jrising | [rocky] Professionalism killed the Rocky star

There was a fantastic discussion at the Rocky party about the state of the cast. The vocal consensus was this:

There's an undercurrent of over-professionalism at the show. In small but definite ways, the drive for professionalism stifles some of the fun of the show and makes working at it a chore. Because the show isn't as much fun, it isn't as good, and the audience has noticed. Both directors, theater 3, and Acid's absence were blamed for these problems.

It's so tough to disentangle real harmful effects from nostalgia. So, tell me: do you agree? Have we gained the world and lost our soul (or raised the bar and broken our backs)? The drive for screen accuracy can push us to do better, but if it drives out jokes and connecting with the audience-- if our performance just duplicates the film-- do we want it? The cast members used to work up the audience waiting outside before the show. Does anyone do that now? We have such a great group, and we can fix these problems, but maybe not without big changes.

Feel free to post anonymously or email me separately.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

asavitzk.livejournal.com

Wow, so much to say but I guess it can easily be summed up as "and thus the circle continues."

There are always discussions about the cast "in general" and they are usually about how things have changed for the worse. I remember these conversations back in 1994 when I joined and people were talking about how great things used to be. Am I saying this because I don't think people should care? Of course not, I'm just trying to give a bit of perspective.

Has the audience shrunk? A bit, yes. But honestly it's been happening everywhere around the country as the DVD/Video/TV-Showings have drawn people out of our seats. That trend will continue but we've got a good core of regulars plus a regular rotation of virgins and as long as we don't start to outright suck, that will continue as well. All I worry about is making sure we get enough people that management will still want to show it.

Screen accuracy/professionalism is the main thing that sets us apart from other area casts. Notice I did not say that other casts suck and we're the best. We're not. But we're the best at *our style* of Rocky and that style is outright professionalism. We have the best props, costumes, lights, and yes, screen accuracy. If you're screen accurate and then change something to be funny, then it's funny. If you're just fucking around and change something to be funny, nobody will notice anything other than the fact that you've been fucking around.

I like Twinkie's A/B accuracy ideas but I feel it necessary to note that the full accuracy is what we at FBC should strive for - that's our "thing". True, most won't notice if Brad uses the proper hand to put into his pocket at just the right time, but that guy playing Brad will know and will (or should) feel a sense of pride when he gets it just right. Plus, who's to say who in the audience won't be looking past him at the screen at just that moment and think "hey, he didn't move his hand right". I doubt he'd think "hey, he moved his hand just right" because you tend not to notice perfection unless you're looking for it, but imperfection usually jumps out at you.

Do I think Gary is a problem? Sometimes. And sometimes I think I'm a problem and sometimes I think Jon is a problem and sometimes I think JD is a problem and sometimes I think a techie who joined 2 weeks ago is a problem. Everyone has their moments where they cause problems and everyone has their moments when they contribute greatness. No one person is responsible for all the problems though it does fall on a few shoulders to minimize those problems - mainly my shoulders. And as I've said countless times before, if people don't come to me with problems and hopefully answers, nothing can be done about it. Talk all you want at a party but unless I'm there and can be engaged in the conversation, or at least be told the details later on, how much good can really come out of it other than validating the participants' "oh woe is me" attitude?

Getting back to the over-professionalism and having no fun - I really do have to disagree (again). First of all, though they are rare, we do have special nights every once in a while (and if we did them more often they wouldn't be special). I think people had fun during the evil bearded rocky night - I know I did and I know others did as well because they told me. I also know we can have fun being professionals because that's what we do every time we do an outside show. We wouldn't get hired back to so many places if we weren't professionals there yet at the same time we have alot of fun (both during and after the shows).

A professional, screen-accurate show is fun. Trust me.

I wonder how many will email or post anonymously to Jimmy yet won't do that for me.

From:

jrising.livejournal.com

I want to take the comments from this discussion and bring them to you and Gary. I don't want this discussion to replace talking to you, but if it's another forum for collecting people's thoughts and encouraging discussion, it can't be a bad thing.

I, for one, don't want the professionalism or the screen accuracy to go away, because they are fun. But they need to come out of taking pride in the show-- they need to be an expression of our pride, and I worry that recently they're more motivated by you than us. The same is true for "our style". FBC is fantastically professional, and that's wonderful, but it becomes over-professional when that style is imposed on us. Professionalism isn't going to go away from loosening that expectation, which currently (in small ways) shares the worst of being globally disconnecting and too-close-for-comfort scrutinizing.

Nor do I think there's any danger of FBC becoming just like any other cast. We don't need a "thing" in order to set ourselves apart. We need to be connected as a cast, and connect with the audience, and they'll see what we bring to the show. We don't need a micro-manager; we need a champion.

From:

asavitzk.livejournal.com

Please do come to us and talk because frankly I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here. "Over-professional" sounds almost as illogical as "more perfect" to me and if I don't expect people to be professionals then I'm not acting like much of a leader. And please explain how we are disconnecting while over-scrutinizing.

From:

asmodai.livejournal.com

I share your confusion.

And I'd like to add that in the cycles of things, I have seen the cast go through eras of a marked decrease in professionalism. And I think those were a function of how much the directors encouraged professionalism and themselves acted professionally. Being this good doesn't just HAPPEN. It needs to be cultivated. It sounds to me like the solution might not be to decrease focus on professionalism, but rather for people with a problem to make peace with said professionalism, and figure out how to have fun while upholding our focus on precision.

From:

jrising.livejournal.com

I'll try to explain more what I'm feeling, but I'm happy to talk to you about it in person.

First, I agree with

asmodai about how important the role of the director is in cultivating a good show, and I think its shown every week how successful that's been and continues to be.

I think there's a huge difference between perfectionism, professionalism, and putting on a good show. Perfectionism is basically a negative drive. It's a drive against imperfection, and I think people feel it that way, and feel like they have less leniency to diverge. Professionalism is an attitude about how you use that leniency-- you want to choose how you diverge well for putting on a good show and to be respectful to your fellow cast members. Putting on a good show is a further goal beyond professionalism, to which being professional is an important building block.

Please don't take my comment about disconnection and over-scrutinizing too strongly. By disconnect, I mean that there's a (small) barrier between the directors and the rest of the cast. On the one hand, you and Gary are very approachable-- on the other, it can feel like a lot of decisions are going on behind closed doors and decreed from on-high to the rest of the cast. (I understand how that's necessary for decision-making, but perhaps the barrier doesn't have to feel this high.) At the same time, it's the directors which ask us to maintain our perfection, and who are watching and will hold us liable if we deviate from it. Maybe it's a disconnect between our perceived levels of responsibility (which everyone has lots of for making it a good show), and authority (which, if people don't feel they have equal to their level of responsibility, they won't want to do it). I think there are small ways in which these effects are there, but for the most part I feel like you and Gary are good at staying connected to the cast, and that things are fairly laid back as far as mistakes go.

From:

suitboyskin.livejournal.com

The A & B list screen accuracy concept is something I've always used as a teaching aid more than anything else. I'm not saying that Brad shouldn't ultimately learn which had goes where, etc. I just think that conceptualizing it that way makes it easier for people to have a more realistic view of their progress in learning a role. I've seen people at Rocky (not just FBC) get so bogged down with really tiny, polish minutae to the point where they beat themselves up needlessly and can't appreciate a good performance on their part for the trees. So to speak.