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
Wednesday, March 22, 2023
Broadway shows are becoming embarrassingly cheap-looking
nypost.com: There is a depressing sight that New York theatergoers are becoming all too accustomed to: a brick wall at the back of the stage.
Welcome to Broadway! Please enjoy the bare minimum!
This article definitely covers an interesting topic that I think people are held back from voicing their opinions on. I’m a huge fan of extravagant sets myself (‘Moulin Rouge’ therefore tops as one of my favourites) but I still believe that there is a line between minimalistic style and minimal set. ‘Life of Pi’, for instance, has a minimal set that is in no way near minimalistic because of the heavy projection, which works beautifully with everything else. There are also some shows that I’ve seen where they are mostly relying on lighting (when there’s no VMD) to ‘fill the space’, which – more powers to the lighting designers, but – makes me feel like something is missing and I can’t ignore how empty the stage looks. The article briefly mentions ‘My Neighbour Totoro’ by the Royal Shakespeares Company, which I got to watch last October in London, and I agree that the puppets and puzzle-like sets are probably one of the best ones I’ve seen so far.
I’ve noticed this as well. As shows have opened and I get to see production photos, as of late I have been left wondering if that it all there was to it. I personally love huge productions, I want to see something so grand, with tons of moving parts. I understand that this is expensive, but it also feels like there hasn’t been something like this that has opened on Broadway recently. I see the sets and I think about how to achieve building them, and how long it may take, what the expensive version of it may be built to look like, and even then I just kind of wonder what else there could be. I will say that it is not the best feeling as a TD. Of course it would be a joy and honor to work on any of these shows, but I guess I just want something mind-blowing in terms of scenery.
This article popped up in my Google feed a few days ago, and I had a feeling it was going to be posted for Newsquiz. Though contrary to other people’s opinions, I found this article to be a bit abusrd. I completely understand that if you go to see a Broadway show that you’re expecting to see something big and grand. But honestly, I often find that the smaller, less scenic heavy shows are the most impactful to me. I go to the theatre to watch a story happen right before my eyes. If that story just so happens to be told with a huge set, that’s cool. If it’s told with two rehearsal cubes and a few lights, that’s also cool too. As a technician it is a lot more intriguing to work on a show that’s set heavy. Broadway is definitely in a shift and change right now and especially to get it back on its feet after the pandemic that might mean having smaller shows.
There is something to this design style, especially after a pandemic that nearly killed our industry. I'm unsure how much of this is about design choice versus available resources and willingness to invest. I think this style is more intimate and focuses on being here and being with others experiencing something at the same time aspect of theatre, rather than the spectacle aspect. However, as a scenic designer with love for extravagance, I am disappointed that I cannot go to a Broadway show and know that I will find something beautiful and grand each time, but I've always said that's not what broadway is for. There are times where I think that broadway sets and designs look cheap, and I honestly think that it is because the best work cannot come from shows that are so mainstream and at a large scale. However, New York holds a lot of money for theatre designers, so it is the only place that could reliably have the large-scale designs when the show calls for it.
Although I don’t know much about scenic design, I do know that design as a whole tends to have trend cycles, and this kind of more rugged Fairfield to the stage I think has been happening a lot recently, because the storytellers wanted to be focused on the story itself, and, almost making it, feel more exposed to make the characters feel more open and intimate with the audience. I’ve seen two of the shows that they mentioned in this article and Juliet and into the woods and I think for aunt Juliette it was actually a really good choice to keep it make it look like a tudor style performance space and I actually think this was a really good choice cause the whole play center round Shakespeare writing, and performing this play in its new version that his wife is trying to convince him is better. And when it came to into the woods, I will say I actually was a bit disappointed with the lack of set it made it actually feel kind of lackluster and unprofessional I sat there, knowing that those were cardboard construction tubes that I couldn’t build the same set, and that made me a little upset.
I think the way in which Broadway shows are steadily decreasing their production value is very saddening. Like this article mentioned, it is no longer uncommon to see shows, even the big, famous, musicals that theoretically highlight the season, that have bare bones sets. Minimalism when it comes to scenery and other production aspects is very popular now. Many shows make some of the backstage areas of the backstage area, like the walls, lighting booms, wings visible which can help to save money on having to build something in front of it. However, in some cases, shows have gone so far as to have almost no set at all. When I first heard that the current Broadway production of “A Doll’s House” had only some chairs and a turntable with nothing else on the stage, I was very surprised. As much as I think a minimalistic set has its place, I think it’s being overused and I hope high production value comes back to Broadway soon.
This is something I feel very strongly about, especially when we’re talking about the Into the Woods revival. It made me want to hurl something at a wall. I’m all for minimalist productions when it’s appropriate. There are ways to do minimal beautifully - I think of the revival of Falsettos, Spring Awakening… The Into the Woods revival is a good example of what I believe to be modern the loss of extravagance, especially with the recent City Center-pipeline — money. The Into the Woods production at City Center was a staged concert. The same basically went for Parade, which this article also mentions. It had minimal sets because it was put together in two weeks with not a ton of budget. Then it went to Broadway completely unchanged, and brought in huge crowds for its slew of talent. They didn’t change it because they didn’t need the set to make profit - so in theory, why invest in it? At the end of the day, Broadway is a business. So as much as I (and many others) feel a beautiful set is integral to an authentic and massively impactful Into the Woods experience, who cares? It infuriates me, and I hope that this new “trend” dies - EXCLUDING creative and artistic intentions. The Doll’s House thing is tricky - is having no set actually enhancing the story? That’s the question that has to be asked. Sure, it’s putting focus on the performances, but does that actually comprise and make up the entirety of the experience? That kind of thing almost feels like an insult to the art of scenic design. The article’s description of the impact of Lee’s work is dead on for this reason.
7 comments:
This article definitely covers an interesting topic that I think people are held back from voicing their opinions on. I’m a huge fan of extravagant sets myself (‘Moulin Rouge’ therefore tops as one of my favourites) but I still believe that there is a line between minimalistic style and minimal set. ‘Life of Pi’, for instance, has a minimal set that is in no way near minimalistic because of the heavy projection, which works beautifully with everything else. There are also some shows that I’ve seen where they are mostly relying on lighting (when there’s no VMD) to ‘fill the space’, which – more powers to the lighting designers, but – makes me feel like something is missing and I can’t ignore how empty the stage looks. The article briefly mentions ‘My Neighbour Totoro’ by the Royal Shakespeares Company, which I got to watch last October in London, and I agree that the puppets and puzzle-like sets are probably one of the best ones I’ve seen so far.
I’ve noticed this as well. As shows have opened and I get to see production photos, as of late I have been left wondering if that it all there was to it. I personally love huge productions, I want to see something so grand, with tons of moving parts. I understand that this is expensive, but it also feels like there hasn’t been something like this that has opened on Broadway recently. I see the sets and I think about how to achieve building them, and how long it may take, what the expensive version of it may be built to look like, and even then I just kind of wonder what else there could be. I will say that it is not the best feeling as a TD. Of course it would be a joy and honor to work on any of these shows, but I guess I just want something mind-blowing in terms of scenery.
This article popped up in my Google feed a few days ago, and I had a feeling it was going to be posted for Newsquiz. Though contrary to other people’s opinions, I found this article to be a bit abusrd. I completely understand that if you go to see a Broadway show that you’re expecting to see something big and grand. But honestly, I often find that the smaller, less scenic heavy shows are the most impactful to me. I go to the theatre to watch a story happen right before my eyes. If that story just so happens to be told with a huge set, that’s cool. If it’s told with two rehearsal cubes and a few lights, that’s also cool too. As a technician it is a lot more intriguing to work on a show that’s set heavy. Broadway is definitely in a shift and change right now and especially to get it back on its feet after the pandemic that might mean having smaller shows.
There is something to this design style, especially after a pandemic that nearly killed our industry. I'm unsure how much of this is about design choice versus available resources and willingness to invest. I think this style is more intimate and focuses on being here and being with others experiencing something at the same time aspect of theatre, rather than the spectacle aspect. However, as a scenic designer with love for extravagance, I am disappointed that I cannot go to a Broadway show and know that I will find something beautiful and grand each time, but I've always said that's not what broadway is for. There are times where I think that broadway sets and designs look cheap, and I honestly think that it is because the best work cannot come from shows that are so mainstream and at a large scale. However, New York holds a lot of money for theatre designers, so it is the only place that could reliably have the large-scale designs when the show calls for it.
Although I don’t know much about scenic design, I do know that design as a whole tends to have trend cycles, and this kind of more rugged Fairfield to the stage I think has been happening a lot recently, because the storytellers wanted to be focused on the story itself, and, almost making it, feel more exposed to make the characters feel more open and intimate with the audience. I’ve seen two of the shows that they mentioned in this article and Juliet and into the woods and I think for aunt Juliette it was actually a really good choice to keep it make it look like a tudor style performance space and I actually think this was a really good choice cause the whole play center round Shakespeare writing, and performing this play in its new version that his wife is trying to convince him is better. And when it came to into the woods, I will say I actually was a bit disappointed with the lack of set it made it actually feel kind of lackluster and unprofessional I sat there, knowing that those were cardboard construction tubes that I couldn’t build the same set, and that made me a little upset.
I think the way in which Broadway shows are steadily decreasing their production value is very saddening. Like this article mentioned, it is no longer uncommon to see shows, even the big, famous, musicals that theoretically highlight the season, that have bare bones sets. Minimalism when it comes to scenery and other production aspects is very popular now. Many shows make some of the backstage areas of the backstage area, like the walls, lighting booms, wings visible which can help to save money on having to build something in front of it. However, in some cases, shows have gone so far as to have almost no set at all. When I first heard that the current Broadway production of “A Doll’s House” had only some chairs and a turntable with nothing else on the stage, I was very surprised. As much as I think a minimalistic set has its place, I think it’s being overused and I hope high production value comes back to Broadway soon.
This is something I feel very strongly about, especially when we’re talking about the Into the Woods revival. It made me want to hurl something at a wall. I’m all for minimalist productions when it’s appropriate. There are ways to do minimal beautifully - I think of the revival of Falsettos, Spring Awakening… The Into the Woods revival is a good example of what I believe to be modern the loss of extravagance, especially with the recent City Center-pipeline — money. The Into the Woods production at City Center was a staged concert. The same basically went for Parade, which this article also mentions. It had minimal sets because it was put together in two weeks with not a ton of budget. Then it went to Broadway completely unchanged, and brought in huge crowds for its slew of talent. They didn’t change it because they didn’t need the set to make profit - so in theory, why invest in it? At the end of the day, Broadway is a business. So as much as I (and many others) feel a beautiful set is integral to an authentic and massively impactful Into the Woods experience, who cares? It infuriates me, and I hope that this new “trend” dies - EXCLUDING creative and artistic intentions. The Doll’s House thing is tricky - is having no set actually enhancing the story? That’s the question that has to be asked. Sure, it’s putting focus on the performances, but does that actually comprise and make up the entirety of the experience? That kind of thing almost feels like an insult to the art of scenic design. The article’s description of the impact of Lee’s work is dead on for this reason.
Post a Comment