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.
News - Films - The Independent: Cinemas are proving to be a goldmine for some of the UK's finest opera and ballet companies, with Hollywood stars including Daniel Craig and Ryan Gosling being nudged aside by the rise of live arts streamed into auditoriums in a growing trend for "event cinema".
I think this article points to an important new trend in our theater, and one that live theater artists should be wary of, but also excited of. Sure, its great that people can go see these live pieces of art in a movie theater (its happening here in the US too- take the Met for example), but you have to ask why they're not going to the theater in the first place, and what they're missing or gaining because of it. I think they may not be missing much- the event is still live, you're still seeing it with a theater full of people. But there's a lot to gain. Live Cinema audiences have a better seat than almost anything in the theater (that's why the Operas are so popular- you're closer than even the first row), the event is cheaper, and often easier to get to. However, live cinema can get more people to see a show at once, so longer runs become rarer, and over time that could have a profound effect on the industry.
This is a brilliant idea. I'm no saying do this for everything, but for some shows this would be great. I love theater, but growing up fairly far from any major city going to a play or musical was a treat I got only once every couple of year (which was more then most of my friends). Going to the cinema however happened at least once a month (in the summer and winter even more often). If plays and dances could be streamed to placeless were people might never have the opportunity to see shows and ballet's could really see the beauty of it. I don't think it would really alter the industry much, nothing compares to seeing it live. But it would be nice to make it a little more accessible to the masses
I think this could be really interesting, but I don't agree with Jenni's assertion that this probably won't alter the live performance industry much. Sure, in the next few years, I don't think that this will dramatically affect the theatre industry, but over time, I think that people becoming used to seeing live performances in a movie theatre for much cheaper than a normal theatre ticket (and it's often much easier and more convenient to go to the local movie theatre than to get to the nearest theatre) can dramatically affect our industry. It could lead to a much shorter runs, as Brian said, but it could also cut down on the amount of low-level avant-garde theatre that is produced, simply because many people that go watch a live event on a screen may start to believe that it is the same thing as seeing it live. As a result, shows that can't put their show on a screen or don't want to may suffer from even lower audience attendance.
I'm not really surprised that this is becoming such a big hit. One of the reasons why I fell in love with opera is because I was able to watch recordings of Metropolitan Opera shows in the local AMC movie theatre. The footage is beautiful, and I was able to see the sets and costumes closer than I would at an actual opera house. I've only been to one opera, and I could only see such a clear image when looking through my opera glasses. Not only do they show operas in cinemas here in the US, but they also show national productions if you know where to look. At the Phoenix Art Museum, they show a lot of National Theatre Live from London. I was able to see an encore performance of Frankenstein with Benedict Cumberbatch as the Creature, and I was utterly amazed. The showing covered all design aspects as well as the acting. What I love about these showings are how they can branch out to people who would never even think of going to an opera. This way, more people can be part of this theatrical experience, and the public can see these performances, that usually cost $300-$400/ticket, for $15-30. I can't wait to see more live performances filmed.
4 comments:
I think this article points to an important new trend in our theater, and one that live theater artists should be wary of, but also excited of. Sure, its great that people can go see these live pieces of art in a movie theater (its happening here in the US too- take the Met for example), but you have to ask why they're not going to the theater in the first place, and what they're missing or gaining because of it. I think they may not be missing much- the event is still live, you're still seeing it with a theater full of people. But there's a lot to gain. Live Cinema audiences have a better seat than almost anything in the theater (that's why the Operas are so popular- you're closer than even the first row), the event is cheaper, and often easier to get to. However, live cinema can get more people to see a show at once, so longer runs become rarer, and over time that could have a profound effect on the industry.
This is a brilliant idea. I'm no saying do this for everything, but for some shows this would be great. I love theater, but growing up fairly far from any major city going to a play or musical was a treat I got only once every couple of year (which was more then most of my friends). Going to the cinema however happened at least once a month (in the summer and winter even more often). If plays and dances could be streamed to placeless were people might never have the opportunity to see shows and ballet's could really see the beauty of it. I don't think it would really alter the industry much, nothing compares to seeing it live. But it would be nice to make it a little more accessible to the masses
I think this could be really interesting, but I don't agree with Jenni's assertion that this probably won't alter the live performance industry much. Sure, in the next few years, I don't think that this will dramatically affect the theatre industry, but over time, I think that people becoming used to seeing live performances in a movie theatre for much cheaper than a normal theatre ticket (and it's often much easier and more convenient to go to the local movie theatre than to get to the nearest theatre) can dramatically affect our industry. It could lead to a much shorter runs, as Brian said, but it could also cut down on the amount of low-level avant-garde theatre that is produced, simply because many people that go watch a live event on a screen may start to believe that it is the same thing as seeing it live. As a result, shows that can't put their show on a screen or don't want to may suffer from even lower audience attendance.
I'm not really surprised that this is becoming such a big hit. One of the reasons why I fell in love with opera is because I was able to watch recordings of Metropolitan Opera shows in the local AMC movie theatre. The footage is beautiful, and I was able to see the sets and costumes closer than I would at an actual opera house. I've only been to one opera, and I could only see such a clear image when looking through my opera glasses. Not only do they show operas in cinemas here in the US, but they also show national productions if you know where to look. At the Phoenix Art Museum, they show a lot of National Theatre Live from London. I was able to see an encore performance of Frankenstein with Benedict Cumberbatch as the Creature, and I was utterly amazed. The showing covered all design aspects as well as the acting. What I love about these showings are how they can branch out to people who would never even think of going to an opera. This way, more people can be part of this theatrical experience, and the public can see these performances, that usually cost $300-$400/ticket, for $15-30. I can't wait to see more live performances filmed.
Post a Comment