One Person's Relationship With Reviews
One Person’s Relationship with Reviews
The Person is Liz Talbot - improviser most recently seen in Improv Queensland’s A Lust Of Elves And Magic and will be joining the Theatresports crew at the North Australian Festival of the Arts.
If you’re also a person, why not share your own thoughts on how reviews have shaped your growth? Contact us to be a guest on the Blog.
Rather than recap the story of my life as though I’m about to drop the secrets of my grandmother’s pumpkin soup in a recipe blog, I’ll just jump straight into it. Below is a summary of how I’ve reacted to reviews of my comedy shows over time - presented here in an effort to illustrate that reviews don’t have to be scary. If they are scary, you can trust that - like all things - it’ll pass.
Earliest review I can remember - UQ Law Revue - 2009
A local academic self-published a review on his website, comparing the Law Revue against the Med Revue (the State’s least consequential and most privileged rivalry). He suggested that the other production was overall of a higher quality or a more fun experience. I felt sour about this because I believed he was factually incorrect. At the time, I felt a certain injustice stemming from his reckless spreading of disinformation like that. I don’t think I granted myself any opportunity whatsoever to reflect on why somebody would take that position, and was enthralled by any and all discussions with fellow cast members about what covert vested interests could be at play. Fifteen years later, I’m just now recalling that he he praised a sketch of mine as being the highlight of our Law Revue - I must have forgotten that very quickly, but stayed bitter about the rest for a few weeks.
At some point (and because somebody had great connections), the Med Revue arranged for Hugh Jackman to say on camera that the Med Revue was superior to the Law Revue. I feel that if Hugh met me in person he would like me and would feel remorse for doing me dirty like that. I have done nothing but support him.
FIRST PROPER KICK IN THE GUTS
A comedy show at the Underground Theatre of the Powerhouse, about fourteen years ago. Tickets were sold out and the audience felt warm and happy, but the reviewer called us crude and unfunny and suggested that the audience was comprised of friends and family. I remember curling up under my bedcovers after reading the review and feeling a large dose of shame. On some matters, I felt that familiar sense of injustice:
How could this be a valid thing to say when people were laughing?!
but the heavier feeling was the embarrassment. Somebody was really calling us out for being crude and unprofessional, and deep down I could see why. That really made me dislike my own work, and I allowed every word of the review to hit hard. At the time, I didn’t digest it with great perspective. What could have been moderate disappointment was instead pure humiliation and shame, and the review definitely did linger in my memories and thoughts for years. It hit with a 9/10 intensity at the time, but now I’d estimate that memories of this review are triggered once every year or two. It was a bit nasty but shared some harsh truths.
IMPROV REVIEWS
I saw a lengthy period wherein a handful of reviews were published but I was rarely mentioned individually and seldom had my scenes discussed. My glass-half-empty POV certainly only focused on the failure to deliver memorable performances, rather than the joy of being spared from copping a spray.
Moving further into improv, it honestly was a little disappointing to see this course of events play out a little too often:
Troupe develops and pitches an improv show;
Troupe rehearses the format, practicing a way of doing improv that is new to them or otherwise challenging and unique;
Troupe is reviewed, and they eagerly await publication (with a little too much self-worth riding on it, but the anticipation builds); then
Published review reads like a diary entry grappling with the fundamental nature of improv, e.g:
“The thought of being on stage without a script would be a frightful one for most of us…As I walked into the theatre, I thought to myself, could this really be all made up on the spot?…”
before echoing that:
“…given the nature of improv, some things worked and some things didn’t, but what you can’t deny is that it takes a lot of courage to do improv.”
The most helpful reviews have been those that made a genuine attempt to review the show, not to just review improv as a whole. Come on, articulate what we’re trying to achieve and assess our success, don’t just sit on the fence and say “I’m just impressed that you’re giving it a go”. That’s what you all said about Raygun but I know you were all being mean to Raygun.
Improv reviews also triggered my first foray into quote-grabbing etiquette, eg:
“Can I use [quote from review of Show ABC] on a poster for another show?” “Hmm, I’d use it for Show AB and Show ABCD, but maybe not Show XYZ”
And that saw me leaning on many others in my community for advice - I simply couldn’t navigate that without help.
CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS
Over time, my level of resilience has grown. I’m building a backbone strong enough to approach reviews critically; to run reviews through a filter that allows me to sift every line into one of:
Yeah, you have a point there.
Yeah, I’m just going to have to let that one land.
That’s not right, go back to being the Mayor of Sillytown.
Ooh, a great quote to grab for promos.
???? lol
Hot takes that rile me up will generally just lurk in my mind for a few days, then will fade away. Some months ago, a reviewer published a comment reflecting on how an improv show would not have been as funny if the same content was presented as scripted sketch, and that rustled my jimmies enough for me to start writing a piece about best practice in reviewing improv. It’s still sitting in my cloud storage looking for a home, or some co-writers to expand it into a group project. Please get in touch if that floats your boat.
Liz Talbot, September 2024