The new proposal is warped and twisted, and would destroy the vitality of the black-box/fringe world.
D
Dennis Gersten
11 years ago
Member AEA, SAG/AFTRA. I have been waking students up to the value of Theatre in their lives for several years. Our local 99-seaters have been a great aid in this goal. We've been given student-affordable tickets and flexible arrangements by Antaeus, The Road, The Victory, and others theaters who understand that our efforts open minds and offer new possibilities to those at risk in our society. When we lose the art and joy and spirit of these companies, where do we send our youth? To the Taper? Hey Equity! Who do you think is creating the next generation of Theatre-goers who will pay for the actors to work? No audience, no jobs.
J
Julius Galacki
11 years ago
Dramatists Guild and ALAP member
T
tania verafield
11 years ago
AEA member
K
Kristin Farrell
11 years ago
save the 99!!!
L
Laura gardner
11 years ago
Aea member since mid 70's
H
Hilary Prentice
11 years ago
member SAG/AFTRA, equity eligible
P
Parnell Damone Marcano
11 years ago
While we would all LOVE to have even half of the well paying theater opportunities here in California, there just aren't that many. Most of the larger theaters only offer so many Equity contracts, and others only seem interested in casting New York talent,or film or television actors. The 99-seat plan, though in need of some changes, is the opportunity many get to FINALLY get a chance to display their talents. Often the only time a chance was given to perform a role they have always been passed over for because of the pursuit of a "name" or Broadway credited actor. Maybe there should be a focus on lower fees for smaller theater companies to obtain the rights to a show. Perhaps making some budget changes so that actors get paid a little better. That would be better than making it so that the few chances union actors have to hone their craft become even fewer.
L
Leo Marks
11 years ago
Featured
I'm an Equity member who signed the Re-Imagine LA document--because I wanted to have a conversation about actor value and compensation, not because I wanted a drastic and sudden fiat from above to destroy the companies I love.
S
Simon Levy
11 years ago
Negotiate, don't dictate.
N
Nance Crawford
11 years ago
Maybe it's time for a breakaway West Coast branch of AEA. There are some very silly people in New York. Obviously, they're so buried in snow their ears are blocked as their hearts freeze over.
P
Pavel Cerny
11 years ago
It seems that AEA makes an attempt every 20-30 years to liquidate the 99 seat scene in LA. I walked the streets with picket signs in the 1980s, and I am willing to do it again.
V
Valerie Spencer
11 years ago
AEA & SAG-AFTRA member. I've been performing in the LA theatre since the mid-80s, mostly in 99-seat houses. The work has been artistic and spiritually rewarding. Financially, not so much. I'd love to be able to make a living doing theatre in LA (who wouldn't?), but come on. There just aren't the Equity houses to support all the AEA members in LA. Factor in stunt casting with TV/film "names" and NY hires, and the Equity opportunities in this town are minuscule. The 99-seat plan allows us to do what we love for the love of it. Please don't kill it.
J
Jessica Sherman
11 years ago
I, too am an Equity member & greatly opposed to this proposal. In particular, I find threatening the restrictions placed on Membership companies with open casting policies which have enjoyed an influx of both Equity and Non-Equity members -- those for whom an intimate setting provides unique opportunities to do innovative work more frequently. I have done my most artistically & personally rewarding work in 99-seat theaters. Theaters that consistently attract top-notch artists enthusiastic about a collaborative vision. Placing additional financial burden on small theaters which continue to foster a cohesive environment is not only disruptive to their growth, it also threatens to greatly limit the opportunities for AEA members to act. I want to continue to be proud of my union status - please reconsider how burdensome & restrictive your proposal is to the many 99 seat theaters that have contributed to the growth of LA's dynamic artistic community. Please - don't stunt us.
C
Colin Willkie
11 years ago
99 seat theatre has provided me with many opportunities to develop as an artist and as a professional actor. I am very disappointed with where the union is going.
E
Ellyn Stern
11 years ago
My richest experiences have been from the 99 seat theaters in this town. How can AEA deprive us of theatre that is so rich? Counterproductive to what our union stands for! We can't do full equity houses every time and we need places to work. This is so vital to our community!!!!
J
Jaime Puckett
11 years ago
Art for art's sake.
J
Jennifer Fenten
11 years ago
AEA member
M
Mike Mahaffey
11 years ago
I'm currently a member of AEA since 2002, and this proposal does NOT serve the LA membership of AEA. Please create a plan that takes into account ALL members, not just a few. Thank you.
S
Stephanie Geyer
11 years ago
I am no longer an active member of Equity, but I was for 25 years, 15 of which I lived here in LA (and still do). If it weren't for the 99-seat plan, I wouldn't have been able to perform in any of the productions I was in. The 99-seat plan provided many more opportunities to perform while still following Equity rules. It is totally unrealistic for Equity to think that there is enough work available in equity houses to keep its thousands of members working and doing what they love. Please do not take this incredibly important plan away from your members. Thank you.
The new proposal is warped and twisted, and would destroy the vitality of the black-box/fringe world.
Member AEA, SAG/AFTRA. I have been waking students up to the value of Theatre in their lives for several years. Our local 99-seaters have been a great aid in this goal. We've been given student-affordable tickets and flexible arrangements by Antaeus, The Road, The Victory, and others theaters who understand that our efforts open minds and offer new possibilities to those at risk in our society. When we lose the art and joy and spirit of these companies, where do we send our youth? To the Taper? Hey Equity! Who do you think is creating the next generation of Theatre-goers who will pay for the actors to work? No audience, no jobs.
Dramatists Guild and ALAP member
AEA member
save the 99!!!
Aea member since mid 70's
member SAG/AFTRA, equity eligible
While we would all LOVE to have even half of the well paying theater opportunities here in California, there just aren't that many. Most of the larger theaters only offer so many Equity contracts, and others only seem interested in casting New York talent,or film or television actors. The 99-seat plan, though in need of some changes, is the opportunity many get to FINALLY get a chance to display their talents. Often the only time a chance was given to perform a role they have always been passed over for because of the pursuit of a "name" or Broadway credited actor. Maybe there should be a focus on lower fees for smaller theater companies to obtain the rights to a show. Perhaps making some budget changes so that actors get paid a little better. That would be better than making it so that the few chances union actors have to hone their craft become even fewer.
I'm an Equity member who signed the Re-Imagine LA document--because I wanted to have a conversation about actor value and compensation, not because I wanted a drastic and sudden fiat from above to destroy the companies I love.
Negotiate, don't dictate.
Maybe it's time for a breakaway West Coast branch of AEA. There are some very silly people in New York. Obviously, they're so buried in snow their ears are blocked as their hearts freeze over.
It seems that AEA makes an attempt every 20-30 years to liquidate the 99 seat scene in LA. I walked the streets with picket signs in the 1980s, and I am willing to do it again.
AEA & SAG-AFTRA member. I've been performing in the LA theatre since the mid-80s, mostly in 99-seat houses. The work has been artistic and spiritually rewarding. Financially, not so much. I'd love to be able to make a living doing theatre in LA (who wouldn't?), but come on. There just aren't the Equity houses to support all the AEA members in LA. Factor in stunt casting with TV/film "names" and NY hires, and the Equity opportunities in this town are minuscule. The 99-seat plan allows us to do what we love for the love of it. Please don't kill it.
I, too am an Equity member & greatly opposed to this proposal. In particular, I find threatening the restrictions placed on Membership companies with open casting policies which have enjoyed an influx of both Equity and Non-Equity members -- those for whom an intimate setting provides unique opportunities to do innovative work more frequently. I have done my most artistically & personally rewarding work in 99-seat theaters. Theaters that consistently attract top-notch artists enthusiastic about a collaborative vision. Placing additional financial burden on small theaters which continue to foster a cohesive environment is not only disruptive to their growth, it also threatens to greatly limit the opportunities for AEA members to act. I want to continue to be proud of my union status - please reconsider how burdensome & restrictive your proposal is to the many 99 seat theaters that have contributed to the growth of LA's dynamic artistic community. Please - don't stunt us.
99 seat theatre has provided me with many opportunities to develop as an artist and as a professional actor. I am very disappointed with where the union is going.
My richest experiences have been from the 99 seat theaters in this town. How can AEA deprive us of theatre that is so rich? Counterproductive to what our union stands for! We can't do full equity houses every time and we need places to work. This is so vital to our community!!!!
Art for art's sake.
AEA member
I'm currently a member of AEA since 2002, and this proposal does NOT serve the LA membership of AEA. Please create a plan that takes into account ALL members, not just a few. Thank you.
I am no longer an active member of Equity, but I was for 25 years, 15 of which I lived here in LA (and still do). If it weren't for the 99-seat plan, I wouldn't have been able to perform in any of the productions I was in. The 99-seat plan provided many more opportunities to perform while still following Equity rules. It is totally unrealistic for Equity to think that there is enough work available in equity houses to keep its thousands of members working and doing what they love. Please do not take this incredibly important plan away from your members. Thank you.