Variety: "Make it cheaper, just don't make it smaller.
Touring Broadway productions have thrived in an economic landscape ravaged by falling stock prices and collapsing banks, but with capitalization funds harder to come by, producers are finding more and more innovative ways to keep costs down and attract newly reticent consumers."
8 comments:
While I understand that "pizazz" is important for selling tickets, especially on tour where people are possibly less likely to be avid theater-goers, producers have to be very careful about keeping a) the artistic integrity of the show intact and b) theater from becoming all about the spectacle. Yes, spectacle does sell seats, but does it tell a story? Does it make people think about themselves and the world around them? probably not. This is the problem with many of the Broadway shows where the art is only partially present and the show is all about making money and commercialism.
Its great to see the innovative ways people come up with in order to keep the budget of a show. With this economic situation, many theaters will have to really cut down on costs. Seeing how each of these huge theaters handled this could be inspiring for smaller theaters to come up with ideas of their own to stick to a smaller budget.
It's interesting considering how we always talk about how, on broadway you can have all the money you want. Yet, here is a situation in which producers of these broadway shows are being put to the test. I think that one of the smartest calls I read about was the touring orchestra. Why tour with the whole orchestra when you can find people to play that music anywhere. When there are restrictions, that's always when the most interesting choices in theater are made.
I think that it is hysterical that the Dreamgirls Producer got his stage built in South Korea. Outsourcing your set construction has a whole slew of problems which is why it isn't very common place. There is a huge potential for massive issues with communication that are necessary for touring productions. I don't think the language barrier is as difficult as drafting standards, construction norms, and hardware issues that are widely accepted in the US.
When looking at economics, we look in micro and marco scales. On a macro scale, businesses across America are being forced to downsize right now. They have to be innovative in order to cut costs without cutting service, even if it means one less olive in the salads on American Air lines or no more corporate retreats for AIG. On a micro scale, I am glad to see my future industry is able to be just as creative in their element to provide large scale productions at a lower cost. Though I do find set build outsourcing to be pretty funny.
I have to say that the touring show is a smart move considering the current economy. Staying close to home is considerably more cost effective than traveling up to New York to see a Broadway show, so a touring show is likely to appeal widely to theater fans with a more limited budget. (Anyone who's been to New York knows it can get really expensive!)
On another note I agree with Kservice in sharing a few concerns about outsourcing set building. The first problem that occurs to me is the question of units of measure. The US is just about the only country to use the inch based system. If sets are built with metrics it might pose difficulties during assembly or repairs when transported to the US. It's not that I doubt the average worker's ability to work with slightly unusual measurements, only sometimes people don't stop to think and there's that whole saying about assuming...
It has been very nice to see a positive shift from the articles that were posted on the page at the end of the last school year in contrast with some of the articles that are popping up now. While it is obvious that many theaters are still struggling, and many people are still conflicted about the commercial and easily marketable vs. true to artistic visions and outside the box there are also clearly many who are finding ways to make it work. Cirque is adding new unexpected shows to its repertoire , which allows it to keep its original shows, and bring Cirque aesthetic to a new audience. However the simple things that are discussed in this article such as hiring local musicians, seem like the kind of innovative ideas that are needed to keep theater alive and possibly with minimal compromises.
I find this article a little silly - downplaying the whole aspect of the national tour, and how it is a much 'leaner' version of the opulent Broadway bonanza that is NYC.
In reality (or at least in my opinion) one of the only motivators for creating a successful Broadway show is to earn critical acclaim so it can tour and make even more money. Look at the Tony awards: the last five shows to win for best musical (excluding "In the Heights") have gone on to have very successful touring carriers. This is partially due to the fact that many of the Tony voters are not necessarily actors or design specialists. They're producers - seeing what the next big investment could be, and by bestowing the 'best musical' or 'best play' title on one of these productions, just might be the ticket it needs to score big across the nation.
Post a Comment