Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
CMU School of Drama
Monday, September 18, 2017
'From the man who gave you "Hamlet" and "Lear"': Why live theater needs movie-style trailers
LA Times: It has all the hallmarks of a movie trailer — the fast pace, the quick cuts, the relentless beat. “Something primal,” a deep voice intones. “Something raw. Something otherworldly. Something wicked this way comes.” But it’s not. “It’s ‘Macbeth’ as you’ve never seen it,” the voice continues, “tickets at DenverCenter.org.”
I think that Mark Ciglar is very smart. A large part of the advancement of technology is the attraction of very short videos that catches the attention of an audience. Especially with the amount of advertisements that people receive through apps and websites, having a video media platform for a show could really contribute in having a show gain attention. What I find funny is that the videos might not actually be accurate to what will be performed on stage. I'm not sure I will watch a theatrical trailer with the same perspective as I once had.
I agree with Ella that Mark Ciglar seems to be doing a very smart thing with trailers for theatrical production. The thing in this LA Times article that stood out to me the most is the fact that the filmed parts that you see in these trailers do not actually occur in the productions. This, I think, is a smart move because it allows the makers of these trailers to catch a viewer's attention in a much more film-oriented way. The trailers for theatre productions that I have seen before have always seemed a bit off, as can watching any filmed version of a theatrical production, but I think that blurring the lines between theatre and film in this instance could be a good promotional tactic for theatre productions.
I agree with the principle behind having more cinematic trailers for theater. Live theater doesn’t translate well to video. I think part of that comes from factors such as the lighting is designed to look good in the space but doesn’t translate well to camera. I agree that either not showing clips of the show at all or showing very brief snippets is the best way to make live theatre look good on film. I think the Macbeth add was a little much, but maybe that is an accurate portrayal of the production. I feel like it seems like it is trying too hard to be catchy, to the point of feeling a bit absurd. That being said, it does look significantly better than just taking a bunch of clips from the show rather than intentionally going for more of a movie trailer look. When we are trying to take theater and put it in video form, it makes sense to borrow from a similar industry that always exists in video form.
I find the concept of movie trailers for live theatre to be incredibly intriguing. As the article claims, to "sell an emotion" is a radically different task than simply promoting the next Avengers movie. One cannot simply use stock footage already captured of the film and stitch it together with engaging music and flashy titles. Instead, the advertisements are essentially small productions in and of themselves, requiring a significant amount of extra effort on the already-busy creative team. However, I believe these ads are critical to the survival of theatre. By injecting live theatre into conciousness of a market which streams video, the theatre industry inches towards higher accessibility around the world and taps into a wider audience. This increase in consumption of live theatre can only be an inherently good thing, as theatre is the mirror we use to force society to confront its greatest issues while also reveling in the strength of the human spirit.
My freshmen year here at school, a few of the Subscription series shows had 30 second trailers that were quite impressive. The trailers used footage from tech rehearsals, most importantly with full sets, costumes, and lighting. And that’s one of the stark differences between the trailers that Ciglar is creating and what we did. We were able to use B-roll from stage videos to help create the trailer, something that I find very useful. I do think that consumers are becoming smarter and smarter because you can’t just use text and some cool graphics to sell a show anymore. People want to see what it will look like and what scale the production is. You’ll see this with a lot of Broadway shows that they are able to have video of the large dance numbers. In the first video of the article, it had clips of the trailers from Aladdin, Big Fish, and few other Broadway shows. My guess is that those trailers were what they put out before they had b-roll. The lack of b-roll is pretty common in regional theatres so I could see how the green screen and text slides would be more achievable.
5 comments:
I think that Mark Ciglar is very smart. A large part of the advancement of technology is the attraction of very short videos that catches the attention of an audience. Especially with the amount of advertisements that people receive through apps and websites, having a video media platform for a show could really contribute in having a show gain attention. What I find funny is that the videos might not actually be accurate to what will be performed on stage. I'm not sure I will watch a theatrical trailer with the same perspective as I once had.
I agree with Ella that Mark Ciglar seems to be doing a very smart thing with trailers for theatrical production. The thing in this LA Times article that stood out to me the most is the fact that the filmed parts that you see in these trailers do not actually occur in the productions. This, I think, is a smart move because it allows the makers of these trailers to catch a viewer's attention in a much more film-oriented way. The trailers for theatre productions that I have seen before have always seemed a bit off, as can watching any filmed version of a theatrical production, but I think that blurring the lines between theatre and film in this instance could be a good promotional tactic for theatre productions.
I agree with the principle behind having more cinematic trailers for theater. Live theater doesn’t translate well to video. I think part of that comes from factors such as the lighting is designed to look good in the space but doesn’t translate well to camera. I agree that either not showing clips of the show at all or showing very brief snippets is the best way to make live theatre look good on film. I think the Macbeth add was a little much, but maybe that is an accurate portrayal of the production. I feel like it seems like it is trying too hard to be catchy, to the point of feeling a bit absurd. That being said, it does look significantly better than just taking a bunch of clips from the show rather than intentionally going for more of a movie trailer look. When we are trying to take theater and put it in video form, it makes sense to borrow from a similar industry that always exists in video form.
I find the concept of movie trailers for live theatre to be incredibly intriguing. As the article claims, to "sell an emotion" is a radically different task than simply promoting the next Avengers movie. One cannot simply use stock footage already captured of the film and stitch it together with engaging music and flashy titles. Instead, the advertisements are essentially small productions in and of themselves, requiring a significant amount of extra effort on the already-busy creative team. However, I believe these ads are critical to the survival of theatre. By injecting live theatre into conciousness of a market which streams video, the theatre industry inches towards higher accessibility around the world and taps into a wider audience. This increase in consumption of live theatre can only be an inherently good thing, as theatre is the mirror we use to force society to confront its greatest issues while also reveling in the strength of the human spirit.
My freshmen year here at school, a few of the Subscription series shows had 30 second trailers that were quite impressive. The trailers used footage from tech rehearsals, most importantly with full sets, costumes, and lighting. And that’s one of the stark differences between the trailers that Ciglar is creating and what we did. We were able to use B-roll from stage videos to help create the trailer, something that I find very useful. I do think that consumers are becoming smarter and smarter because you can’t just use text and some cool graphics to sell a show anymore. People want to see what it will look like and what scale the production is. You’ll see this with a lot of Broadway shows that they are able to have video of the large dance numbers. In the first video of the article, it had clips of the trailers from Aladdin, Big Fish, and few other Broadway shows. My guess is that those trailers were what they put out before they had b-roll. The lack of b-roll is pretty common in regional theatres so I could see how the green screen and text slides would be more achievable.
Post a Comment