Watch Broadway Shows At Your Local Movie Theatre- Page 2

[sondhead]

Posted: 2/2/07 at 9:34am

">> No one on this board is hoping this won't happen.

Speak for yourself, pookie. I'd welcome it with open arms, and IMHO it's an inevitability. Get used to the idea, because at some point in time, it *will* happen."

Can you read? No one on this board is wanting this to NOT HAPPEN. That means we all want it to happen.

As for the lincoln center tapes, being shown to people with research reasons in a room in a library is pretty different from being shown in movie theatres across america. Not only will they never be shown here before of contractual things (believe me, if you did your research into these archives you would know they ain't gonna change) but also because of quality issues. Nothing would ever be distributed and showed to the public that hadn't been professionally edited. The videos out now (Sweeney Todd, Into the Woods, ect.) all had separate taping days in an empty theatre to get better angles and to correct mistakes. No prodution would be released without doing things like this. This is why we'll never see the NYCO Little Night Music or Piazza from Live at Lincoln Center--there are mistakes, and that will never let it be released.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 2/2/07 at 12:47pm

>> Can you read

Yes, I can. What you're saying is "Sure we want it BUT this and BUT that." I'm saying bring it on and do it now.

>> This is why we'll never see the NYCO Little Night Music or Piazza from Live at Lincoln Center--there are mistakes, and that will never let it be released

LOL -- and? The Lincoln Centre tapes vary wildly from pick up rehearsals to finished edited pieces, but no one's saying they're anything beyond that. The simple *fact* of the matter is that, *yes*, they are available to the public. It is not illegal. As I said earlier (and can you read?), in a very limited and controlled fashion, but *nevertheless* available.

Were producers to broadcast their shows, I imagine they would be thinking first and foremost about the product they were selling and make sure it looks as good as possible on all fronts. That too is just plain business sense.

Insofar as releasing the Lincoln Centre tapes for sale, that's another matter altogether, but I'd happily bet that both the Library and the producing companies are at least considering *part* of the collection for sale. Face it: there's no developmental costs -- the shows are already filmed. All they need are the packaging and the duplication services, and those are negligible. Yes, the Library would have the same quality control concerns and therefore isnt going to release just anything, but it will still happen eventually, even if it's just a few titles.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/2/07 at 12:51pm

I know a lot of people who DON'T want it to happen. They are the people that say theatre is a live event and should only be experienced live.

While I agree that the best way to experience theatre is indeed seeing it live in the theatre, I do think theatre can also be experienced through a movie screen or a television. It won't be the same experience, and in my opinion, it won't be as good of an experience, but at least you had the experience.

Theatre USED to be cheap. Yes, there is plenty of good free theatre and plenty of great alternatives to expensive ticket prices. But Broadway is Broadway and who wouldn't want to see the BROADWAY show with the ORIGINAL CAST. I wasn't here to see Ethel Merman in GYPSY. Now that performance only exists in stories and in audio. One of the legendary performances and productions and I'll never see it. I'll never get to see GYPSY as originally intended, shaped and formed by its authors. The original designs and direction and talent. IF it were preserved on film, however, I could have seen it! I could have gotten a taste of what it must have been like to have seen it live!

Little Timothy in Valez, Alaska wanted to see Disney's AIDA on Broadway. He asked his mother if, for his birthday, she would bring him to New York City to see the show. His mother replied: "Honey, no! Don't you realize that it would cost $3,200 for airline tickets, a hotel, food, transportation, and theatre tickets for you, me, daddy, and your little sister Vikki?"

"But don't you love me, Mama?" replied Little Timmy.

"Of course I do, sweetie," Timmy's mother said, "but I don't love you enough to spend $3,200 on a trip to New York City to sit in the last row of some theatre show I hardly know anything about only to have little kids screaming in the theatre, kicking the backs of seats, hearing popcorn being munched on, candy wrappers opening, and cell phones going off every five minutes! We can have that at home seeing THE SANTA CLAUSE 3 at the movie theatre, and that'll only cost me $30!"

Too bad AIDA wasn't filmed for release. Little Timmy could have seen it eventually, when he turned into Teenage Timmy. Not only that, but the producers of a show that CLOSED and and is no longer touring could be making money from it RIGHT NOW.


My point is that yes, it does cost quite a sum to professionally record a show. It cost $500,000 to record and release CANDIDE and only half of the money came back. Didn't turn a profit. But there are ways to make more money off of these recordings AND to cut costs back.

1) For broadcasting shows live in a theatre:

- Cut costs by only have a single camera stage shot. Or, one camera for a stage shot and another for semi-closeups.

- Cut costs by selling advertisement opportunities via sponsors.

- Increase revenue by increasing movie theatre tickets to the event to $15 dollars.

2) For DVD releases:

- Intermission is a great place to add 3 minutes worth of advertising. Sure, people can always press "skip" to begin Act 2, but the advertisements are there and if the product is of interest to the buyer, chances are they will watch it.


The final point I wish to make is special events. The 10th anniversary concert shows of RENT and CHICAGO would have been perfect candidates for broadcasting in movie theatres. Especially those two titles! A poorly missed opportunity. Two titles that had films made of them, are known in the mainstream, and are one-night-only events. Think of all the extra profit that could have been made.

Updated On: 2/2/07 at 12:51 PM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 2/2/07 at 1:12pm

"Don't you realize that it would cost $3,200 for airline tickets, a hotel, food, transportation, and theatre tickets for you, me, daddy, and your little sister Vikki?"

I'm not sure that total would finance a similar weekend for a family of four coming from upstate NY, let alone Alaska

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/2/07 at 4:27pm

$3,200 price tag came from a quick Expedia.com Hotel & airline package. I chose the cheapest options for a three night stay. Then I added for theatre tickets, food, etc.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/3/07 at 6:08pm

bump

[CapnHook]

Posted: 2/7/07 at 2:19pm

I feel like there are a lot of things going unsaid to this issue. No one has a retort to Little Timothy? He's awfully upset all the way over in cold, sunny Alaska.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 2/7/07 at 2:31pm

As a poor college student stuck in the Midwest whose fanily hates NYC and/or musical theatre and has therefore NEVER seen a real Broadway show in her life, I can definitely sympathize with poor Timmy.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 2/7/07 at 4:53pm

Now see? All you people who want this strictly controlled so Little Timmy cant see his favourite musical of all time and thereby grow up to be a whacko regular on BWW.com with endless threads about whatever there might be when he grows up.

Do Little Timmy a favour and LET THESE SHOWS BE SEEN!! Otherwise, youre all a bunch of selfish gits, and you're getting nothing -- I repeat, NOTHING -- for Valentine's Day... aside from perhaps the clap.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 2/19/07 at 7:05pm

bump