Saturday Night Fervor- Page 2

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 12:44pm

In terms of fans’ “anger at the world” for not providing more of an audience for the show they love, I think it’s more a manifestation of sadness that more people don’t get the chance to experience what that person experienced in the theatre. When I see something I love and had one of those thrilling experiences as an audience member, all I want is for my family and friends (and as many people as possible) to get the chance to have the same experience I did. Perhaps this sadness is sometimes misdirected and fans of shows “blame” those who didn’t have the same feelings about the show as them, (which, in that case, is out of line), but I think most fans’ bemoaning a show closing early and is just out of sadness that others (or more people) didn’t get the chance to experience what they did.

His question was of moderation: why is it that every show seems to have a greater outpouring of ardent support than the average show seemed to years ago?

If this was his question, then my guess would be it having to do with how many different kinds of theatre offerings there are these days. Yes, there have always been different genres and special, unique shows. But, nowadays, I feel like there so many different types of unique, different theatrical experiences that are more accessible and more mainstream than ever before. Because of being able to experience so many different kinds of shows, I feel what people want to get out of a show when attending the theatre (and what kinds of shows people are attracted to) has really expanded and changed. There are so many different types of shows out there – it makes sense to me that there will at least be a small group for nearly all of them that has a core group of fans who largely connected with it. (This all came out a bit convoluted, as of course it’s only theorizing, but I hope it made some sense, nonetheless.)

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 1:16pm

I'm not sure if After Eight was specifically taking issue with behavior at final performances, but I don't take issue with a little extra cheering and love being shown for the cast at these performances. It's a way for the fans, as well as family members, friends, fellow members of the theater community, etc to say thank you and goodbye to the show, no matter the quality.

I like attending final performances. I like the curtain speeches and the actors getting emotional now and then. Even at shows that I knew were "bad" like Wonderland or Scandalous or A Tale of Two Cities it can be fun to cheer the cast on if for no other reason than a congrats on making it through the run!

Flops like Bridges or Passing Strange are different though. Those shows meant something to me and there is sadness seeing them die what I feel is a premature death. There's no anger, but I don't see what's wrong with thinking it's a shame that the show couldn't find a larger audience.

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 1:26pm

"I'm not sure if After Eight was specifically taking issue with behavior at final performances"

I based that assumption on his post in the Bridges final week thread, after someone said they hoped the final audience would be packed entirely by fans cheering, etc.:

"Hate it when they do, and am glad not every performance is like that.

They give a completely lopsided take on a show, and often irritate those in the audience with a more dispassionate vew of the material who just want to enjoy what's on stage.. People pay to see a show, not audience members trying to outdo one another in their displays of undying love.

The hysteria regarding this show gets more overwrought with each passing day.

Perhaps it will abate after the show closes. but then some new object of veneration will come along and it'll start all over again."

[jnb9872]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 1:56pm

"jnb-at what closing performance have you seen scorn? and how was it expressed." That answers that.

This is in an interesting topic to me because I see it as a matter of general population, and of trends as opposed to individual opinions. Of course individuals have every right to their reactions and that is to be expected, nurtured, and valued. What's interesting to me is that nowadays there seem to be hyperbolic outpourings at far more shows than I would expect. Is that on me, for expecting more rational and sober accountings for the business of Broadway and for? Perhaps. Is it on an individual who had a deeply resonant chord struck within them at a specific show? Of course not. But there is a general sense, at least to me, that there is a greater passion that rings beyond the expected bell curve of passionate-or-impassionate responses. Are shows better than they were? Are more of the passionate responses that had always been present now more visible and available? Or are people more breathless in their exclamations, in ways that one might consider irrational or reckless in effusive praise (or disdain, to be fair) where nuanced opinions would serve more accurate reflection and greater critical value.



ETA: Note, so far none of the people in this thread are people of whom I think their responses are irrational or hyperbolic. Even After Eight, who has his detractors, usually can reason with the best of them, others just don't like his reasons or his rhetoric. I'm talking about the posters who breathlessly exclaim, perhaps often without grammar or spelling correctly, and who I find endlessly curious if usually useless.

Updated On: 5/19/14 at 01:56 PM

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 2:13pm

"What's interesting to me is that nowadays there seem to be hyperbolic outpourings at far more shows than I would expect. Is that on me, for expecting more rational and sober accountings for the business of Broadway and for?"

It's probably the Amazon effect, where the people most likely to review any product are people giving products one star or five star reviews, the people with the strongest opinions. So, online, a thread for a specific show is a gathering place for both of those groups, who will tend to dominate the conversation and flow of things more often then the person who pops in once to say they saw the show last night and it was "OK but not amazing."

I think theater and novels inspire more passionate responses, since they are two of the remaining things that haven't been devoured by social media, the Web, etc. When you see a show on Broadway, you engage in a way that is becoming (sadly) increasingly rare. You shut off everything else but what is happening directly in front of you for multiple hours.

Even a concert isn't like that anymore, since people are tweeting, taking pics, and on social media and in documentation mode the entire time.

And TV barely exists on a timeline anymore. No one watches it when it's live most of the time, so the watercooler aspect is gone. You can't even discuss it in front of spoiler-phobic Tivo people or, people who wait for the season DVD or Netflix. And, again, people watch TV while on social, the Web, pausing it, etc. Many shows encourage live tweeting during the show, as well as putting up the hashtags you should use while discussing it online, etc.

So, those are some scattered thoughts.



Updated On: 5/19/14 at 02:13 PM

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 2:15pm

Are shows better than they were? Are more of the passionate responses that had always been present now more visible and available?

I think part of it may be more and more theatre taking on deeper topics that people can relate to on a very intimate level. Not to say that deep topics have not been explored in the past, but, as I said before, I think there has been an increased amount of shows that are accessible and in the mainstream that handle topics and themes that may not have been politically correct to explore on mainstream stages in the past (and these are the kinds of topics that usually hit home with people more or people have more personal stakes in/feelings about).

I do think the other part has to do with the visibility of these passionate responses. Not only are we seeing them more, but others can now easily communicate and congregate with others who feel the same. Creating this community with others who have similar feelings about a show can add to one’s excitement and passion for a show; especially as someone is able to discuss and explore the show with others who had similar experiences in the theatre. After-show discussions can often open up new realizations about the material which can then, in turn, add a deeper appreciation for the piece.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 2:23pm

jnb-I don't think there is that much distance between what we are saying. And the reason is that I used the word "legitimate." It's admittedly somewhat subjective, but I think people who are irrationally effusive (or even unfailingly effusive) would not generally be thought of as legitimate.

Are people today more demonstrative than they once were? I don't know. Maybe. But is that a bad thing? I think the lens we often see these things through is the auto-standing ovation. To me, it is not legitimate when an audience is gauged as relatively unresponsive and then erupts in a standing o at the curtain call. But I don't think that's the dynamic at a final performance, or even at some non-final performances that are exuberantly received.

I think one thing that causes a negative reaction to an exuberant crowd is when you are (as I mentioned earlier) not on the same page as the crowd. It's awkward and may even anger you, but on closing nights it kinda goes with the territory.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 2:23pm

A lot of people are moved by tasteless or "bad" art that more stable minds can't see the value of. That these sorts of mental defectives would then have fits over said works is hardly surprising.

That's one of the most mentally defective posts I've read on these boards (outside anything After Eight posts). But it's always nice to know which people are unfamiliar with the concepts of subjectivity and opinions. They are usually found atop a homemade pedestal patting themselves on the head and pissing on any passersby with smiles on their faces.

Updated On: 5/19/14 at 02:23 PM

[ClydeBarrow]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 2:36pm

I think everyone should stop responding to this nonsense thread.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 3:36pm

His question was of moderation: why is it that every show seems to have a greater outpouring of ardent support than the average show seemed to years ago?

If this was his question, then my guess would be it having to do with how many different kinds of theatre offerings there are these days. Yes, there have always been different genres and special, unique shows. But, nowadays, I feel like there so many different types of unique, different theatrical experiences that are more accessible and more mainstream than ever before.

Precisely. It's evolution, without which we would still be watching The Black Crook, The Red Mill, Vaudeville and Burlesque and none of After Eight's lamented shows of yesteryear would exist, though the audience behavior would most likely be more raucous than it is now.

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 4:00pm

"One can show one's enjoyment and enthusiasm for a show without blaring it from the rooftops or crying a river. It used to be done all the time."

After Eight, I am one of those people who go WAY OVERBOARD with my likes and dislikes of art. I am ultra sensitive to everything in the world. I can be listening to a song and there could be one note which is hit with so much accuracy, strength and beauty that it puts me in tears. Also, when listening to music, I am profoundly touched at the different elements of a recording and how they blend together. I picture in my mind the percussion, guitar, keyboards, voices, and how they each are perfection in how they join in with the others. I'm in awe of that. I wish I were one of those elements.

Conversely, if a sudden loud noise or shriek occurs behind me, I feel it physically in my spine and I recoil. This is part of my sensitivity I hate.

Anyway, if I see a show that I love, I will go overboard in raving about it because I am just that happy about it.I want to share the joy with everyone. And I'll try to see it as many times as possible.

Why am I telling you this? Because you don't seem to understand that people have different ways of reacting to the world.

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 4:11pm

" A lot of people are moved by tasteless or "bad" art that more stable minds can't see the value of. That these sorts of mental defectives would then have fits over said works is hardly surprising."

WHAT??? Are you kidding? You think YOU are the judge of what is tasteless or bad art??? Really? These sorts of mental defectives???? This has to be a joke post. No one could be that arrogant and clueless.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 4:43pm

You think YOU are the judge of what is tasteless or bad art???

And don't forget they also determine which reviews are "legitimate"! And for those of us who remember, they also sound like they believe Hamlet was bipolar.

No one could be that arrogant and clueless.

Unfortunately, those people do exist. And it would seem they severely limit their own experiences of joy. Oh, well. Pity.

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 4:59pm

Pity is right, Matt. I guess I should feel blessed that I enjoy so much of life and that I'm not like those people.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:01pm

I don't think there's such a thing as loving a production too much. But in the past few years there's been a change in how people demonstrate their approval during a show that, to me, steals focus. I'm with After Eight on this.The mid-show standing O's, the whoops, the shout-backs do seem to be as much about the whooper as the show or performer. It feels like learned behavior from TV competition shows and school performancees. And it tips the balance into the house rather than on the stage. But my complaining about it ain't going to change it.

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:10pm

I'm with the people who have just experienced something so good that they have to applaud it. These outbursts occur among the most "sophisticated" audiences. Sometimes a performer sings a song or dances a dance so damn well that there's visible and audible appreciation shown spontaneously. Hmm, Raul singing Being There comes to mind. Christine Ebersole experienced it in Grey Gardens. I'm sure you all know what i'm saying.

Actually, if a performer just hits the nail on the head that time, better than he/she ever did before, and doesn't receive that outburst, I feel they were robbed.

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:16pm

"The mid-show standing O's, the whoops, the shout-backs do seem to be as much about the whooper as the show or performer. It feels like learned behavior from TV competition shows and school performancees. And it tips the balance into the house rather than on the stage. But my complaining about it ain't going to change it."

You'd be hard pressed to find this behavior unless you attend a show's final performances, though. It's not like it's happening at every show. Any performance of Bridges prior to this week and nothing happened. So, it is a pretty contained spectacle to be upset about.

Even extended applause, like Ramin gets consistently for Bring Him Home, rarely have people standing or whooping, just applauding a lot. Same with Friend Like Me in Aladdin, extended applause only.

[inception]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:33pm

jane2 wrote: "...This has to be a joke post."

What? People don't do that here do they?

See how easy it is to get people emotionally overwrought over garbage.

Yes, Bridges got mixed reviews from the press.
You're not crazy if you like it.
You're maybe just a bit temporarily crazy when you get into any situation where your emotions get influenced by those around you.

I've been flamed big time on here for my own real opinions by the small group of bullying thought police on here, who can't fathom that people might have a different opinion than their own; so I am well aware that it is possible to like something others do not or vice versa.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:45pm

Haterobics, I happen to have seen both shows you mention and there were whoops at Les Mis and both whoops and a standing O from some for Friend Like Me. And Jane2, at both Grey Gardens and Company, the extended shows of appreciation seemed utterly warranted and not at all what I'm referencing.

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:47pm

what are you referencing?

never mind, you mean the mid show standing o's, etc. I've rarely seen those, if ever. Guess I'm lucky

Updated On: 5/19/14 at 05:47 PM

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 5:47pm

"A lot of people are moved by tasteless or "bad" art that more stable minds can't see the value of."

[darquegk]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 6:09pm

The rise of television, televised "live" events and of the concept of "fans" being legitimate rather than unusual changed theatre. Not just the way it is received, but the way it is written. Jokes and moments that elicit whoops, shouts and cheers are primarily in shows written post-Neil Simon, who was the first to really use television's style and energy onstage (and has influenced sitcom writers, most notably "Two and a Half Men," for generations now).

Additionally, shows used to be written and marketed primarily for the prototypical "tired businessman" to come and enjoy somewhat detachedly. Fans and devotees were not such common things. With less mass media, those who were extremely enthusiastic were thought of as something of an odd duck- an autograph fiend or a teenybopper. Note how not just the concept of swooning over rock stars, but the very notion of fandom, is somewhat lampooned in "Bye Bye Birdie." Nowadays, with personalized mass media, information and audio/video available instantly anywhere, shows can be marketed to specific groups in specific ways, actively courting an emotionally involved fandom.

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 6:09pm

"I happen to have seen both shows you mention and there were whoops at Les Mis and both whoops and a standing O from some for Friend Like Me."

Well, when I saw both, they didn't, so that supports the notion that it is not a standard practice at every show, but that sometimes the audience is moved to react like that. I can't really say people being enthusiastic about a show is a huge concern for me, though. And, in both cases, those are showstopping moments, so... if someone stands during extended applause, it's not holding up the show.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 6:27pm

Darguegk, that all makes a great deal of sense. I think there's more here though than an emotionally involved fanbase. I don't think Aladdin, for instance,is tapping into one. I think people are watching behavior on TV and now in theater and thinking this is now how one shows approval.
Haterobics, I didn't say this was now standard practice. From my experience, it's an increasingly popular phenomenon, not exclusive to final performances.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/19/14 at 6:31pm

The only times I can recall having seen a standing ovation at any time other than during a curtain call were once for a tour of Dreamgirls in the mid-90s after And I am Telling You (and that was for Fuschia Walker understudying Jennifer Holliday) and once for Circle of Life shortly after Lion King opened on Broadway.

But stories of extended ovations stopping shows are as old as Broadway itself, though not unique to musical theatre. Legendary opera and ballet performances have experienced the same.

Updated On: 5/19/14 at 06:31 PM