Film Broadway Bootlegs — Page 3

My favorite (and I have NOOOOO problem telling this story) is a Miss LuPone. Patti came out hard against bootlegs a few years ago and it struck me as quite odd since Mama Rose herself is an active seeker in videos of her own work. Being against something is one thing but being a hypocrite like her is another.

Why yes. Yes, they were.

Well whatdya know?! lol

That's exactly what I'm talking about, though.

(From the back of the theatre)
Elphie, he's gone.

Fans should be allowed to take pictures before the show of the theatre and curtain and for the curtain call for a souvenir, but never during the performance as it is dangerous.

I do think audience members should be allowed to take pictures of the curtain and stage before the show and at intermission though. There is no harm in it and a lot of people don't even know it is prohibited until they get yelled at by an usher.

Do you think the stage curtains just happened? That no one went to the trouble of designing it and copyrighting it? The stage curtains are protected under copyright just as much as the sets.

---

Look, the way to cut down on bootlegs is really simple. The productions themselves need to film them and release them. Too expensive you say? Add $1 to the ticket price and call it a "preservation fee". Tickets are already so damn high it won't matter and it's not like most people would mind that. Distribution too much money? Don't distribute them to the stores. Do what Warner Bros. does and release them via request online. Want a copy of GOD OF CARNAGE? Go to a website, place an order for say $29.95 (doesn't seem like a bad price at all to pay) and it will be mailed to you.

It's not as complicated as everyone makes it out to be. These antiquated Equity contracts are in serious need of revision as it is. Once that's done it will be a matter of regular contracts and agreements being signed. Lincoln Center library is great but I never saw the point of them with their restrictive policies. They should be available to anyone at anytime.

Well when the Lincoln Center recordings were recorded the contracts were nothing like what they would have to be for it to be distributed and sold, so their case would be that they legally can't (which is true without going back to every single person involved in the shows and having them sign more paperwork and agreeing on royalties, etc.)

I do think that since most shows close at a loss in this day and age, at least a portion of the sale of the shows could go back to the Producers of the shows. Hell, make it a $2 "Preservation Fee" per ticket. I'd be excited each time I bought a ticket that I was helping to fund the release of it after it closes.

Again, it's not going to stop bootlegging all together. There's always going to be the people who need to see the understudy for Chistery in the 6th Non Equity BumF*ck, Alabama tour of WICKED. But it would surely make most others obsolete and create great looking records of the shows instead of camcorder copies.

It's also kind of silly to me when people freak out over bootlegs of shows that have long closed. Once the production has closed and the tour has ended there's not really any more money to be made outside of the licensing fees for stock and regional productions. How does it hurt any of the actors or creators should someone choose to watch a bootleg of a production that has ended and one that they never would have been able to see otherwise?

And don't get me started on people whipping out their cell phones and texting devices at intermission/ There is no earthly reason why your texts can't wait until the show is over and you are outside the theatre.

I'd like to hear more about why you think people shouldn't be allowed to use their phones during intermission? During a show, sure, but during intermission? I'm on my phone all the time during intermission, I've never even thought there was anything wrong with it. (And this is coming from someone who puts her phone on silent, and then turns it off, during the show itself, to make doubly sure that it won't ring during the show.)

There is little-to-NO money to be made from recording productions for DVD. In fact, you LOSE money. Lonny Price told me that to film the CONCERT version of CANDIDE it costs $2 million and they were lucky if they got HALF of that back.

To film a production, there are SO many costs. A film crew & creative team (for the taping) is an expense. Paying all the stage performers & creative team (for the stage) is an expense. Paying the writers is an expense. Paying for DVD production & distribution is an expense. And if you do any marketing, that's an expense. And if you use clips in your marketing, you have to pay the actors an additional cost.

It's incredible that there are producers out there who are willing to sacrifice their money to make recordings of productions happen. Although if I were that rich, I'd do it, too.

I've said it before in other threads regarding bootlegs and I'll say it again:

Yes, theater is meant to be seen LIVE and watching a production on DVD defeats the purpose of theatre. However, in my opinion, the benefits of a DVD recording are far superior to the minuses. It preserves the show, it promotes the show, and it potentially reaches an audience that would have never otherwise have seen it.

---

I wonder if BARE would have had the following it does without a bootleg. I've seen clips on YouTube and it seems the bootleg made people WANT to see the show. It should have been released by the producers opening week. lol

I know that bootlegs don't help a lot of shows, but I do think the performers grow more of a fan base and get more well known because of them.

I do see how they can lose money for a show, so I get that factor too.

I could be wrong, but I honestly don't think producers releasing a dvd of a production would stop bootlegging.

People want to see different performers in the different roles, look at Wicked for example. Is there really just one or two boots of it? I dont think so.