'Fela' broadcast not coming to a theater near you

January 4, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Last week, you may have caught choreographer Bill T. Jones on the Kennedy Center honors broadcast.

On January 13 you can go to the movie theater, get a tub of popcorn, and see his work in the Broadway production of "Fela"...

...if you are in Covington, KY, Cleveland Heights, OH, Missoula, MT, or dozens of other places that aren't Indianapolis.

London's National Theatre will be broadcasting a production of the high-energy biographical musical for one day only. But theaters in Indiana aren't part of the program.

It's part of National Theatre Live, which offered "Hamlet" last month and will be adding the Donmar Warehouse production of "King Lear" (with the great Derek Jacobi), "Frankenstein," and "The Cherry Orchard" later in the season.

Interested? Let your friendly neighborhood theater know. Now.

For details on the series--and for a great read of the "To be or not to be" speech by Rory Kinnear-- click here.

Your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • small venues
    In looking at the list of participating venues, they look like independent theaters or performing arts venues. I doubt Landmark is going to put this in their theaters. Maybe IMA with the Toby?
    • Fela
      I was lucky enough to see Fela in NYC last May. It's a great show, so I am very sorry that it won't be coming here. Fingers crossed for a national tour date nearby.
    • Landmark letdown
      Landmark cinemas are actually part of this in some cities, including St. Louis. I don't know why they dropped the ball on it for the Keystone Art Cinema because it could have been a big event for them.
    • Fela! IS coming to Indianapolis
      Fela! is coming to Indianapolis - Saturday, February 5th, 7:00pm at the Indianapolis Museum of Art's Toby Theater. More information at CulturalCannibals.com

    Post a comment to this blog

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

    2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

    3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

    4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

    5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).

    ADVERTISEMENT