Walking out of a show....- Page 3

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 4:31pm

I don't see how anyone could pay for a show then just walk out.

I don't see how anyone can force themselves to sit through something that makes them miserable to watch.

[Barney Stinson]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 5:44pm

I'll be honest, I think in general (not 100% of the time), people who walk out of shows take themselves WAAAAAAY too seriously.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 5:59pm

See, I think it's the opposite. I think the people who are shocked and offended that somebody won't stay and watch something they are not enjoying are taking themselves way too seriously.

[Patash]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 8:42pm

I'm a bit stunned by the repeated comment that people wouldn't walk out after they paid for the whole thing as if since they paid for it they insist on getting their "money's worth". Using that same logic, does that mean if they ordered a meal and it was simply terrible, they'd be sure to eat the whole thing since they were paying for it? Sorry, I just don't get either of those ideas. The fact that I paid for something horrible doesn't mean I should have to sit through it anyway.

But I will say that I've never walked out of a show, and like another poster said above, I envied those who walked out of Desperate Writers last week. It was painful to watch the whole thing.

[Barney Stinson]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 8:53pm

"See, I think it's the opposite. I think the people who are shocked and offended that somebody won't stay and watch something they are not enjoying are taking themselves way too seriously."

That's not really the opposite, since both can be true. And I agree with you. If someone else leaving "shocks and offends" you, then yeah, you need to remove the stick from your butt.

Regardless, people walking out still take themselves too seriously as well though (with exceptions).

[hpeabody930]

Posted: 6/5/11 at 9:13pm

The only show I've ever left at intermission was Paradise Lost at ART last year, had NO idea what was going on in the first act and had absolutely no reason to stay for the second. I'm of the crowd that never thought that I could leave a show but this was one certainly changed my opinion of that.

Edward Albee has this great quote that I am going to absolutely destroy but he says that as an audience member one of the greatest most empowering things you can do in the theatre is to stand up in the middle and walk out. Of course he says it far more eloquently than I, but when I heard that quote it really made me go, "yeah!".

[fingerlakessinger]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 2:24am

I wanted to walk out at intermission when I saw my first Broadway show ever (I mean, I have seen tours and been in love with musicals and broadway my whole life but this was my first trip to NYC 3 years ago in 11th Grade)
That show was "Phantom of the Opera."
I'm sorry...if I was not with my chorus class on a trip I would have left. That show was just dreadful and it sucked cuz we all went in with high hopes cuz we thought we would love it but even the big fan in our group walked out after the show with a frown.

I did walk out of a high school production of "Fiddler on the Roof" once. I know its a bit rude, and its High school so I shouldnt expect high end talent or anything but these kids were literally the worst. Not just in talent but also in discipline. Whenever the ensemble were on stage countless kids would point in the audience and wave to their friends/family and one even shouted out "Hi dad!"...come on...these were 9-12 graders!

[chewy5000]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 2:47am

Why does the audience have to respect the actors? Let them know, loud and clear, if you think it's crap
Updated On: 6/6/11 at 02:47 AM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 9:55am

Is it just me, or are there a lot of posts missing from this thread?

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 11:02am

I don't think so, Matt. I've been reading this throughout, and I don't think any are missing. I could be wrong, though.

"I don't see how anyone can force themselves to sit through something that makes them miserable to watch."

I don't see how watching anything could ever make me miserable. I suppose it should follow that since a theatrical experience can thrill me and bring me joy, it should also be able to make me miserable, but in over 30 years of theater-going, it never has. Sure, there have been shows I didn't like, but I can always find something to interest me. Only once have I ever wanted to leave at intermission, and that was at Passing Strange. I hated Stew beyond reason. I thought he was pretentious, conceited, annoying...I just couldn't stand him. Had I bought the ticket, I am sure I would left at intermission, but I had been comped in, and I think it is very rude to leave a show that you've been comped into.

"Using that same logic, does that mean if they ordered a meal and it was simply terrible, they'd be sure to eat the whole thing since they were paying for it?"

Bad analogy. It is extremely unlikely that a meal will take a sudden twist and improve. It happens in theater with some frequency. Your point, and Matt's is well-taken, though. If you're the sort of person that gets bored easily, or is otherwise for whatever reason made miserable by a show, I don't see any point in sticking it out. I know I would have left at PS's intermission - but that's the only time ever thus far that walking out has ever even occurred to me.

"Why does the audience have to respect the actors? Let them know, loud and clear, if you think it's crap"

I hope you're kidding. That's just obnoxious.

[justafan2]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 11:24am

The actors don't usually write the script, nor the music. They're being paid to perform the material given to them! They are the ones who (IMO), get disrespected if the audience is unhappy with the content of the show & leaves before final curtain.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 11:30am

Firstly im shocked anyone on here walked out of Parade, i thought it was a stunning show.

Here in the UK i went to see the first national tour of Jekyll and Hyde, a dreadful production, mis cast, cheap, click track, bad sound, awful design etc. They hope it would move to the West End (it never did).
Anyway i watched it at the stunning 2000 capacity seater Manchester Palace and when the show started about 500 were in the audience (it had not sold well). After the interval we came back and the show started up again, just as the light went down i noticed that over HALF of the audience had left, more left through act 2. At the end of the performance around 200 were left.

[Pammylicious]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 11:33am

Two shows I have been tempted but stayed were both at American Airlines Theater.....Hedda Gabler and the show after it, The Philantropist ........both were AWFUL and BORING

[jennamajig]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 11:57am

I've never left a show (I can usually find a redeeming quality in there), but there was one I wish I'd left at intermission and that was Whistle Down the Wind. The tour came through Boston and sold so poorly that I got a 4th row orchestra seat for $28. The cast was talented, but the material was so awful they couldn't save it.

Funny thing is, the older folk around me and my friend loved the show. We just didn't get it.

Oh, wait I take that back. I also wish I'd left The Little Mermaid at intermission. I loved the film and its score and that production was truly bad. My love for the source material kept me there for Act II, which was, IMO, much worse than Act I.

[p.s.]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 11:59am

Statler and Waldorf have a better idea.


p.s. Heckling is ok, but walking out would be rude.

[newintown]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 12:27pm

I see a lot of posts in this thread from people who don't seem to grasp the notion that there are a lot of different values/priorities in this world.

I know a guy who, at 65, is still thrilled like a kid every single time he walks into a Broadway theatre, and finds something to like about everything he sees (which is only about 2-3 times a year). I know another guy who, at 47, still finds riding in a New York cab an exciting experience. I know a girl who could eat spaghetti for every meal of her life.

But there are shows that I (and others) find so inept and devoid of value, I don't see any reason to stay for more - no matter how good the second act might be, it doesn't make up for a simply unbearable first act. These include shows like Lennon, Ring Of Fire, High Fidelity, A Class Act, Lestat, and on and on. Some shows, like Prymate or Dance of the Vampires, are bad in an unintentionally entertaining way, so that staying can provide a certain sadistic pleasure.

[East Village]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 12:45pm

Getting up and walking out of a show is very disturbing and disrespectful to other audience members. Wait for intermission.

However all bets are off for shows performed without intermission. Most of the time producers are well aware that providing a break will result in lots of empty seats for Act 2.

[JulesOfBway]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 8:38pm

Mister Matt- Yes there are some posts missing. Mine, which you quoted earlier, has disappeared. I don't know why or how.

If you that miserable watching a show then you might not truly like theater. Personally, even if the show sucks,I find something interesting enough to stay, such as the costumes, lighting, delivery of lines or just the sheer fact that its so bad it becomes a comedy. In addition, the curiosity and hope that it will become better as the show progresses.

Also as a college student, paying roughly $100 for a good seat in NYC means using money that could have went towards paying my tuition and not being so far in debt. Walking out and essentially wasting my money is not an option. Maybe in the future when I'm out of college and have payed off my student loans, but even then I doubt I will.

I agree the food analogy was bad. If you dislike a meal, you have the ability to send it back and either have it changed, have it comped or be given a new meal. I am extremely picky and have done this a million times. Rarely can you have a show improved just because you paid for it, but you can try to make the bad into a positive and find something good with in it.

I respect that other people may have different opinions and if you get bored, bored you get bored. But however I do not just walk out of a class because I find it utterly boring and terrible.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 8:56pm

"If you that miserable watching a show then you might not truly like theater."

You, my friend, are full of shlt. I love theater. I live it and breathe it and the times I have left a show were because if I had to sit there one second longer, I would contemplated suicide. Suffering through the first acts of ROCK 'N ROLL, A TOUCH OF THE POET and the one or two others I've left over the years was more than enough for me and there's no reason in hell I needed to stay and finish them. I didn't care what happened to the characters, I wasn't following the story so I had no idea what was going on so why on earth would I want to stay? When I saw THE PHILANTHROPIST, 30 minutes into the first act the Tony award winning actor next to me had his head back and he was snoring. His partner had to wake him up and guess what? They didn't return for the second act. Why on earth would he??

Now you're saying I don't truly like theater. Since January I've seen 52 productions in and around the city. So you can take your ridiculous assumptions and suck 'em.

Oh, and of course you don't walk out of a class because you're bored. YOU HAVE TO BE THERE. Updated On: 6/6/11 at 08:56 PM

[salutz1031]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 9:05pm

It wasn't until last year when i walked out on a show. I have always felt this is always one thing to see, whether it be costumes, choreography, or scenery. All that changed this past year! I refuse to waste my time. I never saw Act II of: Memphis, Enron, and The People in the Picture. I would have walked out of Catch Me If You Can if friends werent seeing another show.

[JulesOfBway]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 9:47pm

Fine. Not truly liking theater was a bit harsh,and I'm currently in a bad mood so I'm being way harsher then I usually am.

As I said before,there is more to a show then just the story.All the acting technique along side of the technical aspects make up the vision you see in front of you and work along side the story. Ask any theater major and they will tell you that there is more. Yes when you start noticing the lighting designs, the show it's self is doing a bad job keeping you in a sense of suspended disbelief.

It could be that I am fascinated with the technical aspects of theater in addition to whats happening on the stage, but as I said before there is just more then the story. The moment I become bored of the story or the characters I go into tech mode and look at all lighting, make up, the time between quick changes, how to re-block the show's bad parts and so on.

Now since I live 3 hours away from the city I am not able to see the same quality of shows you are as often. Since January I have seen every show with in a 30 mile radius of me. Only 3 of them being national tours, so the rest were community theater or high school shows ( most of them kind of bad). I subject my self to this theater though because I have such a thirst for theater. The moment I am able to move to the city, I plan on doing the same thing you do; see as much as possible.

In addition, I said that I respect that there are other opinions. If you cant sit through a show, then fine. So be it. But it is not for me.

Also, going to class is not fully required, I know kids who have just shown up on test days and still received an A in the class, my point was that just because you may be bored, you don't leave in the middle of class, you wait till the end.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 10:19pm

JulesOfBway i work as a director and writer of plays here in the UK, I’m also a critic for What's on Stage here in the UK, i have left a couple of shows before, does that mean that I’m not as attached to theatre as you?

As someone who has to see every aspect of the theatre i will ALWAYS look at every single detail on the stage (it's impossible for me not to do that now) but if a show is not doing anything for me at all then it's my choice if i should leave, it does not mean i like theatre any less. Believe me many shows that i have reviewed i have wished i could walk out but as a critic you can't, but if i am there as a paying customer and i hate it then it's my choice. I love film as well but if i turn a DVD off that is not getting my attention it does not mean i love film any less.

If someone walks out of one of my plays that i have written or directed i don't think 'that person should have stayed and looked how pretty the lights were or how expensive that costume piece was' i would think 'well this show is not for them, never mind'

Jordan is clearly a HUGE theatre fan but he should not nor should anyone else have to stay to watch something they are not enjoying, no matter how great the set looks or how hard working the cast are.

Updated On: 6/6/11 at 10:19 PM

[binau]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 10:30pm

I think the simple logic is that:

* You pay $100 and sit through awful theatre, and have say an arbitrary happiness rating of 50 afterwards

* You pay $100 leave at intermission, and because you haven't experienced the 2nd half of said awful theatre you have say an arbitrary happiness rating of 60 afterwards

In both cases you spend $100, but in the 2nd case you're happier than in the 1st case. Of course, perhaps someone would feel happier in the end sitting through the show knowing they are seeing everything their $$$ entitled them to see, and there was the argument that sometimes the 2nd half of the show isn't awful. BUT I can easily see how in certain situations (like the one I described initially), it makes more sense to leave a show than stay.

I paid a full price ticket to see WOMEN ON THE VERGE but completely skipped it because I thought I'd have a better time doing something else in the city I couldn't do another time...I wasn't going to force myself to see WOMEN ON THE VERGE because I had paid money to see it. In the end I am just looking for whatever outcome will be most enjoyable..

Updated On: 6/6/11 at 10:30 PM

[JulesOfBway]

Posted: 6/6/11 at 10:48pm

As I said be for I am in an extremely terrible mood and that it was harsh of me to say and I am sorry and I have since claimed down from said mood and see how harsh I was. I understand people have other opinions. In addition, I have said that if you can't sit through the show, that is your decision and that personally I wouldn't opt to walk out.
My original post on this thread, which has oddly disappeared, stated my surprise of seeing someone leave expensive box seats less then 10 minutes into a show. My original comment on leaving after you have paid was directed more towards that instance which, looking back,I did not make clear enough.
Yes, it is fully the decision of the audience member to walk out if they feel that they can not take anymore of the show. I fully respect that.
Yes, you can love theater with a passion and still dislike a show enough to walk out.I'm sorry that what I said offended so many, as I said I was in a bit some ones head off mood. I was giving the reasons that I find to stay through bad productions. Once again I am sorry.

I have aspirations to become a producer someday and know that as long as the audience member pays that they have the choice to do what ever with their ticket.Though personally I would not dream of walking out, but as I also said, it's a cost benefit type thing currently and maybe in the future when I am financially stable I will understand the other side of the coin better.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 6/7/11 at 12:32am

While I am not one who leaves at intermission, I can definitely see, and respect, the other side. This is a personal decision and preference. If people want to leave the show they paid for, that's their choice. It is there ticket and they can use it however they wish. If people wish to stay and stick it would, that's their choice too. While I have only left at two shows in my life, there have been some shows I stayed for that I wish I would have just left.