BMR2010 Technical Team photo by Vasantha Saparamadu

Chaandana Senevirathne - BMR 2010

Dear friends,

Since Cicil has asked for opinions, I thought of writing mine.

Comments, we need at this time. But no! not from the production team.
Production team knows the show in advance (well, minus sounds and visuals).
Sounds and visuals are just add-on's. If the core item is strong and captivating, its entertaining by itself.
As such, I think the comments from the production team should come prior to the show.
Now we need comments from the audience.
As I've expressed during our team conversations, we should do an item-basis survey (on a 1-10 scale) from the audience.
In that way it will be a proper one to analyze. Not a distorted, over-heard, or verbally-conveyed-by-a-third-party type comments.
But it was an overkill, at that time, to concentrate on.

Well, thinking about the objectives that Cicil concentrated on during the production, I agree with most of them.
But I'd shake it out this way.

1.       Provide a quality show
2.          Be financially viable.
3.       Build community relationships

The third objective, a very important one, contains the Artists we work with, Technical and Non-Technical teams we work with and the Audience (including the guests, invitees, etc.etc.) to which the show is directed. This whole involvement is the foundation for the community relationship. Within that we create an audience for our artists, kids and community workers. Its all embedded in this  objective. We hear criticisms & comments of all sorts because we are all in a relationship. The show (BMR) creates a path and strengthens it.

The second objective is self-explanatory and it depends on how we manage the other two.

Unfortunately, the very first objective is the issue here. If we could achieve this, it will be financially viable and shall create avenues for better understanding for the community.
The bottom line is BMR should be the pinnacle.
All artists (except kids) should try to achieve this pinnacle, which means, they should strive to do a better one to be listed in the BMR.
But, what has happened in some years is that the BMR has lowered its standards, accessible to all - no matter the quality. This will not help the community - it will sow disharmony instead. People think, if X can do a crap, why Z cannot do the same.
It s not the same logic when its come to quality.
People think twice before entering themselves to BMR or they try to upgrade their skills set.
This is what we wanted at the end. That way,  we can give a push to boost the taste & love for 'art' within our community.

Otherwise it will be a downward-spiral for all concerned.

So, to put it simply, we need to maintain quality.
To achieve that we need guidelines, some will get hurt at the beginning, but everyone will nod in appreciation in the end.
Lets concentrate on these (potential) guidelines from now on.

kind Regards.
Chaandana

Cecil Fonseka - BMR 2010

Hi All,

Let me thank the team again for the massive effort by all of you and the honest comments you have made. I read all of them carefully which has been very educational. I have to face the facts and reluctantly agree to Nissanka’s comment of 2010 rating is Average. I now wish I received all these comments before the show. I am not correct person to read the, but the next Production Manager. I heard that after each BMR every year a lot of comments were made and documented. Did the corresponding following year team read and follow them? Does anyone know? Are we preparing ourselves to create another document of comments that the next BMR team will seriously not read? We have figure out a way to write our documentation so that the next Prod Man will read it happily.

One thing to remember is BMR has been going down in the past few years to a level of below average. It is unrealistic to expect 2010 BMR to straight away go to from below average to the best BMR in 2006 or so. The team this time stopped the show sliding any further and brought the level up to average. Next production team now can work on it to improve to above average.

After the last AGM it was clear that SCF had a bigger problem. It has alienated itself with membership and most artists. When I called to invite well known artists to attend BMR 2010 almost all of them immediately refused to attend BMR 2010. They did not want to have anything with SCF. I have walked right into a SCF PR disaster. If BMR results in a PR problems, disunity in our community I don’t see the point in doing BMR. Survival of any association depends on public relations.

I have received a lot of comments on BMR 2010 from different sources. People coming to watch BMR have different objectives. Most want to see a very entertaining show. They are entitled to criticise when they see an item which did not provide them entertainment. This is quite acceptable.

If entertainment is the only objective the best way to achieve is the bring Bhathiya and Santhush and Gypsies together to Sydney. But SCF has a lot more objectives.

SCF has many conflicting objectives which makes BMR the 7 way ultimate balancing act.

1.       Build community relationships
2.       Provide an entertaining show
3.       Provide a stage for established local artists and promote them
4.       Develop and build skills of budding artists
5.       Provide opportunities to more artists (than less artists)
6.       Involve our children and the youth. Give them an opportunity develop artistic skills
7.       Be financially viable.

In that order. In my mind most important is 1 least is 7.

Some objectives are related. Involve school children and financial viability are somewhat related. Remove school children completely and we can expect 200 – 300 less people buying tickets to the show. This is a reduction in revenue up to $10000. Can SCF carry a loss of that magnitude?

Unfortunately with BMR, objective 1 and 2 are in direct conflict! What a pity.

What the next BMR team would require is not more comments. It is ok to give comments. But we have been giving comments for the last few years and the next BMR  team will not take any of them seriously simply because of large volume of comments and their conflicting nature. This is what happened in the past. Let’s do something different this time and make it difficult for the next BMR team to ignore us.

I invite you all wise people for a discussion on these objectives (via email at this stage). Are these objectives valid? Is this the correct order?  Should we drop some of the objectives? Did the BMR 2010 achieve the correct balance with these objectives?

The next BMR team needs guidance. So stop comments which we have received in 100s. Start guiding and directing. Email your thoughts on the objectives.

These are my opinion only. Don’t take anything personally. I am usually wrong. (my good wife will confirm this any time)

Regards,

Cicil

Asu Siriwardena - BMR 2010

Hi Everyone,

Its time to let your true feelings out, mainly as a constructive criticism.

Following are some of the suggestions that I would like to bring upon;

1. Limit the show from 6.30PM - 10.30PM Max 10.45PM and must clear the hall by 11.30PM.

2. Limit the no of items irrespective of no of artists.(Further you may restrict no of items one can perform- Some may not like but you can now experience the consequences)

3. Restrict it only for the local artists those who have performed somewhere before rather than dragging people from home performances that we have seen at private parties.

4. Do not cheat the audience by putting pre-recorded voice tracks which will jeopardize the other artists by way of comparison.

5. Organize/review the audios/visuals well ahead of the show (At least 01 or 02 weeks before).

We will be discussing all these for few weeks and then get on with other agendas forgetting all these again. Therefore my request is, please look in to this by the current committee, and formalize some sort of a procedure, document it and bring it to the agenda of the next AGM.

Final request, god sake do not break this record of being one of the longest shows.

Thanks & Regards,

Asu 

Nissanka Dharmathilake - BMR 2010

Please analyse my response together with what you have witnessed on 1^st May 2010 and early hours of 2^nd May 2010 at the Hills Centre.

I used to do an item by item review of BMR (from 2004-2006), however, I stopped doing that when the show became very long. This year we reached the pinnacle. YES, BMR 2010 WAS BLOODY LONG.  Since there were more than 40 items, none of us from either production or technical team got an opportunity to see all the items before the show was staged.

My personal comments are listed below:

1.        After 8 months of long closure, this was the 1^st time HC hosted a show and staff was relatively new to the venue and the equipment used. There were a considerable number of technical hiccups, mainly in the sound and DVD areas. Although SCF is not directly responsible for this, the audience expects nothing less than highest possible quality. (As you know some of them paid $50 per seat)

2.        Out of 16 or 17 song items presented by Sydney’s local artists, only 3-4 could be categorised as good ones, others were well below par.

3.        Most of the dances presented by experienced dance teachers and our youth were of highest quality and these items virtually rescued the show from a potential disaster.

4.        Both comedy items produced by our local artists didn’t make any significant impact.

5.        There were too may children’s items. Sometimes, people felt like being to a school concert.

6.        Although it had a noble intention, the use of youth members for compering should be closely looked at.

7.        If we have managed to slash 15 items (12 songs, 2 children items and 1 comedy item) we could have easily staged a far better quality show. Of course we would have ended up with a few disgruntled self appointed artists.

OVERALL RATING: AVERAGE

Vasantha Saparamadu - BMR 2010

Sounds, life, the universe and everything

Hi All,

"The time has come," the Walrus said,
"To talk of many things:
Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
Of cabbages—and kings—
And why the sea is boiling hot—
And whether pigs have wings."
                              - Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

I'll talk of sounds.

Compared with what we had during the rehearsals, sounds were a success in the show. But, that's not a good measure, and people don't come to a show to see how much better it is compared with the rehearsals. So, let's forget about the rehearsals for a moment. There were too many sound stuff-ups in the show. In the past, I would be unhappy when there had been one stuff-up. In that sense, I have to categorise this as a monumental failure as far as the sounds are concerned. Unfortunately, there wasn't much I could do myself on the day to prevent those problems, as the whole sound set up is operated by HC staff. However, as the sound manager, I'm responsible for sounds, and as such I have to bury my head in shame. There are a number of things we can do before the show to improve the situation.  Perhaps, we can meet someday in a relaxed environment (i.e. not a rushed-through meeting) to discuss all BMR issues. And there are a number of things HC can do on the day of the show to improve the situation.

Talking of sounds, I just remembered this good story. It was when we used to do the Sinhala school concerts at the Hills Centre. It must have been about 15 years ago. Once Athula Ginige was the sound manager. He got me to assist him. The following year I became the sound manager. Rehearsals went alright. In those days we operated the playback equipment at HC, i.e. the cassette players. [CDs, and particularly recording them at home, were unheard of!] I had the cassette for the first item loaded and ready for the show. When the house lights were turned off at the start of the show, it was pitch dark where I was sitting. (In the previous year, they had some light there and there was no need for a torch, but since then they had changed the set up near the control desk.) I managed to press PLAY at the right time, but there was no way I could see the next cassette to load for the following item. HC sound/lighting guys couldn't give me a light. There was less than 4 minutes left in the first item. When I looked around, I saw Tissa Liyanage standing behind me. I told him, "Machan, bring a torch from somewhere before this item finishes!". I don't know how he managed it; he brought not only one but two torches in no time. I had about two minutes to spare before the next item started.

So Tissa saved me from my major sound disaster then. I suppose I was lucky that it took another 15 years for that to happen!

Perhaps, it's time for me to retire, or at least, to apply for long-service leave :)

Regards,
Vasantha

Lakshman Randeniya - BMR 2009

Dear All,


Congratulations for putting together a fantastic BMR 2009.  The show was appreciated and enjoyed by many people and a major comment was that the show was not boring.  I will list some positives and negatives as I saw. They are only meant to be passed on for a even more successful BMR in 2010.
For the committee only:
1.      A major positive was the length of the items. This definitely contributed to a smooth flow of the show. Any items which were not up to the standard were over within 4-5 minutes without making it painful for the audience.  Good items finished on very high notes. The Production committee should be commended on this.
2.       Newer performers were brought on stage.  This is always a positive as long as they present something innovative.
3.      Youth participation was fairly high, although this trend has been clear for many years.
4.      The show was long as always but this may not be a big problem for the audience (may be for the committee) as long as boring and long items are not presented. This was particularly evident this year, the show came to an end without any fuss from the audience. I didn’t note time passing.
5.      Innovative stage decoration added value to the stage presentation particularly because of the clever placements of the artefacts.
6.      The Pranama for Premasiri Kemadasa was most appropriate and added value to the show; and well presented with Sulang Kurullo song.
7.      Classic presentations: Parnama, TYG thriller, Lapa Nomawn;  Bahu Ranga
8.      Technical side (lighting, smooth flow) was not particularly up to standard. Although some creative background slides/movies were presented lighting projections for some items were not up to standard. Starts and stops/ delays, although only a very few, need to be avoided.
9.      The start and the finale of the show wasn’t particularly interesting or creative.  The start was no better than an ordinary school concert until the school children came on stage and presented a fantastic item (item 6 ??).
10.     Although it was a good idea to give many youngsters an opportunity, the constant change of MC was annoying. The audience normally make a “relationship/trust” with the MCs and this bond has to be maintained from the beginning to the end.  They maintain a common thread through a fast-changing environment. Changing them constantly did not add anything to the show.
11.     Late delivery of the printed program.
12.     As in the previous years, some items clearly lacked innovation or creativity.  Well, for scientists it’s just a Gaussian.
13.     I was particularly annoyed that nobody announced  Reggie Dissanayake was invited to light the Pahana to honour his services to the community.  SCF committees should not fail to acknowledge people who carry this organisation forward with great commitment at their pinnacle event.
I am not commenting on other behind-the-scene issues that I came to know from various sources. I trust the committee will be able to discuss these and go forward.  All progressive efforts are not going to be always popular. We should accept that. I always trust that the present committee has been given the rights and responsibility to carry the SCF forward as they see fit.
I hope that the marathon effort for BMR will not deter you from carrying our important programs for the rest of the year.


My best wishes to all of you and know that we always value your efforts and dedication.
Lakshman Randeniya