What is so bad about bootlegs? — Page 11

I don't usually look for bootleg versions of shows...but I did download a Matilda. After I saw the show, I could barely understand what was being said from my balcony seat..and I was not really a fan. I felt like I missed a lot of the show....the bootleg helped.

After watching the bootleg a number of times and purchasing the CD, I have since gone back to the theater to see the show a number of times...as once I understood what was going on and being said, I enjoyed it a lot more. I don't think anyone should have to watch a bootleg to enjoy a show but that's what happened in my case.

Seeing a bootleg would never take the place of seeing a show live ...but of course not everyone has the option.

The boot of the current Cabaret has Leeds Hill on for Alan.

---

I just wish they could find a way to sell legal versions after shows close (like an OBC recording). I am sure someone could work out some deal with the bunions to product/sell the Lincoln Center still camera versions

It's the cost . . . it just cost so much - the show needs to be re-teched (lighting for sure, often for sound) - and then every actor needs to be paid a SAG/AFTRA contract rate -designers get a bump.

For a new broadway musical, they wouldn't want to sell the DVD until the road tours are done - and by then, how much interest is there?

I simply can't watch the video bootlegs, but there are some lovely audio recordings out there dating all the way back to thee 50s of notable unrecorded flops and legendary performances. Say what you will about them, there are true treasures out there.

---

I've got a question - sorry if this has been answered somewhere in the 20 pages of responses - but, how were bootlegs recorded in the 70s and 80s? Today, people can record from their phones or from tiny micro cameras. But what kind of technology were people using to record bootlegs in the pre smartphone days? I mean, I'm guessing this wasn't happening:

It most certainly was. But the cameras were bigger than that.

That wasn't a joke. Google home video cameras in 1979 which is when those first videos popped up, and see what they looked like.

That's nuts. Were ushers just oblivious to people lugging in and operating massive camera equipment? Anyway, I'm grateful for those bootlegging pioneers.

I know GOOGLE GLASS make great/ high quality recordings of a show. HEDWIG for instance. There is no band on wearing them at a show and recording the whole thing

And no zoom.

To answer the question: everything and all things. That is what is so bad about bootlegs. First, contrary to popular belief, most actors can see you and feel it's highly insulting that you can't pay attention to what's happening on stage and would rather spend your time recording a grainy, second rate version of their show.

Second, it is one thing to post them on YouTube, but to seek funds for these recordings is just heinous. Everything that occurs on that stage is copyrighted and, unless you are giving royalties to the cast, musicians, and creative teams, it is highly illegal and despicable to seek money for work that is not yours.

Personally, I find it very disrespectful to everyone involved in the production that you can't give them your undivided attention. Let me ask this: would you steal a CD or movie from Best Buy? No? Then why do this?

I empathize with those that may not be able to afford to see an Off-Broadway or Broadway show (truly; I have missed a lot of great shows simply because I couldn't afford it and I work in this business), but sometimes you just have to deal and get over it. I am sure you will find a great number of actors and musicians who would very much agree.

@ FutureGM - I get messages ALL the time from Broadway actors wanting copies of their shows- So they don't all feel the way you are saying.
Also, you are inaccurate in calling bootlegs " grainy, second rate version of their show"- You clearly are out of date. Bootlegs are now being shot in HD and are mainly damn near perfect these days. Get your Facts right.

---