Am I the only one who likes seeing faces?- Page 2

[My Oh My]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 12:17am

If I had to pick one location to sit for every show from now on, I'd choose 7th row orchestra center. Perfect...unless a giant is sitting in front of you or some lady with annoyingly big hair.

Updated On: 8/25/08 at 12:17 AM

[Elke]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 6:34am

I agree with what the majority had said: closer is better. In fact, I can't even remember exactly when I last sat in the mezz or balcony. That must have been in 2004 or something... I will always try to get a seat in the first five rows. If possible, discounted, but if not, then so be it.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 10:13am

While I would rather see exact expressions, it's not like you just see blobs from further back (unless of course you should visit your eye doctor). If it's seeing a show at all and being able to see more shows and live, I'll take what I can get. If I get a bit of extra money, I might splurge, but bottom line, I'd rather see the show.

(And don't forget the cases ~ the St. James comes to mind ~ where closer is actually more ache inducing due to the stage height.)

Posted: 8/25/08 at 10:37am

I saw Wicked from the house sets. Nice, but I much preferred sitting back to get the whole stage picture.

[dancingthrulife04]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 10:46am

I'm a seat snob, I like to sit as close as possible. Most of the time, student rush makes that really easy. Of course, if it's all I can afford I'll take the seats in the balcony, or wherever.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 11:04am

When I used to only visit once a year, I usually got orchestra seats and would see one show. Now that I live here, I buy balcony for the same reason someone stated above. I would rather see four $30 shows than one $120 show. I love being able to see a show without really thinking about the cost. It's not really a question of quantity over quality because a good show can be a great experience from any seat.

I saw ITH from the orchestra two months ago and then from the balcony Sunday. I actually prefer balcony seats for this show. There are choreograpy moments and things done with the lights that you miss up close. You don't really notice the movements and goings on in the other store fronts and windows when you are really close. I have seen RENT from all over the theatre and my favorite seats were the front row of the balcony. We got lottery seats three weeks ago and that is really just too close. It's distracting when you see the actors spit when they sing or when you are worried that an actor's breasts are about to fly out.

[jennamajig]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 11:22am

I love sitting up close and would take it any day of the week if money were no object. Sadly, it is, and sometimes that means sitting further back. Thanks to lotteries and rush seats, more often than not I've seen shows close up and loved the experience.

However, there are a few times where I didn't mind sitting further back and/or preferred it. I sat in the balcony for Boeing-Boeing in July (3rd row, center) and thought it was the perfect view for the show. The theater isn't huge and the mezz and balcony are well stacked, so I could see faces and got a nice overall view of the stage (and all the doors - important in this farce). I've also sat in the mid & rear mezz & rear orchestra at Studio 54. I preferred the mezz. The overhang from the orchestra was distracting and up higher I had better sight lines.

[puppet]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 12:19pm

I always take my opera glasses even when in the orchectra. I like 5 or 6 row seats as that's where the directors usually sit when directing the show. For AVE Q I sit as close as possible -row 1 or 2 to watch the subtle movements of the puppets.

[winter_sky]

Posted: 8/25/08 at 12:35pm

Some shows have great balconys. I was trepidatious about sitting there for Passing Strange but they were perfect. Legally Blonde on the other hand was awful. It was Bailey's first performance and there was many people I had not seen as there had been a lot of cast change in 3 months and I couldn't really tell the difference. I never understood how people could confuse people who look so drastically different (Luther Creek for Tim Howar as Roger in RENT for example) but I honestly had no idea who was playing a few of the characters.

I guess I'm spoiled by rush/lotto.

[Scottsacto]

Posted: 4/13/10 at 6:38pm

David-And You have run this Opera Glass Company for How Long???

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 4/13/10 at 6:48pm

For me it depends on the show. At Next to Normal I want to see their faces. The Lion King, Wicked... I want to see the design.

Posted: 4/13/10 at 6:52pm

Well sure, I love sitting as close as I can, but as a college student, I'm lucky to be able to afford to sit anywhere. Whatever I can get.

[AC126748]

Posted: 4/13/10 at 6:57pm

There's a difference between sitting in the top row of the Family Circle at the Met and sitting in the mezzanine/balcony in a Broadway house. Personally, the only time I've sat far away in a Broadway theatre and not been able to glean facial expressions was in a barn like The Hilton. When I sat in the balcony for A View From the Bridge, I never had to squint or use binoculars to clearly see the actors' facial expressions. Ditto La Cage, which I saw from the last row of the mezzanine this past Wednesday. I saw everything as clearly as if I were sitting in the front row.

Personally, I prefer the mezzanine to the orchestra. I like the perspective it offers. When in the orchestra, I only like to sit about five to ten rows back. Other than that, I'll take anywhere in the mezz.