The Size and Scope Would Leave Broadway in Awe

Western Corps Connection userpic=drumcorpsMost people know that I’m into Live Theatre, and love to write about it. Truth be told, I love live performance of any variety. Last night, instead of being at the closing of the 2015 Hollywood Fringe Festival (FB), we were out in Riverside in 90+°F and humidity watching a form of theatricality that, especially considering its size, stamina, and scope, would likely leave any Broadway performer in awe. Where were we? We were at the Western Corps Connection (FB) in Riverside, watching a drum corps competition.

Drum Corps (you’re probably saying to yourself)? That’s just a fancy half-time show. There you would be wrong. Here’s why Drum Corps would put Broadway in awe (and has, if you remember Blast on Broadway (FB)). Let’s take a single World Class corps. It consists of roughly 150 young adult performers (16-21) plus additional staff. These performers are roughly divided into four groups: Marching Brass (valve-based horns), Marching Percussion (various types of drums), Guard members (dancers who manipulate a variety of props including rifles and sabres), and a small number of pit personnel (xylophones, large drums, and now it seems, keyboards) and drum majors (conductors). They must give a 15 minute performance to music of their own choice; the performance must be sufficient to cover an entire football field. They will be judged on this performance based on the quality of their music, their precision, their visual effects, and the general reaction of the audience. Music has ranged from Broadway standards (including Sondheim) to Jazz to Orchestral to … you name it. Now, imagine that they also must load all their equipment onto the field and connect it up before each show, and remove it afterwards. Now put them in competition over the summer, marching and dancing almost every day under the summer sun, with 25 to 40 other such similar groups (our show had 7), and have them judged as to who is the best.

That’s drum corps. That’s why I said size, stamina, and scope is much greater than any single Broadway show, and might even be greater than a Broadway season (given the compressed timeframe). Broadway performers also get to go home; they don’t sleep in buses or in school gymnasiums. These performers have a grueling job. If you are in the Live Theatre industry, and see someone with Drum Corps experience on their resume, know you are getting a tested musician or a tested dancer, one who knows and loves hard work and precise results.

Drum Corps, like Broadway and the rest of the theatre world, has gotten more and more… well… more and more over the years. My wife, when young, marched in a youth band that thought it was a corps. She tells me of the days when the colors (US and state flags) had to be on the field at all times, when there were strict requirements on instruments, flags, and performances. Today things have changed greatly: there is amplification of the pit, keyboards, electronic sound effects, the occasional non-valve horn, and sound mixer boards. We even had an electric guitar and an electric bass from an Open Class corps! Some things haven’t: the best corps are not just loud, they are LOUD, if not LOUD! Corps have triggered noise complaints from residents.

Don’t take my word. Here’s a link to a performance of this year’s top Open Class corps from the 2014 show that will show you:

You can find more videos on YouTube. Drum Corps International (DCI) (FB) has a number of free videos posted on their site.

Last night’s show featured 6 “Open Class” corps and 7 “World Class” corps. World Class corps have made the DCI top 25; they march with a full complement of performers. Open Class corps are smaller. They may be feeders to larger corps (both Blue Devils (FB) and the Santa Clara Vanguard (FB) have cadet corps to train the young, although they weren’t at our show); they may be corps that are rebuilding after a bad year or a large age-out (you have to leave when you are older than 21); or they may be corps that do not have sufficient membership (we saw some former World Class corps in Open Class with less than 10 in the guard). June and early July shows may not yet be complete — the finals are in early August.

Here is my assessment of the corps we saw last night, in the order of performance:

Open Class Corps

Golden Empire (FB) – Bakersfield. This is the second year they have fielded a corps, and they are amazing for a new group. Their show this year, “The Color of Crime”, seemed to be about a jewel heist. It consisted of 5 scenes: (1) “Breaking In” (The Area is Secure / Pinch of a Finger, by Christophe Beck”; (2) “Heist & Escape” (Perfect Day for a Murder by Christophe Beck; (3) “Scot-Free Shopping Spree” (Feeling Good, by Anthony Newley); (4) “Pink Cloud Paradise” (Dreamsville, by Henry Mancini); and (5) “Clues to Confrontation” (The Damburger Incident, Dragalong Dreyfus, Chasing Yuri, and Pink Panther Theme by Christophe Beck, Henry Mancini). I felt the story was good, but they needed to work on their precision. They had a keyboard and used amplification. They had a nice sound, but they needed to be much louder to provide the “oopmh” that was required. They were unable to fill the entire field.

Incognito (FB) – Garden Grove. This corps started in 2005, expanded in 2007, and fielded a corps for the first time in 2008, and then took a number of years off, returning last year. So they are rebuilding. Their program, “Planet Incognito”, had 3 movements: World of Incognitians by their director, Tony T Nguyen; The Planets: Mars by Gustav Holst, and The Planets: Jupiter by Gustav Holst. This was a small corps, only marching 8 in the guard and about 6 horns. Their music was slow, and it was clear their show was incomplete. They did not use amplification. They were notable for marching a trombone, which you never see.

Impulse (FB) – Buena Park. Impulse was formed in 1999, and seemed to be the inheritor of the mantle of the Velvet Knights (FB), one of the most crowd pleasing corps ever, at least in terms of fun. This year’s show was called “Interpolation”, and they didn’t give more details. The corps was a shadow of what it used to be, with a very small 5 member guard. They were OK on volume, but not as much “in your face” as I remembered them. They tried to fill the field.

Watchmen (FB) – Riverside. Watchmen formed in 2013, and marched an Open Class corps for the first time in 2014. Their repertoire, “Influenced”, was original music from staff members Richie Sabastian, Alex Mendoza, and Harry Hutchins. This was another small corps, with only 7 in the guard. They used amplification and had two keyboards, plus vocal sound effects. Their guard needed to up their precision. They also needed more volume, but they were missing their low end horns.

Gold (FB) – San Diego.  Gold started in 2005, and competed outside of California first in 2011, and has been an open class finalist every year since 2012. They are the corps in the video I embedded above. Their repertoire this year, called “Pop Star”, consisted of the music Toxic by Cathy Dennis, Bloodshy, and Avant. Their field setup was unique — they put the pit on the field about 70% back, with a raised drum set, and electric guitar, and an electric base. They then had a big pink tarp the covered the wiring and provided good visual effect. They marched a full complement of horns, and had very sexy guard outfits. They had nice music and filled the field well. They got organized chaos right. All in all, a very good show.

Open Class Conclusions

🎺🎶🎺🎶 ⇒ Overall, I liked the programs of Gold and Golden Empire the best. They had accessible music, great sound, and great visual effect.  The other corps were clearly marching at a disadvantage with incomplete complements.

World Class Corps

These corps all marched full complements.

Mandarins (FB) – Sacramento. Mandarins used to be an all Asian corps, and go back to 1963. Their repertoire, “Resurrection”, featured four movements: The AwakeningWarriorDynasty of the Emperor, and Forever in Stone, all by Key Poulan (music director), Sean Womack (percussion arranger), and Mark Hunter (percussion arranger). This is what a corps should sound and look like: they had an entertaining and energetic show. They were notable because at one point, most of the guard started playing horns — you don’t see that too often. They had great general effect, and when they took the field, they took the field. I also noticed that their faces were particularly fierce — acting with the music, instead of the constant smile.

Pacific Crest (FB) – Diamond Bar. Pacific Crest is a newer local corps, having stared in 1993. They are the only world class corps left in Southern Californnia. Their repertoire, called “The Catalyst”, consisted of four movements: Scythian Suite Op 20 (Sergei Prokofiev); Liberi Fatali from Final Fantasy VIII (Nobuo Uematsu); Enjoy the Silence (Martin Gore), and Angels in the Architecture (Frank Ticheli). Their music was not that accessible and their show was unfinished, at least based on this weird open metal structure they rolled on the field and kept moving, but did nothing with. They had odd sound effects, but good percussion. Not that crazy about this show.

The Academy (FB) – Tempe AZ. Academy stared in 2001, becoming a corps in 2004, joining World Class in 2007. They had a very accessible show, “Step In Time”, that used music from Mary Poppins (stage): (I) Introduction (Chim Chim Cher-ee; A Shooting Star); (II) Practically Perfect (A Spoonful of Sugar; Practically Perfect; Galop (from Masquerade Suite)); (III) Step in Time; (IV) Feed the Birds; and (V) Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. The guard uniforms were beautiful, and they had very nice props. They provided good field coverage and wonderful effects. They were notable for having the pit use tap shoes on hands tapping on a board to provide tap percussion. They also used drum brushes to provide a great auditory effect on Feed the Birds. They had the right sound, and were the first corps to get a standing ovation.

Blue Knights (FB) – Denver CO. A musical group founded in 1958 by former vaudeville comedians and musicians Faye and Fred Taylor, they hit the corps scene in 1991. Their repertorie “Because…” featured 5 movments: Because (Lennon, McCartney); Rush (Jay Bocook, Kevin Shah, Mike Jackson — all BK staff); Apres Moi (Regina Spektor); I’m Alive (Adam Watts), and Fly to Paradise (Eric Whitacre). Their uniforms were beautiful: white and light blue for the musicians, orange and light blue for the guard. They had some wonderful dance moves, but the music was not accessible. They also had this odd ghostly echo effect that was more distracting than anything else.

Phantom Regiment (FB) – Rockford IL. Founded in 1956, they have been finalists every year since 1974. Kudos to them for being the only corps east of the Mississippi to come to California. They had a very accessible repertoire “City of Light”: I Love Paris (Porter), Horoscope (Constant Lambert), Clair de Lune(Dubussy), An American in Paris (Gershwin), and Symphony No. 3 (Camille Saint-Saens). They filled the field and had a nice loud sound, but their precision was a bit off and their show just didn’t grab me.

Santa Clara Vanguard (FB) – Santa Clara. Founded in 1967, this is one of the top corps in DCI. Their program, “The Spark of Invention”, featured Invention in A Minor (Bach), Virus Attack (Amin Bhatia), Pure Imagination (Bricusse, Newley), and Piano Concerto (Corigliano). They were LOUD, but Vanguard is always loud. They had multiple costume changes on the field, and had these odd Van DeGraff generator type props. They also had an odd echo effect created by sound board delays — likely intentional, but I didn’t like it.

Blue Devils (FB) – Concord. The other major California corps, they were founded in 1970. They have won nationals 16 times, most recently in 2015 (yes, that’s what the program says — Blue Devils is that cocky and sure of themselves). They have never been lower than 4th in the last 20 years. Their program, “Ink”, dealt with fairy tales: Dark Forest (Dave Glyde), Sweeney Todd (Sondheim); The Giant Attack (Sondheim); The Mad Hatters Tea Party (Gordon Goodwin); I Like You (GOT7); Children Will Listen (Sondheim); Last Midnight (Sondheim). This was Blue Devils doing it right — a very accessible program, wonderful dance, wonderful story, wonderful and LOUD music. My only quibble is with the use of The Ballad of Sweeney Todd to accompany fairy tales — Snow White, in particular. They had the precision, and they knew it.

World Class Conclusions

🎺🎶🎺🎶 ⇒ Overall, my favorites were Blue Devils, The Academy, and the Mandarins, in that order. For me, as a theatre person and not a musician, their shows touched me the best. I was surprised at Blue Devils — often they do an inaccessible Jazz show. They did it right this time.

Scores/Conclusions

Position Corps Score
Open Class Division
1 Gold 50.600
2 Golden Empire 50.150
3 Watchmen 44.550
4 Impulse 43.450
5 Incognito 36.100
World Class Division
1 Blue Devils 79.850
2 Santa Clara Vanguard 78.650
3 Phantom Regiment 72.900
4 Blue Knights 72.400
5 The Academy 65.950
6 Pacific Crest 64.900
7 Mandarins 63.050

The scores for last night’s performance are shown to the right. Scoring is on a 100 point scale, with 40 for General Effect (20 each from two judges, one a visual expert, one a music expert); 30 for Visual (20 points each for Visual Analysis, Visual Proficiency, and Color Guard, summed and divided by two), and 30 for Music (20 points each for Music Analysis, Music Brass, and Music Percussion, summed and divided by two). Here are my thoughts on the scores.

In the Open Class, I think they got it right. Gold had the best show, and Golden Empires was far above the incomplete shows of the others.

In World Class, I really think that Mandarins should have been higher; ditto for Academy. They must have lost points with the judges on precision somewhere that I missed. Blue Devils did deserve to win.

A few technical notes: The RCC Band (FB) and Riverside Community College (FB) need to provide more food trucks and more drink options, especially on hot days. People were not able to cycle through the food lines in the 40 minute intermission. That indicates you need more servers and more options. It would also be useful for RCC or DCI to make clear what can and cannot be brought into the stadium. Lastly, next time I must bring stadium chairs; sitting for four hours without a seat back is hard.

Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I am not compensated by anyone for doing these writeups in any way, shape, or form. I subscribe at three theatres:  REP East (FB), The Colony Theatre (FB), and Cabrillo Music Theatre (FB). Through my theatre attendance I have made friends with cast, crew, and producers, but I do strive to not let those relationships color my writing (with one exception: when writing up children’s production, I focus on the positive — one gains nothing except bad karma by raking a child over the coals).  I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.

Upcoming Shows: July is a month of double-headers, begining with “Murder for Two” at the Geffen Playhouse (FB) on July 3rd, and “Matilda” at the Ahmanson Theatre (FB) on July 4th. The next weekend is another double: On Friday night, July 10th, we’re seeing Colin Mitchell‘s show Madness, Murder Mayhem: Three Classic Grand Guignol Plays Reimagined at Zombie Joes Underground Theatre (FB); Saturday July 11th brings “Jesus Christ Superstar” at REP East (FB). The following weekend is another double header: “The History Boys” at the Stella Adler Theatre (FB) on Saturday (Goldstar), and “Green Grow The Lilacs” at Theatricum Botanicum (FB) on Sunday.  The last weekend of July brings our last double: “Lombardi” at the Lonny Chapman Group Rep (FB) on July 25th, with the annual Operaworks show the next day. August start calming down, with “As You Like It” at Theatricum Botanicum (FB) the first weekend of August, our summer Mus-ique show the second weekend of August, and “The Fabulous Lipitones” at  The Colony Theatre (FB) the third weekend of August. After that we’ll need a vacation … but then again we might squeeze in Evita at the Maui Cultural Center (FB) the last weekend of August. September right now is mostly open, with the only ticketed show being “The Diviners” at REP East (FB) and a hold-the-date for “First Date” at The La Mirada Theatre for the Performing Arts (FB). October will bring another Fringe Festival: the NoHo Fringe Festival (FB). October also has the following as ticketed or hold-the-dates: Kelrik Production (FB)’s Urinetown at the Monroe Forum Theatre (Hold for Sat 10/3);  “Mrs. A. Lincoln” at The Colony Theatre (FB) (Ticketed for Sat 10/10); and  “Damn Yankees” at Cabrillo Music Theatre (FB) (Ticketed for Sat 10/17). As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Share

A Modest Proposal to Review — Private to Pre-Vetters Only

As you know, I’m an engineer and a scientist by trade. I don’t complain about problems, I design solutions to problems. As such, I’ve been thinking a lot about the problems the Bitter Lemons Imperative created. You may have even read some of my thinking to this point. I have also read through all the published commentary and compliants about what BL did, including the discussions on the pro99 Facebook group. I have also seen, in some of the comments, that there are components of the community that really want the ability to get reviewed when they have been ignored by the media (and they saw this as a way to do so).

I would like to come up with a proposed solution that can be presented to Bitter Lemons that has been pre-vetted by the community — that is, all the kinks have been worked out. I know that a solution is possible: in the accounting business, auditors are paid by the companies they audit, yet have independence in their findings. Corporations also have internal quality control organizations. In my professional life, I’ve done a lot of work with the government’s NIAP/CCEVS program, where commercial labs are paid by vendors to evaluate their products, and validators (such as me) review their work to ensure independence and correctness (before that I was an independent government evaluator for a similar program against the prior criteria). What gives the independence is an agreed upon code of conduct, different reporting chains, independent oversight, and often indirection between the source of funding and the reviewed.

Thinking about this issue, I have come up with the following. Please comment on where additional correction is required and this post will be edited, preserving the changes, until we get to a final solution.

Mission

The purpose of this proposal is to do the following:

  1. Provide independent and quality theatrical reviews to organizations that are capable of paying for them.
  2. Provide independent and quality theatrical reviews to organizations that are not regularly reviewed by mainstream theatrical review organizations.
  3. Provide operating funds for the review manager, and remuneration for the reviewers.

Process

  1. All reviewers operating under this review proposal must publicly subscribe to the following ethics rules:
    [🎭 Note: This provides a basic level of independence and ethics for the reviewer]

    1. The reviewer agrees to knowingly accept nothing from a venue being reviewed other than a pair of complementary tickets, an information packet on the show, and possibly parking.
    2. The reviewer agrees to disclose any past, present, or future relationships with the theatre or any cast or crew members, and must agree to not let those relationships color their assessment of the show reviewed.
    3. The reviewer agrees that their assessment of the show will be based solely on the story, performance and presentation, and that their assessment will be honest, even if it is negative.
  2. Organizations capable of paying for reviews will pay $160 to the review manager to obtain a review. The review manager will retain $25 of this fee to cover operating expenses, and the remaining $135 will go into the review funding pool.
    [🎭 Note: The amounts have been selected so that those that can afford to pay provide coverage for those unable to pay.]
  3. For every two paid reviews, the review manager will select, based on an editorial decision of the shows currently running or soon to open that have not received sufficient reviews in the past, a third show to receive a review for no charge.
    [🎭 Note: This means that at least one third of the shows reviewed under this proposal get their reviews for free.]
  4. Shows selected for review must agree, at minimum, to provide two complementary tickets per reviewer unless the reviewer refuses. If a show receiving a review for no charge is unable to provide such tickets, the review manager has the option to select a different show for review.
    [🎭 Note: Although I’m not in favor of complementary tickets for reviewers, it appears to be standard industry practice.]
  5. Any show that is reviewed agrees not to disclose to the reviewer whether they are a paid or an unpaid review. If a reviewer indicates that a show made such a disclosure, any review will not be published.
    [🎭 Note: This addresses the other end: a show disclosing to a reviewer that they have paid for the review in order to try to influence the reviewer. If they do so, they’ve wasted their money and get no review.]
  6. Reviewers are paid $90 for each show reviewed, independent of whether the show paid for a review or received it for no charge. The $90 is based upon an estimated average of 3 hours of writing up the review, 2 hours for the show, and 1 hour transit time at the updated LA minimum wage ($15) for each show.
    [🎭 Note: This provides independence of the reviewer from the show. The reviewer has no idea whether the show paid for the review; if they attempt to guess, they have a 1 out of 3 chance of being wrong. [Added 7/2: It also follows the notion of the current idiotic AEA proposal: The reviewer is being paid no more than the actor, who is supposedly getting minimum wage.]]
  7. Reviewers desiring to review under this proposal must (a) subscribe to the ethics rules, (b) apply to the review manager providing samples of recent reviews, and (c) be accepted by the review manager based on the quality of those samples.
    [🎭 Note: This ensures that those reviewers accepted into the pool have some level of quality.]
  8. Reviews generated under this approach will be included in the Lemonmeter. Every 6 months, a comparison will be made of the reviewer’s ratings of a show versus the Lemonmeter rating for the show. If the reviewer is outside the standard deviation (i.e., the consensus opinion), they may be dropped from the review team at the discretion of the review manager.
    [🎭 Note: This protects against a reviewer who does not appear to be reflective of the opinions of the community — it protects against the “I love everything” or the “I hate everything. It provides the closest one could get to independent oversight, as reviewing is subjects and assessment of whether the reviewer followed an objective process is not possible. The oversight, in a sense, is provided by the community coming to the same consensus view.”]
  9. Ideally, there would be separation between the review manager and the advertising component, so that there is no bias in favor of advertisers in selecting unpaid reviews. This may not be possible for a small website, but ideally the unpaid reviews should be selected based on the theatres regularly receiving insufficient reviews to warrant inclusion on the Lemonmeter (e.g., they are being reviewed, but just not getting enough reviews).
    [🎭 Note: The goal here is to prevent bias from the editorial to the selection of the no-pay reviews, addressing the implication that you need to purchase an ad to get a review.]

Let’s address some potential complaints:

  • This will be a slippery slope, and all theatres will have to pay. First, this approach includes free reviews based on editorial decisions, so you don’t have to pay to get reviews. Further, there will always be bloggers and others willing to review a show for tickets.
  • This will encourage other media to charge for reviews. Other media needs no encouragement. Print media is begging for income. This is an attempt to develop a vetted model that will address that need while still addressing conflict of interest concerns and independence. Hopefully, this might even be a model that those forced to go that direction could adopt.
  • How can you charge theatres, and at the same time insist they needn’t pay actors. First and foremost, it is important to remember that no theatre is required to utilize this, and that theatres that don’t use this might still be reviewed for free. Second, I don’t think the position has been that theatres should not pay actors. Rather, the call has been for a tiered system, where creatives (of all types) are paid based upon the theatre’s ability to pay and the budget for the show. If a theatre is budgeting for publicity, this may be part of that budget. If they can’t afford it, they can’t. Nothing is mandatory here; this is just provide an option to those that want to use it. For those that can afford it, budgeting for publicity is part of a production budget, just as is budgeting adequate pay.
  • But this looks like a conflict of interest. In an ideal world, there would be no conflicts of interest; reviewers would be paid by journalistic endeavors with no connection between editorial and advertising. But this isn’t an ideal world; there are micro-conflicts everywhere: comp tickets are a conflict, as is any paper or website that accepts advertising at all.  Even in such a world there can be independence: look at auditors of major corporations (which are independent), quality control organizations, or the Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme. They achieve that independence through indirection, strong ethical codes, and oversight. That’s the approach here: have a strong ethical code; get feedback on reviewer quality; and make it so there is uncertainty whether the theatre has paid for the review.

I’m aware that people may not like this idea just because it involves money changing hands. If so, no proposal will be satisfactory unless it fits the model of yore. But our focus should be mission success: getting more people — and younger people and new audiences — to the theatre to see shows, and more reviews help to do that. It should be to improve the viability, the vitality, and the visibility of theatre in Southern California. Let’s work together to come up with a workable approach that satisfies concerns. Let’s be sufficiently open-minded to posit that such an approach is possible if we structure it right.

For those that are willing to make suggestions on how to improve this to address concerns, I’m open to your comments.

Share