Why do you think Broadway has lost its mainstream cultural appeal?- Page 2

[temms]

Posted: 6/21/07 at 7:18pm

I think it's more that everything in entertainment is less "mainstream". Top Forty radio is now divided into a hundred different Top Forty charts, with every conceivable narrow definition. As far as big acts, there aren't nearly as many and the vast majority are super-corporate (the Britneys, the Avrils, the Justins, etc.)

However, this has opened up a huge, thriving Indie music scene. Any "serious" music lover doesn't care so much about the charts, but can find A-level work under the radar. Recording has gotten so much cheaper and easier (just like film), so just about anybody with the knowhow, talent, and the gumption to put in the hard work can make a recording (or film) that holds up next to the #1's.

Theatre, however, has only gotten more expensive. And as audiences generally splinter (there used to be 3 television stations, remember, compared to the 1000 today) I think Broadway has fallen off to the same extent most everything else has. Problem is, there is no low-budget way to do theatre on an A-level the same way you can film or music. Theatre requires a lot of people - you need to pay all of those people a salary. It's gotten more expensive to produce when other art forms have gotten cheaper and more accessible.

What I'm trying to say is - an indie film that tears up Sundance, or a really great indie record, can set the industry ablaze. It's because they are finished products even as "Indie"s. A NYMF production or a Fringe production can never compete with Broadway, until they get the capital and the resources to become a multi-million dollar endeavor.

[jv92]

Posted: 6/21/07 at 7:26pm

Because of the jerks that let Actors Equity know about the bootleg videos up on "that site."
Come on! Look at the wonders You Tube has done for TV. The TV networks are getting into putting up clips and allowing people to see them on the internet. Why not do it for theatre? Not the whole show of course, but selected whole numbers that aren't slick press reels or Tony performances.
There's one idea to make it mainstream.

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 6/21/07 at 7:37pm

Too many shows based upon popular movies. This, in turn, implies that theatre is on its knees giving cinema a blowjob while cinema screams "I'M THE KING!".

These shows based upon movies imply that theatre is somehow "less" than cinema when, in reality, the two mediums should never be compared because they are completely different. Theatre is bowing to the needs of cinema and that just isn't koo.

[javero]

Posted: 6/21/07 at 7:49pm

I'm with Fosse here. Let's see...feature film, CD/DVD, broadcast TV, cable TV, satellite TV, broadcast radio, satellite radio, 24-hour cable news, MTV/VH1/BET/Univision/Telemundo, NFL, NBA, MLB, MLH, ATPTennis, WTATOUR, PGA, Disney World/Land, Six Flags of ..., Busch Gardens, Spring Break in Cancun/Girls Gone Wild, Internet, ipod, iphone, mp3 players, IM, text messaging, day trading, online investing, etc. All these entities are competing in some manner with the Great White Way.

[me2]

Posted: 6/21/07 at 8:30pm

This is a really interesting discussion.

I think there are a lot of factors, and I recently wrote about this in my blog (Give Them What They Want / Za Ba Zoovee).

In short, Broadway has lost touch with the times. RENT is such a big hit because it speaks to young people, even though it is now outdated. Musically, the typical theatre writer and critic doesn't "get" rock, hip hop, or pop music. When a rock show comes in (or pop), critics and people don't get it. If the critics don't get kudos to a show, it can be a real struggle for that show to survive and find an audience.

Both adults and kids do like fun, old-fashioned shows. Watch kids line up to audition for MUSIC MAN or WEST SIDE STORY or GREASE at their high schools. But I think there's little that connects to people on such a level as RENT did/does, either in musical style or what it has to say.
Broadway Blog: Confessions of a (Former) Stage Door Johnny

[iliketheater]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 12:11am

One word: Television.

How can B*way possibly keep up to something significantly cheaper & more accessible in terms of entertainment?

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 1:45am

It's my personal opinion that people no longer like the idea of a musical. It's become a cheesy thing to them. Whenever you ask a non-fan why they don't like musicals, most will say "People don't just burst out into song and dance in everyday life!" Look at all of the successful modern musical movies: they incorporated the songs in a different way. When they did do it in the traditional musical transition style, the non-fans didn't like it: you should have seen comments I read on a review for Dreamgirls. Though I do agree those transitions were sloppy--sorry, I digress.

I can't comment on the tourist theory because I don't live in NYC. Heck, I've never even been a tourist there. Sigh. I do agree though that Broadway appears to have become a tourist attraction.

Updated On: 6/22/07 at 01:45 AM

[javero]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 8:53am

If only we could find a way to "digitize" Broadway shows and marshall them to paying audiences in TV land. Wow...what a novel concept...Broadway-on-demand. To me, nothing tops the live theatre experience but the show's producers and venue operators are missing out on boatloads of TV revenue by not videocasting/taping the shows akin to pro/college sports leagues.

I offer that the "business model" of theatrical producers is fundamentally outmoded. With the advent of 500 channels available soon on broadcast high definition TV soon throughout the US, the production side of these shows should be scrambling to pipe these products to viewers (or paying cable subscribers) at advertiser expense. Not everyone can make the trek to NYC but TV reception in the US is ubiquitous.

Updated On: 6/22/07 at 08:53 AM

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 9:33am

It's easy to say Broadway is out of touch with current pop culture, but that wouldnt explain the success of the Metropolitan Opera, which has wildly succeeded at getting that elusive youth audience without lowering the quality of their productions. The Met has also figured out how to send its product out via DVD and TV broadcast (granted, with donor help in the latter), which, with very rare exceptions, seems to be something that eludes most Broadway producers. I mean, yes, it's expensive to record a show to DVD, but can you imagine the phenomenal sales that something like WICKED would have?

True, it's best seeing these live, but DVDs and broadcasts havent stopped the ticket sales by any stretch. And frankly I dont understand why more producers arent taking advantage of what could be a very lucrative income stream.

But then, we're also looking at a product that's aimed more and more at Boomers and the generation immediately afterwards. Ticket prices are absurdly high for shows that, to be bluntly honest, arent worth it. For CHORUS LINE to be charging as much as it is for a show that has such minimal physical requirements is ridiculous -- and please dont start with "well, the marketing and advertising!" -- WICKED has just as much of a second-level budget, but, according to some sources around here, it's repaid its investors and is now solidly operating in the black. CHORUS LINE has supposedly also recouped its investment. That being the case, there's no reason to not start bringing the ticket price down.

But once again, it's a matter of product. As delightful as CURTAINS and CHAPERONE may be, they're becoming a little too much of inside jokes for audience to want to flock to. And the "revolutionary" SPRING AWAKENING is just a walking joke that cant decide *what* it wants to be. The Disney shows are a little too prepackaged to be anything but theme park extraganzas, and that seems to be what audiences want more than anything -- after all, isnt that really what WICKED is? An over-produced theme park musical?

I dont rend my garments and tear my hair that Broadway aint what it used to be. It isnt, because popular culture has changed so much. But Broadway *is* more and more an anachornism, and I honestly have no idea what it can do to save itself from beocming more and more an overpriced curiosity piece.

Updated On: 6/22/07 at 09:33 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 9:44am

Back in the Golden Age, people looked to Broadway for its culture and trends.

Today, Broadway looks to the people for its culture and trends.

It's a sad reversal. Due to the commercialization of the American theatre, the masses now dictate what turns up in front of them when the curtain goes up. They want to see what they've already seen and heard before. They want to watch stories they know by heart, from their favorite movies and TV shows. They want the same plays to be there, year after year.

And the American theatre caters to this wholeheartedly, because now there is too much money at stake.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 9:46am

"In short, Broadway has lost touch with the times."

No more than it always has. Very few musicals which captured the essence of the period in which it originally ran have ever been successful. Spring Awakening has a modern sound/sensibility that is geared toward the exact same demographic as Rent was 10 years ago. And no, I'm not saying Spring Awakening is the next Rent, but that it's target audience is a similar teen/twenties crowd that obsessed over Rent in the mid-90s. And let's not forget the tween-girl phenomenon that is Wicked. If Broadway has lost touch with the times, then how do you explain the burst of younger audiences arriving in droves for years now to see a Broadway musical? No, I don't think Broadway has lost touch with the times any more than it ever has.

[Weez]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 9:47am

Whenever you ask a non-fan why they don't like musicals, most will say "People don't just burst out into song and dance in everyday life!"

Which is a fairly ignorant statement in itself, as I am far more likely to burst into song and dance as part of my everyday life than I am to get caught up in a car chase or bank heist or even a series of romantic interludes resulting in a "happily ever after".

JUST ONCE I'd like to see someone who actually KNOWS about musicals diss musicals. I'd be more inclined to take people seriously when they say "musicals are rubbish because..." if their arguments were actually relevant. No, musicals aren't all twee, no, they aren't all cheery fluff with happy endings, no, they aren't all R&H-style showtunes.

[me2]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 12:12pm

I've always thought it interesting that people will call musicals "so fake," but they have no problem seeing some fantastic action movie or outrageous horror film.

People don't realize that the musical is a form of artistic expression. It's not intended to be real.
Broadway Blog: If They Could See You Now (the understudy debate)

[misschung]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 12:22pm

JUST ONCE I'd like to see someone who actually KNOWS about musicals diss musicals.

thank you.

[SamIAm]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 4:25pm

I would say that we have still to settle the question of what we consider to be the definition of "mainstream". I think that part of the issue with live theater today is that they have tried too hard to appeal to mainstream audiences with retrofit themes from movies, juke box musicals and safe revivals.

Technology has improved sound and lighting and sets, but sometimes that gets carried away as well. Regional theater and touring companies still exist and people in Peoria still go to see live theater so I would not say that theater is dead. I would say that London, NYC and all other theatrical markets are now catering to the mainstream and to the youth demographic and that is the way they are able to survive. As an old timer I do not like the transition ("progress" if you want to call it that) but it is a reality.

All in all I think that all entertainment has become more mainstream. Mainstream in the 50s meant whatever choices they gave you and it attempted to appeal to the largest audience. Marketing today splits demographics and targets tweens, teens, 20 somethings, etc. The niches may be smaller but they are still considered "mainstream". Fringe theater and experiments that allow new playwrights and actors to spread their wings are far in the past. We now have huge financial machines investing in theater and they are not philanthropic. They want to make a big profit.

As for the new audience disliking musicals, I have to disagree. High School Musical and the recent soap opera presentation of the prom musical prove, if nothing else, that young people are interested in musicals that THEY can relate to.

Welcome to the new world!

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 4:36pm

Frankly, I think musicals are the thing that is keeping live theatre in general going.

Film has proven time and time again that great drama can told just as well cinematically. So most plays don't need to be experienced live to be enjoyed. Hell, most plays today are just staged screenplays!

However, musical theatre demands that the audience be acknowled.

Economics, education, lack of tradition of going to live theatre.. all play a part.

The UK does a better job of supporting the arts than we do. We could learn.

[Timmer]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 4:53pm

I think it's a combination of reasons, some of which have been discussed on this thread and some of which haven't.

Some of the reasons are similar to the reasons that baseball seems to hve lost its primacy among American sports. Both have a pace that doesn't match with the frenetic pace that is promoted in the popular culture. They require a slower, mor deliberative pace and temprement.

Also, both are BADLY marketed. It took until the 1970s for Broadway to get the idea of "free sample." (Pippin was the first to put a few seconds of the show in the ad and it revolutionized Broadway advertising. Before that it was "Come see our show. It's at the Shubert. The Times, Post, News, and Journal American love it. The World Telegram says that the leading lady gives the best performance on Broadway thsi season. Come see it. Here's our phone number.")

What's the next wave in promotion and advertising? Why aren't there morebanner ads for Broadway shows on the Net or more active advertising? Why doesn't the League or the Wing, perhaps in combination with the Shuberts, the Nederlanders, or someone of that ilk, putting real theatre on TV, on Bravo or A&E or somewhere? Why not put snippets of Broadway shows on YouTube?

Why don't theatre producers arrange more interviews with the media?

The fact that the media chooses to promote the movie and TV businesses and not live theatre only exacerbates the problem.

The ticket prices are too high. Even TKTS is getting a bit expensive. Part of that is the expense of making everything a superspectacular, part of it is undoubtedly the demands of Equity (it is a labor union, after all), part of it is New York's prohibitive tax structure, and part of it is simply that there is still a market for it at these exorbitant prices. (Another way in which Broadway and Major League Baseball resemble each other, BTW.) If I were a producer, I'd try to find every way I could to reduce my costs so I could reduce ticket prices. You'll never undercut the price of a movie, but if you could get prices into the $20-60 range, they would be reasonable "special event" prices for a family, rather than an elitist pleasure.

Also, if I were a producer, I'd find a way to get discount tickets to schoolchildren. You could mke it a "cultral education" field trip.

The fact that most movies and TV shows are made in Hoillywood and not New York only makes this problem worse. To many people, Hollywood is perceived as the cultural capital. There isn't a song calld "Oh, to Be A Broadway Star," after all.

The dumbing down of education has made live theatre less accessible. People just don't get it.

We also just don't hvae as many good Broadway composers as we once did. That is why we have to "assemble" musicals around selected songs by this or that person or group.

A few things that can be learned from politics. The point about Broadway music is well taken, but any politician can tell you that when you try to expand your because you lose part of it. The core Broadway audience expects a certain kind of experience. When you depart too far from that, you may bring in new people, but the people Broadway has been relying on may not come. Then where are you?

More touring shows would be useful too.

I'm sure there are even more reasons, but these are several of the key ones, IMO.

But I'm not sure being outside the mainstream is a bad thing these days. I am concerned, however, about attracting teh younger audience so that there will still be a Great White Way 40-50 years from now.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 5:11pm

I think it's such a complicated question. Broadway lost its mainstream appeal to the movies. The movies lost their mainstream appeal to television. Now television is losing its mainstream appeal to the internet, and all other mediums quake in fear.

Yet... Broadway sells more tickets now than it has ever before. Both the movies and the theater have become derivative to a fault, whereas television thrives because it's so much cheaper to produce even though it's starting to lose its cultural relevancy.

So Broadway and the movies are crying to the audiences to keep coming to the theaters, and spoonfeeding them. We the consumer have a surprising grip on the market that once dominated us because there's just so much available.

It's self defeating though. People raised on a Broadway of Disney cartoons, popular song catalogues and musicals based on popular movies are going to expect that because they've never known anything else. And people are going to get tired of that fast, and then Broadway will be left with no audience.

As for the whole thing with people not being able to buy musicals or people singing their feelings, I think that's just bull hipster talk--it's "popular" to dislike musicals.

Still, I think a medium that panders to its audience can never be hip or culturally relevant. The theater that doesn't pander is, to be elitist for a moment, simply above most people's heads.

[ErinDillyFan]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 5:35pm

It has been more than 50 years now since rock & roll became the mainstream in music. The music of broadway didn't follow the fans. That kept the music of broadway off the radio. But, it continues to sell more theater tickets than ever before.

You have to pick your battles. The days of being "It" with a majority of people are gone for any type of entertainment. Market to your niche and find a way to keep enough happy to stay in business. Even the best blockbuster films reach less than 20% of the people.
Updated On: 6/22/07 at 05:35 PM

[Timmer]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 5:47pm

If only we could find a way to "digitize" Broadway shows and marshall them to paying audiences in TV land. Wow...what a novel concept...Broadway-on-demand."

Good idea. Put it on TV, even pay-per-view (maybe shows that are closing, one more performance for the cameras), as a special event (every Sunday night? Monthly on the first Sunday or Saturday?) and charge a reasonable price and you have an extended theatre. And the cable companies, DirecTV, and Dish Network will advertise it for you. (They'll want you to buy it from them, after all.)

Also, put every show on DVD and advertise the DVDs (or a site to buy them -- soemthing like broadwayondisc.com) and what you have is an extended theatre.

You could also use old single-screen movie houses as distribution points. Go out to the old Music Hall movie site and get a Broadwayshow on closed-circuit. Again, a vastly extended theatre -- with the movie concessions and with a plug for live theatre and for the DVD site.

[Timmer]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 5:55pm

Whenever you ask a non-fan why they don't like musicals, most will say "People don't just burst out into song and dance in everyday life!"

Sometimes people do. I have a son going most of the time, even whne I'm doign dishes. Sometimes I make up lyrics to amuse my cats or whoever else happens to be around.

[misschung]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 5:55pm

That's true. It seems Broadway really doesnt want to jump on the broadcast bandwagon, save the occasional special on PBS and satellite radio station

I mean how many of us grew up watching The Wizard of Oz on TV every year? That was my first exposure to musical theater, you know?

Updated On: 6/22/07 at 05:55 PM

[Timmer]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 6:00pm

"I am far more likely to burst into song and dance as part of my everyday life than I am to get caught up in a car chase or bank heist..."

Good point, but you're clearly out of touch with "realism." Thsi kind of frenetic hyperaction is all that you can sell to some folks. They hve no understanding of anything finer, other than perhaps sports. They want constant excitement. (Ugh.)

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 6:04pm

With the post about YF tickets, it is like the inmates are running the asylum

[misschung]

Posted: 6/22/07 at 6:22pm

what else is new