Field Day

Two things led to the decision to close the Toronto production of Blue Man Group after a disappointing 18-month run, but they were not the aftermath of 9/11 and SARS, according to theatre experts from the U.S. and Canada.

The backlash from the show's union difficulties and the sheer age of the property itself are the more likely culprits — and not the same general audience malaise blamed for the early departure of The Lord of the Rings.

In other markets, Blue Man had been allowed to function in a non-union situation. But Canadian Actors' Equity wanted it to abide by local agreements and use performers who were members of the union.

The organizers of Blue Man refused and Equity launched a powerful boycott which enlisted the support of The Ontario Teachers Federation and effectively killed all performances for school children. "The teachers' boycott had a crippling effect on them," said Susan Wallace, executive director of Canadian Actors Equity, adding that it eliminated the thousands of students who pack matinee performances for Blue Man in other cities."You go by the theatre when the show is letting out," says Chris Jones, theatre critic for the Chicago Tribune (Blue Man has been running in Chicago since 1999) "and a lot of the time the audience seems to be totally made up of high school kids.

"The second problem was that the antics of the toilet-paper-hurling percussionists were no longer as fresh in 2005 as they had been when they first opened in New York back in 1991."If they had opened (in Chicago) last year, I doubt they would have had the same impact," Jones said. "

It's a little late in the day for Blue Man."With shows running in New York for 14 years, Boston for 11, Chicago for seven and Las Vegas for six, most American tourists would have had sufficient opportunity to catch up with Blue Man in other cities, minimizing the potential appeal of the Toronto run.

Laura Camien, the organization's publicist, admitted the union situation in Toronto "didn't help matters any, but no one can say how much for sure."

She shrugged off questions of the show's dated appeal, saying, "We try to update it all the time."She preferred to put the blame on Toronto's supposed inability in recent years to attract substantial audiences."

It's disheartening that Toronto hasn't rebounded yet and has lately been unable to support long-run shows," she told the Star Wednesday.Wallace was infuriated by her comments. "Placing the blame for the show's failure on our city, instead of squarely where it belongs, with the show's deliberate inability to make itself part of our community, continues a pattern of disrespect for Toronto evidenced by Blue Man from Day 1.

"Labour problems have dogged Blue Man in other cities. When their Las Vegas production moved from the Luxor Hotel to the Venetian this year, their technical employees sought to become unionized and Blue Man resisted. On Sept. 14, the U.S. National Labor Relations Board cited Blue Man Group for unfair labour practices.

Camien did not feel that the Toronto situation had any impact on the organization's actions in Las Vegas."I don't think it's changed the way we look at anything," she said. "We do a case-by-case situation and examine the needs of each market."So where does this leave Toronto? As of Jan. 8, the $12 million Panasonic Theatre owned by Live Nation will be empty. Independent producer Jeffrey Latimer calls it "a beautiful commercial facility, a much-needed 700-seat venue."

There is speculation that Mirvish Productions might assume control of the space, the way it did with Live Nation's Canon Theatre, but John Karastamatis, director of communications for Mirvish, categorically denied any such scenario.While producers are anxiously eyeing the Panasonic as the possible home of smaller shows like Avenue Q and The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee, a more likely scenario is that Live Nation will convert the space into a venue for music performances, not unlike The Opera House on Queen St. E.

In the end, Blue Man Group's failure to produce a lengthy run in Toronto says more about the show and its management than the cultural climate in this city.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

First off - HOOOOORRRRAAAAYYYYYY

"The second problem was that the antics of the toilet-paper-hurling percussionists were no longer as fresh in 2005 as they had been when they first opened in New York back in 1991."

Toilet paper-throwing was fresh?

..................................................

Second off - who would have known teachers had so much power

..................................................

Third off - as much as I can't stand Blue Man Group... it is rather disappointing to see shows take nose dives in Toronto (even if LOTR musical is a ridiculous idea)

Hits like this come at very poor timing especially with Mayor Miller's initiative to create a GTA cultural renaisance - check out

http://www.livewithculture.ca

..................................................

"In the end, Blue Man Group's failure to produce a lengthy run in Toronto says more about the show and its management than the cultural climate in this city. "

The article makes a good point as to why anyone would bother coming to Toronto to see crap they can see in their own cities or cities that are closer with more cultural appeal.

IE. If i HAD to see stupid Blue Man Group, I'd rather go to NY. What does TO offer that NY doesnt have?

Too long, TO has been nothing more than wussy imitations of grander ideas.

TO's cultural climate: having been involved in some "artisitc communities" I have to say a lot of the culture is very secular - people know each other within the community, but outside their little circles, they are really nothing.

Looking in passing at various events at AGO I noticed that there are barely any Canadian, let alone Torontian artists getting exhibits. It takes an Andy Warhol to bring in tickets.

TO = nice place to live - but go somewhere else for vacation

..................................................

Also, the TTC sucks... but that's another post...