Overrated, thy Good Name is Production Values

There is always talk of someone or something being overrated. Anytime something is reviewed or rated it is natural to discuss the review or ratings. Cars, restaurants, films --all have the same discussions about who's overrated. Theatre is no different.

In my continuing discussions with critics, artists and audience members talk of certain companies being overrated has come up and one name has almost always been at the top of the list, sometimes the only one on the list.

In a recent review of A Philadelphia Story Chris Jones says "Remy Bumppo now offers production values much upgraded from its formative days, and this elegantly staged and attired production is no exception."

Translation. They now have more money. They spend more money. This is an observation that has nothing to do with artistic quality. I don't think anyone would say Remy Bumppo did lesser work earlier on, when they couldn't spend as much on sets and costumes. They have more money, good for them. Higher production values equals spending more money on a production, pure and simple.

Said one Critic: "I take a different person with me every time I go. Because no one will go back with me."

I don't knock Jones for pointing this out, though it is no secret that he tends to highly favor shows with higher budgets. Many people do. Many critics do. It is a shame that many critics nationwide subscribe to the gospel of production values=quality. Critics of all people should know better and hold companies to a higher standard than "she wore a pretty costume." Any critic worth his or her salt would agree with me.

Most people I have talked to (and reviews I've read, I have not yet been able to see it) say A Philadelphia Story is indeed a good production and the design elements add to the experience. That is a good thing.

High production values are often cited alongside companies that are overrated. It is problematic when design elements hold up a show as opposed to enhancing them, or when design elements are the experience. This is often mentioned alongside what many see as Jones' major Achilles heel--stemming from, or leading to--his relationship with the House Theatre and Broadway in Chicago.

(Note: I find it interesting that while many reviews end up on Jones' blog, reviews of House shows do not.)

The House often comes up in talk about overrated companies, but perhaps surprisingly to some, they are not the front runner for the most overrated company in Chicago. Not even close. Obviously I have not done a scientific poll, and most of the people I have spoken to have only talked off the record about specific companies.

The most overrated is also the largest and one of the most prominent nationally, and has enough money to buy ads saturating the city. But big budgets cannot overcome bad shows. Said one Critic: "I take a different person with me every time I go. Because no one will go back with me."

The knock on them is beautiful sets, beautiful lights, beautiful costumes, crap shows. Not too long ago, I received a subscription brochure from them. The cover photo is very telling of the state of work to be found on Dearborn Street. Normally the most gripping moment makes the cover. Gripping sells. The cover of their brochure this year: two rich ladies looking at a pair of underwear, aghast. The caption reads "Were you there?" Is this the best moment that has happened on their multi-million dollar stage?

Says another Critic, "It's an organization without a soul, and it's a trust fund. I mean, The Goodman doesn't have to be the way that it is. I think that people at the Goodman believe that they are at the front end of the conversation in theatre in this country and in aesthetic leadership. Because they've been told that they are. And they're the kind of people that believe what they're told."

With the money, and resources at their disposal they should be doing far, far better work than they are. A colossal reputation is built on past work. But for now, they seem to be content with buying enough ads to fill houses, and spending enough on sets and costumes to cover up what is lacking in the work--which is saddening.