New York is not conductive to theater. New York does not encourage its young. It does not encourage experimentation.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I sincerely believe that for the New York theatre to remain relevant, all our major producing institutions should be presenting new American plays.
Is the American theatre allowing itself to become irrelevant? The problem isn't that playwrights aren't being paid enough. It's that theatres all over America are looking towards New York to tell them what new plays to do.
I've always wanted to do theater in Chicago. Chicago is a big theater town-and, in some ways, I think this city is savvier and smarter than New York. Sometimes, I think it's a little too chic to go to theater in New York these days.
There is more sophistication and less sense in New York than anywhere else on the globe.
I don't even think places like the National Youth Theatre (NYT) are necessarily about wanting to be an actor when you grow up. They're about meeting people from different backgrounds and different religions and different cultures, and mixing with people that you wouldn't ordinarily meet.
Most people don't think of Los Angeles as a theatre town, and that you have to go to New York to be in theatre, and it's really not true.
In New York, the theater is a destination point. In Los Angeles, no matter how provocative, how successful, how star-studded the theater event may be, it is, at best, a second-class citizen.
In terms of theater, there's not a more supportive theater community than in New York. It's really kind of a real thrill to go there. I mean, don't forget, I'm a boy from the suburbs of Sydney, so getting to New York is a huge, huge thrill.
If you want to see theater you go to New York.
It is possible to work out of New York on film and television and still not lose your connection to theater.