Letter

By VARIETY STAFF

Read other reviews about this film

Powered By

To the Editor: Much of Jeremy Gerard's piece, "Master of the House" (Variety, Nov. 4-10, 1996) was, as to be expected, extremely to the point. However, the comparison with "A Chorus Line" is, I am afraid, wildly inappropriate. The irony is that "A Chorus Line" was the musical that made the audience realize an anonymous chorus were all individuals and Michael Bennett, quite rightly, insisted that all members of the "Chorus Line" company were on white principal contracts which kept the majority of the cast on term engagements.
 

The point of the role of Cassie is that she was a chorus girl who had become a principal and wanted to return to the chorus, and because of that Zack does not want to cast her, as he feels she has outgrown the role and become too much of an individual to go back into the chorus. The fact that she was older was a plus not a minus, as she was still able to dance Bennett's choreography as brilliantly as ever.

My 10-year celebration concert of "Les Miserables" at London's Royal Albert Hall, which has been seen in the U.S. on PBS, was inspired by the brilliant "Chorus Line" gala evening and, of course, I brought everyone back who had been associated with the show in this country as well as stars from around the world, which is why the evening proved to be so special.

The root of all this unnecessary unpleasantness is, I am afraid, the archaic application of a chorus contract to the modern musical, which American Equity continually refuses to discuss. British Equity got rid of the chorus contract in the early '70s and also banished the manager's right to have an artist for "run of the play," considering 12 months for a play and 15 months for a musical quite long enough for any artist to be tied contractually to one show. We have only one performer's contract in London, which covers principals, chorus and stage management.

"Les Miserables" was conceived as an ensemble piece at the Royal Shakespeare Company. In America all but three of the company are considered chorus and, consequently, are able to give us four weeks' notice at any time and never be asked to leave except through the just-cause buyout that Equity suggested I pursue when we met in September.

In England, we are able to change at least half the cast once a year and properly rehearse the show en bloc for four weeks rather than putting them in in dribs and drabs. Hit musicals that run many years are extraordinarily rare, and yet every year many new talents emerge who are mostly Equity members and who deserve the opportunity of appearing in these exceptional shows.

The days of the anonymous chorus are long gone except for the odd revival. Whenever anyone puts a show together, you try to get the best talent available for every part. There should no longer be first- and second-class artistic citizens. The current cast of "Les Miserables" in New York have been in the show for many years and have worked really hard, but the fact is for most actors it is impossible to sustain the freshness of any role once they have been in a show for more than a year or two unless they have a decent break doing other work. I often have alumni back, as long as they are still right for the role. Indeed, the current London show, which is in terrific shape, has the Montreal and Paris Jean Valjean, Frances Ruffelle as Eponine, and Matio Frangoulis playing Marius for the third time. In England, the contracts are geared toward the actor as an artist, in America they seem to be geared toward the actor as a commodity.

I hope that in the end as well as my getting "Les Miserables" into the 21st century, this furor will get America Equity into the 21st century.

Kindest regards,

Cameron Mackintosh