and was bored out of my mind. Boring talk talk talk. Then I saw it again as an adult, and whoa! What a great picture and an absolutely riveting performance by Humphrey Bogart.  (He played this insane ship captain who has a meltdown on the witness stand. Very similar to Trump's debate performance.)

Same for THE AMERICANIZATION OF EMILY. It’s Paddy Chayefsky at his best, but I was too young to appreciate that when I first saw it as a kid.

And a third is THE TIME MACHINE. Meh at first; super cool thereafter.

More often however, movies that I originally loved don’t hold up upon later viewing. The Blake Edwards PINK PANTHER movies leap to mind.

What movies do you guys love that you originally didn’t care for?

Joe has a Vin Scully question on this, his final weekend of calling Dodger baseball.

Since you love sitcoms and Vin Scully, what did you think about Vin's sitcom narration career on the immortal "Occasional Wife"?

Since most people are not familiar with OCCASIONAL WIFE, it was a romantic comedy sitcom in the mid-‘60s. Michael Callan needed to have a wife to impress people in his office so worked out a financial deal with neighbor Patricia Harty to pose as his wife. Scully was the narrator.

I watched the show when it was on because of Vin Scully and remember enjoying it. Recently, I re-watched the pilot and was pleasantly surprised. It had sort of a faux Neil Simon feel to it. Here’s the pilot. See for yourself.


What is your Friday Question? Now it’s off to the theatre.

The current state of TV comedy

This is all you need to know.

I’m teaching another graduate television comedy writing seminar at UCLA. I have eight super-bright students. They’re all funny and extremely passionate about the business. They know every show on every platform. And they watch inordinate amounts of television (although rarely on their TV’s). The fact that a series is on some relatively obscure streaming service makes it just as accessible to them as if it were on NBC.

I began a discussion about which current sitcoms did they like? The results were eye-opening. There was little or no consensus on anything. Two people would love a certain show; three others would hate it. This was true for almost every show that was mentioned.

And remember, these are Millennials – the prime target the industry is trying anything to reach.

Comedy has become so niche that’s it hard to build a large following even among the desired audience.

On the one hand I applaud that creators are not trying to program to the lowest common denominator. They’re willing to take creative chances even if it means alienating a certain portion of the population.

But on the other, shouldn’t there be some middle ground? Shouldn’t there be some comedies that appeal to a broad base of Millennials? You might say, well, that’s what the broadcast networks are providing. But rarely in the conversation with my students was a network comedy even mentioned. BIG BANG THEORY was acknowledged as was THE GOOD PLACE (which many had sampled and had split opinions). But not MODERN FAMILY, BLACKISH, THE GOLDBERGS, LIFE IN PIECES, 2 BROKE GIRLS, CARMICHAEL, SUPER STORE, MOM, etc.

The viewers that networks are chasing are the viewers that have abandoned them. Clearly this year networks are trying to go more quirky, but it feels desperate, like they’re shooting wildly at a moving target.

So can it be done? Can you mount a series that is contemporary and attracts a large following? Do you have to settle for small but loyal audiences? Are Millennials even capable of agreeing on anything?

The answer of course is YES. What’s the most popular sitcom currently in syndication – not just in the US but around the world? It’s not even close. FRIENDS. Could there be a more retro multi-camera 20 year-old show than that? And yet, the reruns remain insanely popular. The group did have consensus on FRIENDS. And ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT. And (of all things) GOLDEN GIRLS.

I guess what I’m saying is that making your new show too niche could be a trap. People still want to laugh. Yes, even Millennials. Maybe the way to reach them is not some bizarre edgy show that breaks all the rules but appeals to .000001 of the population. Maybe the key is to go back to the essence of what made those iconic shows work. Genuinely caring about the characters and their predicaments. Placing a high priority on making the show actually funny. Dealing with universal relatable issues and themes.

Hey, it couldn’t hurt. The industry is trying everything else.

Until eight whip-smart funny graduate students can agree on a show I think there’s work still to be done.

"We'll get to it."

The first preview of my new comedy play, GOING GOING GONE is tomorrow night. A few seats are still available at discount prices for tomorrow night’s preview. We open Saturday night (and are sold out). But a few discount seats still remain for Sunday’s matinee. For the past several weeks I’ve been reporting on the ongoing process of rehearsing a play.

Last weekend was tech.

That’s when all the technical aspects of the play have to be worked out and assigned. In other words, all the stuff we've been saying "we'll get to it,"  well, now we have to actually get to it.   Because my play takes place in the pressbox of a baseball stadium there needs to be crowd background, cheering and booing at various times. In short, there are over 100 sound cues and 47 light cues.

Cricket, our sound designer, built all the cues on her laptop. How did they do this for OKLAHOMA? All of the sound and light cues get built into one computer program and during the performance our stage manager, Emyli just plays the cues in order. What this requires of course is someone with experience and great concentration. I must say, I’ve been super impressed by the craftsmanship and dedication of everybody on the production staff. This is a small theatre. No one is getting rich. And yet everyone is pouring their hearts and souls into the production. There really are still people who do it for the art. I’m even more touched because I’m reading the book on CAA where no one does anything for the art. It’s all about money, power, and fame. (I’m enjoying the book but have to take a shower after each chapter.)

These were two long days. At 10 AM the set, sound, and lighting designers came in to tweak and prepare. The actors arrived at noon. We then went from cue to cue – getting in and out of each scene, setting any sound cues (like phones ringing or the crowd cheering), making sure any props were in place, etc. You don’t realize it but there are a thousand little details. We have food being eaten in the play. So a microwave has been set up backstage. Media guides and statistic packs are at each reporter’s workspace. The laminated media passes each journalist wears have been custom made. The costumes are carefully selected. And this is just for four actors and one set with no costume changes. Again, how the fuck did they do OKLAHOMA?

For the actors it’s a lonnnnng day. Noon till 8:00 with a dinner break. Unlike previous rehearsals where they were doing scenes straight through; now they’re starting and stopping random segments multiple times. For a large percentage of the day they just stood in place as the lighting and sound was constructed around them. Acting is HARD. Then you add memorization and the tedious process of tech. It’s a real good bet you’ll never see me star in one of my plays.

And for the director, Andy Barnicle, he has to tie it all together, convey his personal vision, and keep a constant eye on the clock. You’d be shocked how fast five hours go by during tech.

On Sunday the cast did two full run-throughs with all the sounds and cues, along with notes in between. We’re almost there.

And now the part where unexpected things happen. Arnold Palmer passed away on Sunday. And in the play there are two pages of jokes about Arnold Palmer and his drink. Not derogatory jokes mind you, but still, in light of his just passing I didn’t feel it was appropriate to do any jokes. “Too soon” as they say. So I had to go home Sunday night, scramble, and write a whole new two page scene. I think it works, but I haven’t seen it in front of an audience yet. You come and decide.

This week the set is being painted and final touches are being applied in all departments.  Last night and tonight are Dress Rehearsals. Next up, YOU. Thanks for coming along on this journey. It’s not Moss Hart saving a play in New Haven (see the book ACT ONE), but it is the process and very exhilarating.