Steven Soderbergh will direct a play about Casey called "Tot Mom"

[cloud]

I would really like to know the timeline of this production. Reports in Australian media and other sources are going all the way back to August of 2008. Soderbergh stated he was interested due to all the coverage in August.........Official reports name a secret production slated for December 2009........JB is reported to consult with an ethics attorney......a Miami lawyer opines on the legality of the Casey Anthony case being portrayed is acceptable under FL. Bar standards.........I REALLY want to know if there is any involvement on the part of the defense team whether it be current members or former. If the play was to portray the media and our obsession with cases as a whole....he should have offered segments with focus on other missing kids....and their mysterious surroundings. This whole thing has taken on new meaning with me and I for one want to know just who was involved in this production. And IMO the reason this was taken to Australia was because that affords the potection against being sued for monies by parties involved. This is hinky IMO. Even moreso to me now when I see that it was 2008 when reports were made about "a secret" production.

Just from a quick Google search... http://westorlandonews.com/2009/10/30/tot-mom-to-debut-in-australia/

Hope it helps, to a certain degree, to answer your question.

However, just like you and probably most posters, I have no idea when it actually "budded" as a plot for a play, or for how long it was planned and rehearsed. Your guess is as good as mine...

JMHO

 

[sleutherontheside]

Cloud....thank you for the link.....the one that really got me on hinky alert was this one

http://www.australianstage.com.au/200809021840/news/sydney/sydney-theatre-company-announce-2009-main-stage-season.html

Untitled Project
Director Steven Soderbergh
Wharf 1. 18 December to 31 January. Opens 23 December

It was from September 2, 2008.........far before this ever leaked to us here in the US. So my hinky meter started buzzing wondering just how close to July 15 this was conceived.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

Cloud....thank you for the link.....the one that really got me on hinky alert was this one

http://www.australianstage.com.au/200809021840/news/sydney/sydney-theatre-company-announce-2009-main-stage-season.html

Untitled Project
Director Steven Soderbergh
Wharf 1. 18 December to 31 January. Opens 23 December

It was from September 2, 2008.........far before this ever leaked to us here in the US. So my hinky meter started buzzing wondering just how close to July 15 this was conceived.

In addition to question of wondering how close to July 15, 2008 this was conceived, I would also like to know Who contacted Who (Whom)? I had often wondered why there were "Missing Children" sites searched on the A's computer before Caylee was reported missing...this makes me go Hmmmmm.

 

[cloud]

Cloud....thank you for the link.....the one that really got me on hinky alert was this one

http://www.australianstage.com.au/200809021840/news/sydney/sydney-theatre-company-announce-2009-main-stage-season.html

Untitled Project
Director Steven Soderbergh
Wharf 1. 18 December to 31 January. Opens 23 December

It was from September 2, 2008.........far before this ever leaked to us here in the US. So my hinky meter started buzzing wondering just how close to July 15 this was conceived.

I see what you mean. I don't have an answer... I can only surmise that Caylee's case resonated so much and so far as to have "emerged" into a play only months after... and it's a disturbing thouhgt.

On another level, I think it also shows how Caylee's "dissappearance" echoed around the world, to this point. For me, the "hinky" meter started running as soon as I saw the first news-cast. A little girl is missing, but her mother didn't report her as such. When asked why not, she said she was using her own means to find her (words to that effect). All of what I've just typed is certainly not verbatim, just a very brief summary. I always stand to be corrected if I'm wrong in what I post.

Back to the wide coverage on Caylee... I think that's a good thing, because it brings to the fore some issues that cross all borders. Children. They need love and protection and a sense of safety, which I can't see happening IF being palmed off from "zanny the nanny" to Jesse's parents, to Cindy or to anyone else who might pick up the slack, so to speak. After all, Caylee was only 2... how many people did she spend her life with? How many raised voices did she hear? How many times was she told to shut up? Why the tape?

No wonder she was clinging to her GGF.

JMHO

JMHO

 

[sleutherontheside]

I see what you mean. I don't have an answer... I can only surmise that Caylee's case resonated so much and so far as to have "emerged" into a play only months after... and it's a disturbing thouhgt.

On another level, I think it also shows how Caylee's "dissappearance" echoed around the world.

I think that's a good thing, because it brings to the fore some issues that cross all borders.

JMHO

Oh Cloud I realize that...and my comments are not meant to draw criticism for the play being hosted in Australia.....I guess my point does not have anything to do at all with the play locale, or cast, or theatre, or participants, or actors. What I am saying is that for a publication to have been available on September 2, 2008.....mere weeks after the case even broke.....someone started the ball rolling and fast. To set a performance date.....says to me this is happening......I just don't see how someone like Soderberg can shift into high gear and commit to a play more than one year in advance BEFORE the media circus even reached it's highest point. My issue is with wanting to know at what point did this hatch. My curiosity is due to my wanting to know who in this saga was playing for another team from day one.

 

[cloud]

Oh Cloud I realize that...and my comments are not meant to draw criticism for the play being hosted in Australia.....I guess my point does not have anything to do at all with the play locale, or cast, or theatre, or participants, or actors. What I am saying is that for a publication to have been available on September 2, 2008.....mere weeks after the case even broke.....someone started the ball rolling and fast. To set a performance date.....says to me this is happening......I just don't see how someone like Soderberg can shift into high gear and commit to a play more than one year in advance BEFORE the media circus even reached it's highest point. My issue is with wanting to know at what point did this hatch. My curiosity is due to my wanting to know who in this saga was playing for another team from day one.

Please, no offense taken or even perceived. I knew what point you were trying to make. And I agree - I'm curious as well.

In fact, it's really interesting. I wish we had some insight into the content of the play, then maybe we could... figure out how it developped so fast, how the information was obtained (apart from boards, obviously) and why the rush. I don't have any answers, just more questions.

If you get any insight, let us know.

JMHO

PS - I always appreciate your posts. They're informative and thought-provoking (also thoughtful )JMHO

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

Oh Cloud I realize that...and my comments are not meant to draw criticism for the play being hosted in Australia.....I guess my point does not have anything to do at all with the play locale, or cast, or theatre, or participants, or actors. What I am saying is that for a publication to have been available on September 2, 2008.....mere weeks after the case even broke.....someone started the ball rolling and fast. To set a performance date.....says to me this is happening......I just don't see how someone like Soderberg can shift into high gear and commit to a play more than one year in advance BEFORE the media circus even reached it's highest point. My issue is with wanting to know at what point did this hatch. My curiosity is due to my wanting to know who in this saga was playing for another team from day one.

I too am asking the same question, The man must be psychic.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Interesting link to Sydney Theatre Company page devoted to feedback on
TOT MOM.

http://www.sydneytheatre.com.au/2009/tot-mom/talkback/?enter=true

 

[sleutherontheside]

Rapid-fire media satire pillories the panel shows



http://www.newstin.com/tag/us/165144646"]http://www.newstin.com/tag/us/165144646[/URL]


WOW.....where have I heard the word pillories lately?????????? And this article was prior to one certain Today Show interview..... Does AL read the Brisbane Times in Australia???

A Story Quote.......
It's fascinating to watch a soap opera serial manufactured from the raw material of circumstantial evidence, armchair CSI insights, hearsay and puffed-up outrage

Now.....everything that I have heard and read has said this was based upon public records, tv interviews, and official statements. Why then, is the author referring to "armchair CSI insights"? If the play was taken verbatim from transcripts and nothing improvised.....were any posts also included??? I would love to hear someone weigh in on this.

 

[butwhatif?]

Rapid-fire media satire pillories the panel shows



http://www.newstin.com/tag/us/165144646"]http://www.newstin.com/tag/us/165144646[/URL]


WOW.....where have I heard the word pillories lately?????????? And this article was prior to one certain Today Show interview..... Does AL read the Brisbane Times in Australia???

A Story Quote.......
It's fascinating to watch a soap opera serial manufactured from the raw material of circumstantial evidence, armchair CSI insights, hearsay and puffed-up outrage

Now.....everything that I have heard and read has said this was based upon public records, tv interviews, and official statements. Why then, is the author referring to "armchair CSI insights"? If the play was taken verbatim from transcripts and nothing improvised.....were any posts also included??? I would love to hear someone weigh in on this.

My guess about the "armchair CSI insights" is they were referring to Nancy Grace viewers who call in to the show with their own insights.Which was included in the play.(instead of referring to them as armchair detectives)
And no...nothing even mentioned in it about online posts.

 

[JBean]

My guess about the "armchair CSI insights" is they were referring to Nancy Grace viewers who call in to the show with their own insights.Which was included in the play.(instead of referring to them as armchair detectives)
And no...nothing even mentioned in it about online posts.

I totally agree with you. I think this is more about NG than KC as evidenced by the title of the play. Perhaps this was in the works long before the KC case came to be, but once this story broke it played right into the script. It was inevitable one would at some point and the minute NG came up with Tot Mom all things were go for SS.

 

[sleutherontheside]

I totally agree with you. I think this is more about NG than KC as evidenced by the title of the play. Perhaps this was in the works long before the KC case came to be, but once this story broke it played right into the script. It was inevitable one would at some point and the minute NG came up with Tot Mom all things were go for SS.

JBean I am open to all possibilities....but given the statements he made about becoming facinated by the coverage while watching in August 2008......it would seem that it was the KC case that was in fact the reason for this production. As early as September 2nd...he secured a slot for Dec at the STC.


So...IMO and JMO the secrecy was due to wanting time to allow the events to unfold and study them without risk of skewing the direction in which they would play out.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Comments left on the site are then being turned into advertising material..... I for one would not be happy about being manipulated into providing ad material. It appears that this continues to be a social experiment .

http://adsoftheworld.com/media/outdoor/sydney_theatre_company_tot_mom

 

[butwhatif?]

JBean I am open to all possibilities....but given the statements he made about becoming facinated by the coverage while watching in August 2008......it would seem that it was the KC case that was in fact the reason for this production. As early as September 2nd...he secured a slot for Dec at the STC.


So...IMO and JMO the secrecy was due to wanting time to allow the events to unfold and study them without risk of skewing the direction in which they would play out.

This is from a link I posted earlier:

Steven Soderbergh isn't part of the Nancy Grace cheer squad but the self-confessed fan of court TV is a regular viewer. Which is good news for the Sydney Theatre Company, since Grace's show provided the inspiration for his play Tot Mom, the STC's final production for the year.

I'm thinking Jbean is spot on. He doesn't like NG, but is drawn to watching it.(kinda like slowing down at the scene of a car accident).
Even though the focus of the play was NG's coverage of the caylee case, it did include parts of the Haliegh Cummings case too.

I'm ASSuming that he had the idea of doing a play that focused on NG for some time. The fact that she covered Caylee's case for such a looooong time, made it a perfect foundation for the play he was already planning to do.

If I can find a contact email addy, I'd be more than happy to ask him myself.
Am I allowed to invite him to the board if he replies?

 

[sleutherontheside]

This is from a link I posted earlier:


I'm thinking Jbean is spot on. He doesn't like NG, but is drawn to watching it.(kinda like slowing down at the scene of a car accident).
Even though the focus of the play was NG's coverage of the caylee case, it did include parts of the Haliegh Cummings case too.

I'm ASSuming that he had the idea of doing a play that focused on NG for some time. The fact that she covered Caylee's case for such a looooong time, made it a perfect foundation for the play he was already planning to do.

If I can find a contact email addy, I'd be more than happy to ask him myself.
Am I allowed to invite him to the board if he replies?

I want to make sure that you understand the reason for my looking more closely at the timeline. I, having not seen the play, do not have an opinion about it relating to good taste, poor taste, etc......

I am a big fan of his work and think he does an excellent job of creating thought provoking pieces. That said.....my sole reason for ringing in on the tot mom production is because there is such deep and visceral controversy surrounding anything that plays out about this case aside from the legal events themselves.

I am of the opinion that this is very much an interactive...almost performance art piece...where we as an audience are players as much as the actors and key figures.

The timing is curious to me for reasons that I won't comment on, but I will say that as suspicious and anxious for "more" that America seems to be in this case.....I feel we have been portrayed without an opportunity to offer rebuttal.

I am impressed that proceeds will go to a deserving organization. I am not bashing SS or STC or participants. But, given the very outrage that so many people feel, and in the absence of an invitation to voice our thoughts (without them being utilized as media ads) it feels a little like we are the butt of the joke.

I will say again.....SS does a great job, he is talented,thought provoking and edgy. I just find the ommission of the interviews, publications, article and social commmentary being given here in the US a bit disappointing.

 

[Kentjbkent]

I just can't help wondering if when he stated this on Dec 16 2009....

"When I was negotiating for the rights and talking to the STC,...."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertai...the-dock/2009/12/16/1260639218006.html?page=3

it had anything to do with his prior relationship with HarperCollins....

HarperCollins published Sex Lies and Videotape as well as Erin Brockovich...he produced the movies, as well as featured a book that included a history on him

http://www.harpercollins.com/books/9780060540180/Rebels_on_the_Backlot/index.aspx

and could be related to a visitor of KCs on 7/06/09 who may be (but is imo) the Rights Coordinator at HarperCollins Publishers????

 

[butwhatif?]

JBean I am open to all possibilities....but given the statements he made about becoming facinated by the coverage while watching in August 2008......it would seem that it was the KC case that was in fact the reason for this production. As early as September 2nd...he secured a slot for Dec at the STC.


So...IMO and JMO the secrecy was due to wanting time to allow the events to unfold and study them without risk of skewing the direction in which they would play out.

But how could he have known back then just how huge the case would still be today? Or maybe it was dumb luck?

I don't think he really studied anything. One of the reasons that some audience members gave a negative critique was because there was no creative element on his part. Every second of the play with dialogue comes directly from NG transcripts.
Now some of the actors on the other hand, deserve praise for their portrayal of the characters. But all SS had to do was gather the transcripts, and put the play together. Nothing creative about it..... Except for the decision to have the suburban scene- with no dialogue- play out in front of the stage, rather than just using news coverage on the screen . And this was the most inaccurate piece of the play, since we know that RK didn't accidently stumble over a skull while taking a pee, and which proves, imo, that he took very little time in studying the case.

This is why I mentioned previously that many of you would be disappointed if you did get to see it, because you've already seen it play out in real life on NG. (which is probably the real reason it isn't playing over there)


If Caylee were still alive today, I believe the play would have focused on Haleigh, or the Ducket case, or any other case that is covered by Nancy over a period of time.

While I enjoyed the play, it wasn't terribly different to watching a comedian doing impersonations. It didn't tell Caylee's story, it was just a reproduction of an NG episode.
JMO

 

[Kentjbkent]

But how could he have known back then just how huge the case would still be today? Or maybe it was dumb luck?
JMO

CLIPPED FOR BREVITY

By the first week of Sept 2008, there were few who did NOT think this was going to be a HUGE STORY....

In fact, after learning of the story in July, I discovered NG and had an 8 pm date with my bathtub, GLUED to the TV every night, much to the chagrin of my hubby. But as I told him, "I cannot think of an author who could CREATE a more compelling, twisting, BOMBSHELL storyline." As heartbroken as I was for Caylee, and hopeful she could be found, I was riveted at the nightly BOMBSHELLS (as they were back then) on NG.

So not unlikely at all that it also caught the attention of writer SS, but I don't think Sleutherontheside is necessarily implying that he immediately dreamt up the script to Tot Mom in 9/08, but that subsequent information makes the possibility reasonable that SS is not yet finished with the KC story....at least that is what I am starting to consider...

From a marketable standpoint, we have all read all the documentations, interviews, etc but when this is finally over and KC is facing LWOP (or death), I think a made for tv movie would generate interest....the opportunity to see everything we have created an image of in our heads, played out in a reenactment. It worked for Erin B.

 

[sleutherontheside]

But how could he have known back then just how huge the case would still be today? Or maybe it was dumb luck?

I don't think he really studied anything. One of the reasons that some audience members gave a negative critique was because there was no creative element on his part. Every second of the play with dialogue comes directly from NG transcripts.
Now some of the actors on the other hand, deserve praise for their portrayal of the characters. But all SS had to do was gather the transcripts, and put the play together. Nothing creative about it..... Except for the decision to have the suburban scene- with no dialogue- play out in front of the stage, rather than just using news coverage on the screen . And this was the most inaccurate piece of the play, since we know that RK didn't accidently stumble over a skull while taking a pee, and which proves, imo, that he took very little time in studying the case.

This is why I mentioned previously that many of you would be disappointed if you did get to see it, because you've already seen it play out in real life on NG. (which is probably the real reason it isn't playing over there)


If Caylee were still alive today, I believe the play would have focused on Haleigh, or the Ducket case, or any other case that is covered by Nancy over a period of time.

While I enjoyed the play, it wasn't terribly different to watching a comedian doing impersonations. It didn't tell Caylee's story, it was just a reproduction of an NG episode.
JMO

I have read mixed reviews......but one article mentioned that he video taped all the rehearsals as well as opening night. The point I am trying to offer is that while the big grand opening has passed.....the show is nearing it's run......and it has been stated that he has no plans to bring tot mom to the US.....I am curious if the hype, reactions, comments and reviews are all part of his next project. The entire marketing plan as I posted in the link, was developed to utilize audience reaction and public opinion as the marketing for the production itself. So if not for the benefit of a US run.....then my thought process says it will be used for another one. Otherwise.....why gather so much reaction when Australians themselves have stated that they just don't obsess about it like we do. I don't think there is any reason to try to invite Mr. Soderbergh here unless the invitation is extended by Tricia.

 

[Kentjbkent]

I have read mixed reviews......but one article mentioned that he video taped all the rehearsals as well as opening night.
Otherwise.....why gather so much reaction when Australians themselves have stated that they just don't obsess about it like we do. I don't think there is any reason to try to invite Mr. Soderbergh here unless the invitation is extended by Tricia.

CLIPPED FOR BREVITY

And according to Muldoon (from the Sydney Morning Herald), Soderbergh, shot and banged out an additional film while working with them on "Tot Mom." Evidently the actor was sworn to secrecy and could not reveal details, but did say that the filmmaker basically shot an entire ''pretty much improvised film." The actor did note that the film has no relation to "Tot Mom," which Soderbergh has already said he will not take to the U.S.

If all goes according to the filmmaker's plan, he will have shot three films in 2010. 1) the aforementioned improvised project, presumably like, "Bubble" or "The Girlfriend Experience," but even more off the cuff, 2) "Knock Out" his action spy film set to shoot in February and 3) "Liberace" with Matt Damon and Michael Douglas which he hopes to shoot in the summer.


http://theplaylist.blogspot.com/2010/01/steven-soderbergh-shoots-quickie.html