Favorite Pro Shot Versions of Stage Musicals?- Page 4

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 8:12am

"I think what made the legally blonde live dvd a great capture was
a) the obc was filmed about 5-6 mos after
Opening and were in the zone in their roles
i can't think of any other proshot captures that were that soon 
b) I think it was broadcast live on mtV
so it had that vibe for cast and audience
c) it was a very enthusiastic Audience
 
 "

 It was definitely not broadcast live. Like many others it was pieced together from several different performances. They did at least one taping in an empty theatre to get the various onstage shots, and I think two with an audience. One was at a regular performance, as I recall, and another was at a performance specially planned and advertised to fill the house with teen girls and super fans of the show, which I assume is the performance they used for any audience shots.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 9:56am

Can we just add that, unless otherwise indicated (and perhaps even if otherwise indicated), all pro shots should be automatically assumed to be compiled from multiple performances? Owing to the nature of live theater, no one performance will be 100% perfect, even if it appears so to the audience watching it, and consequently restricting oneself to a single performance when making a pro shot is too constricting.

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 10:14am

Ah aea bursting my naive bubble where I believed what mtv was promoting to me

Gdelg and you are of course right that all of these shows we've discussed would have been filmed over several nights and edited for a "best video"

do do you industry insiders know how much it takes now to make a pro shot video performance of a musical?

also how are the performers compensated?

In my dream world every "great" musical would have its obc or olc performance captured during the first year and available for later sale or theatre or tv broadcast

ive kind of always assumes the reason more shows aren't recorded and briadcast are:

royalties issues

fears by producers people won't pay for 

The live show

cost to produce and return on investment

I was thrilled when Memphis did there show within the first year and was hoping this would be annual trend for best musical 

at least but it hasn't happened

 

Thoughts?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 1:14pm

AEA AGMA SM is better positioned to answer things from a union standpoint with regard to specifics, but the short version is, between union costs, filming costs, getting the rights, finding a distributor for release, marketing costs, etc., the relatively few people who actually purchase the DVD don't constitute enough revenue to create a good profit margin for commercially released versions of such pro shots (obviously there are exceptions, for example the Les Mis anniversary shoots, but do you see large markets for releases of, say, Merrily We Roll Along or The Drowsy Chaperone?).

The bottom line, sad to say, is money. And the problem with filming and releasing live versions of musicals commercially is that it's simply not lucrative. Only the biggest shows (like a Les Mis, like a Phantom, like a Rent, like a Jesus Christ Superstar) are ever going to generate a profit if they're filmed and released. For it to work for those involved, and to keep going at a more steady rate, people need to buy these like they buy Hollywood blockbusters, and they just don't.

As for anything newer, like online streaming (through such services as iTunes, Amazon, Hulu, etc.) or made-to-order DVDs, both of which sound like safe bets for even minor profitability, the technology is too new for theater as a whole to catch up with, and especially so with regard to unions.

Speaking as a producer, we would love nothing more than to be able to preserve musicals like this on a regular basis. It's intelligent not just in terms of preservation, but in terms of revenue, as seen from the upward spike in ticket sales that long-running Broadway shows like Chicago and The Phantom of the Opera received when their respective standard feature motion picture versions were released (i.e., it helped the profits rather than hindered them, the latter of which has been a complaint that other producers have used to justify their avoidance of producing filmed theater). But first, it has to make fiscal sense. And right now, it doesn't.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 1:29pm

The London production of Kiss Me, Kate with Rachel York and Brent Barrett.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 3:40pm

"The Light in the Piazza thing remains amazingly frustrating.  It was on PBS at least three or four times here in the NY area and I remember taping it on VHS (I sound ancient now) and had some malfunction on it.  But then there pulling it and never showing it again?  It just seems bizarre and a wasted opportunity.  Why not release it on DVD and make some more cash from that stellar production?  Was just so sad I never got into the city to see it live.  Definitely a regret.
 
 "

 They simply legally can not.  It was a Live from Lincoln Center broadcast, not Great Performances or (the much missed) American Playhouse.  As others have mentioned, the Live from Lincoln Center showings (which include things I don't think even were at Lincoln Center like Papermill's Show Boat in the late 80s, NYCO's Candide and A Little Night Music, and the recent South Pacific, as well as, for example, New York City Ballet's Nutcracker a few years back) are affordable to PBS because the deal they make with everyone involved is that they are only allowed to show it that one time (I believe the deal is each PBS can show it once and then repeat it within a week,) and no home media device.  To make a more permanent deal they would have to pay everyone involved more money and sadly, probably no backers would find that worth it for a lesser known title like Piazza. 

5 or so years back there was a big anniversary thing for Live and PBS released a press statement saying that for the first time ever deals had been made to release favourites from the series on DVD--but I don't think anything came of it, certainly nothing Broadway related. 

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 3:42pm

""It's worth owning for me.  I also have the "Fosse cut" copy that's been released (sadly not great quality,) as well as the copy our very own g.d.e.l.g.i. made which is the DVD but whenever there was a cut (over 20 minutes were cut in total,) they splice in the Fosse Cut. 

It's too bad the producer of that filmed version (Sheehan?) has such an ego and got final cut.  He also has flat out said that the cut footage has been lost--which the Fosse cut proves is not true.  It's too bad someone doesn't clean it up and release it on DVD."
I didn't make the combo cut actually, Eric; I just shared it with the forum. The original creator of that cut was the poster known as Phyllis Rogers Stone. (Credit where credit is due, folks.)
Also, I don't believe (from my limited correspondence with him) that Sheehan said the footage was missing. He seemed rather to have the mistaken impression that nothing had been cut. Time plays tricks on people's memories, I guess. :P"

 Thanks for the corrections!  I always got the impression (perhaps unfair,) that he was something of a pretentious jerk, either way

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 3:48pm

"Merrily We Roll Along was briefly available through Digital Theatre. I paid for it and then burnt it to a DVD since Digital Theatre does not offer hard copies of their recordings, and they require customers to use their proprietary player. It annoys me greatly when access is limited for something I paid for. "

I'm impressed--I am not completely tech clueless, but I still have not found a way to burn Digital Theatre's things to DVD.  That aspect annoys me as well, but when I saw that they had to pull the rights for the London Merrily in a few days, and it looked like there was zero chance of a DVD release, I bought the HD copy anyway.  If I play it on my laptop and hook that up to my TV it does look pretty great.  (To be fair I have heard that one reason they are able to release things at all is they pay less for the rights by limiting viewing to their weird viewing program--although I have no idea why Merrily seems to be their only release that was for a limited time only.)

Since it was pro shot (well, probably by students,) I like the recent University of North Carolina Oklahoma! albeit largely for historical reasons--since they worked so hard to recreate the original production.  The cast is largely fine for a university production (actually I find one of the few non students, and a pro actress I believe--the woman who plays Aunt Eller--is the weakest.)  Of course it was only broadcast on UNC's local channel and the copy floating around online is not in the best quality, but...

 

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 3:53pm

"
The bottom line, sad to say, is money. And the problem with filming and releasing live versions of musicals commercially is that it's simply not lucrative. Only the biggest shows (like a Les Mis, like a Phantom, like a Rent, like a Jesus Christ Superstar) are ever going to generate a profit if they're filmed and released. For it to work for those involved, and to keep going at a more steady rate, people need to buy these like they buy Hollywood blockbusters, and they just don't.
As for anything newer, like online streaming (through such services as iTunes, Amazon, Hulu, etc.) or made-to-order DVDs, both of which sound like safe bets for even minor profitability, the technology is too new for theater as a whole to catch up with, and especially so with regard to unions.
Speaking as a producer, we would love nothing more than to be able to preserve musicals like this on a regular basis. It's intelligent not just in terms of preservation, but in terms of revenue, as seen from the upward spike in ticket sales that long-running Broadway shows like Chicago and The Phantom of the Opera received when their respective standard feature motion picture versions were released (i.e., it helped the profits rather than hindered them, the latter of which has been a complaint that other producers have used to justify their avoidance of producing filmed theater). But first, it has to make fiscal sense. And right now, it doesn't."

 More and more producers have discussed this as a possibility (I think due largely to the relative success of the cinecasts--) but I agree that it will take some time to start happening more regularly, although I remain hopeful that it will.

There also seem exceptions--CamMac (or whoever) seem to purposefully have chosen to release various anniversary Les Miz and the Phantom *semi staged concerts* partly because of course they will sell decently, but in those cases they also seem to still believe that actually filming the full stage production while it's still running would cut into theatre sales.

I wonder how well Rent "Live" (it was just one live performance in this case, wasn't it?) did on DVD?  The company that released the DVD made the BluRay out of print several years back, so I assumed it had sold less then expected.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 7:31pm

"More and more producers have discussed this as a possibility (I think due largely to the relative success of the cinecasts--) but I agree that it will take some time to start happening more regularly, although I remain hopeful that it will."

It certainly will as far as original projects with which I am involved are concerned. In fact, I just completed a production budget for a high-definition video feature version of one of my company's original musicals, which we would make a line item of our standard show production budget. Good for broadcast (or cinecast, as the case may be) and great as a promotional tool. We hope others start having the same foresight.

[LuminousBeing]

Posted: 5/22/15 at 8:12pm

Going back to the original question for a moment: one of my favorite proshot performances was of "Contact." I know many here aren't fans of the show, but I first saw it through an old VHS copy made by a friend years after the Best Musical controversy, and absolutely loved it. The third act does for me emotionally what "Company" takes the full length of a show to accomplish (and I LOVE "Company!).

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 5/23/15 at 9:44am

g.d.e.l.g.i  

im so happy to hear that video capture is becoming a part of the budget for your and potentially others projects. 

Ive watched a number of pro shot video or clips of individual songs that productions have used for promotional purposes, and given the world has clearly moved to video on social media, could see any savvy production in the future promoting shows by releasing and promoting a few tracks ahead of time of a full song with video and more sizzle reels of a 2-3 minute montage of the show ahead of previews....