Of course the reviewer saw the panto. We don’t ask for reviews with a little document specifying what we would like to be said. There are lots of productions given reviews that myself and/or the arts editor disagree with but this doesn’t mean they get changed.

We await The Sword in the Stone…

Did you actually see the panto, or were you simply told by someone to give it a bad review?

This would explain the fact that the review criticises the production for being a pantomime, also the strange mention of the ‘overbearing innuendo of Jack and his Beanstalk’ which, as I recall, wasn’t actually mentioned once in the entire production. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Regards,

A puzzled person…

The jokes were perfectly targeted and I laughed all the way through. Well done cast and crew etc. I thought it was brilliant.

However I’ve lost respect for Nouse; their unwavering prejudice against PantSoc seems unfair to me.

Alexxx

The problem with Nouse’s review is that it’s unhelpful. People who did not go to the pantomime will not want to know how stifled the narrative was or how original the dance routines were. Instead, they will be asking such deep and academic questions as:

“Was it entertaining?”
“Was it funny?”

And, that profoundest but simplest of questions:

“Did the audience enjoy it?”

That’s all we really want to know, Nouse critics. That’s what you’re there for. To put it more fancily (courtesy of Wikipedia):

“Criticism in terms of expectations means democratic judgment over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes”

So, basically, what you should be telling us is: did the pantomime fulfill its “intended purposes”? Was it any good … AS A PANTOMIME?

And if you’re still not sure about the answer to that question, just think back to the audience’s reaction as they left Central Hall last weekend.

(By the way, I would be interested in seeing a response from you, Nouse, to these online comments…)

To all the cast you are fab and everyone I know who came to see it said it was brilliant and “the funniest thing I’ve seen since Uni”

As for Nouse, well we already know they “don’t know anything about anything….ever”

GIMP GIMP GIMP

Tempted to make a joke connecting the group’s title, Edinburgh, and it’s creator but I’ll leave it there.

To be fair I’ve seen Belt Up plays get low marks on this site – maybe they have too much class to engage in this sort of thing.

But I can’t help but to put my two-penny worth in…

I have seen many a panto over the years. From village hall shows to uni productions and soap-star-filled shows. What was fantastic about this show was that it knew its audience very well, played to it and everyone I spoke to only had praise for it. To criticise the show for using for university jokes is absurd. I would agree that there can be too many and I think in the past, Pantsoc shows have had too many. But the balance was just right in this instance.

I am a York old-timer and helped form Pantsoc, something I’m very proud to say! This production was first class – the singing, dancing, script and acting was very, very professional.

Little do some people know that Pantsoc is a very new society and has come a long way in a very short space of time. If the reviewer thought that this was a poor version of a student pantomime I honestly invite them to watch videos of our early productions! Before 2004 there was no Pantsoc. These were dark times. Pantsoc people shouldn’t let a fishy review deter them from the great work they do.

But like Pantsoc has now become, Nouse is a very important university institution. Long may it reign, prosper and continue to stimulate debate like this. That is its purpose and it does it very well.

Until next year’s puzzling review, may both great societies keep up the good work! York would be a poorer place without them.

It was so good that I’ve written a poem …

Jack and and the beanstalk
Was performed in York
And it was really funny!
Really, really, really, really funny!
There was a man with some beans
Who was covered in forks
But the funny thing was
That his name was Guy Forks!
And that sounds like the famous man
Who lived in the olden days who was called Guy Fawkes!
There was dancing lice
And a cow that talks
Or was it a camel?
Or was it a horse?
And there was more than one dancing corpse!
A DANCING CORPSE! A DANCING CORPSE!
WHAT COULD BE BETTER THAN A DANCING CORPSE?
Hooray! Hooray! Hooray!

Beki can you please review my poem )

Thanks, bye xxx

An all to believable scene would be the Nouse “journalist” attending a Punch and Judy show and complaining

“Though Mr Crumpet’s innovative direction brings contemporary relevance to the play, the fact the actors are 6 inches tall and perform in a wooden box detracts from the deeper themes discussed. Furthermore the Play’s treatment of the taboo subjects of domestic violence and cruelty to animals was unnecessary”

To Henry, Liam, Beki and the Nouse Team,

Firstly, let me reiterate the sentiment that if you did not enjoy the pantomime then I am truly sorry. As co-Director, I hate to think anyone did not have a good time. It seems to me that this “backlash” is not at all due to the star rating you gave it. People are not moaning because you didn’t give us 5 stars! Think more of these lovely people than that.

Rather, I think they are as saddened and disappointed as I was that their effort and enthusiasm was met by a rather detached and obscure review that read more as a critique of pantomime than of the particular production. Once again, Nouse seems unable to deliver a pantomime review that appreciates the PantSoc ethos, but chooses rather to criticise a “table for being a table”. Pantsoc prides itself, as my cast will corroborate, in being one of the only societies on campus that offers a part to everyone who shows interest. We give people that have never walked the boards before, or have been turned away in the past by other companies, the opportunity to be part of a production. Moreover, by drawing together many elements of campus life – including of course, campus journalism – in a cheeky celebration of what makes York fun (and I stress, FUN), the yearly pantomime endeavours to give everyone that walks through those doors (both cast and audience) the opportunity to relax and have some fun. Unfortunately, the only group we seem to have been unable to appeal to is you.

This “backlash” is not, repeat, NOT because you didn’t give us a shining review – rather it is because you seem to have spectacularly missed the point, again.

To the cast and crew – I remain absolutely proud of you all for the enthusiasm with which you performed your parts, and the joy and banter you gave to the audience each night.

Right, what say we draw a final line under this.

PANTOMIME OR DEATH!