Bootlegs- Page 3

[Craig]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 4:52pm

Is that the legal "WIMPY" excuse "I will gladly pay you tuesday for a hamburger today?"

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 4:53pm

Oooooo. I want a hamburger

[Bobby457]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 4:54pm

Wish it worked that way Matt, but alas.....It doesnt....

[Matt_G]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 5:02pm

No, Craig. It isn't. And you've been snippy with me all day. All I did was state my opinion.

[uncageg]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 5:10pm

Just my opinion....I feel that bootleg anything from the theatre should not be. It is illegal. And yes it just totally bugs me that most shows are not released on video after they close. But I would also like to see the original cast on video. (If I am not mistaken, J&H's video was not the original cast. I was also dissapointed that we got the London version of Elaine....At Liberty and not the Broadway version) I read somewhere that they don't do it because of cost. I can kind of understand that. But seeing how passionate people are on these boards and how many people are on them, there are probably just as many or more that do not participate here and would buy the videos/DVD's. They can always do a limited release thing. I agree that to an extent, a video can get a person excited about the theatre and want to attend. I had a group of friends over to watch "Into the Woods" and now a few of the people who didn't attend theatre now want to go. So videos can be good in that respect, but again, they are illegal. And illegal is illegal. At Raisin in the Sun there was a girl with her picture phone in the front row taking pictures. Myself and the lady next to her stopped her and told her that it was illegal. Some people actually have no idea that it is. (And those people are probably mostly people that do not attend theatre on a regular basis) But I feel that for those of us who do attend on a regular basis, and are as passionate as we are about the theatre, should respect the law and just hope that maybe things will change. Again...I ramble!!! Sorry!

Updated On: 8/19/04 at 05:10 PM

[Craig]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 5:40pm

As a point of reference, my post re: "wimpy" was a POPEYE reference... for those that might have misinterpreted it...

[Greekmusicalfan]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 5:46pm

I have to say, I agree with everything Matt_G says on this thread!

Take care

[tthomas76]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 5:51pm

Trust me I spend plenty of money on Broadway.. We've seen 9 shows in 2 months... I live in Indiana so it's not cheap for me to catch a show... I would kill for a legal copy of any of the shows I've seen on Broadway. I think I'm up to around 24 different shows I've seen on Broadway. I know that's nothing to some of you who live there but that's alot for an Indiana boy that only gets there 1 or 2 times a year... I just need to move there!

[TheGirlinTheFrock]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 6:28pm

I guess the bottom line is, if you have to do it, dont talk about it here.

[tthomas76]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 6:33pm

I agree totally with you there... I would totally be crushed if this site got taken off because people requesting those types of videos...

[jo]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 6:50pm

Why is it that movie producers seem to make an easier decision to film a stage musical than for show producers to consider filming a show that has been well received at the box office? I'm sure movie-making is a more expensive process. Maybe Hollywood and Broadway should talk to each other more ?

Also, shouldn't there be a national arts subsidy to help finance the preserving of visual arts performances for posterity so that they can be enjoyed by many in this and future generations. OKLAHOMA! was preserved for this purpose because the Royal National Theatre in London enjoys government subsidy.

While some people have not had any kind word for Andrew Lloyd Webber, at least he has the artistic motivation ( and commercial outlook) to preserve some of his works either as filmed versions of the stage musical ( Cats, Joseph and the ..., Jesus Christ Superstar) or movie versions ( Evita, Jesus Christ Superstar and Phantom of the Opera) and there is talk that his company would like to preserve as many as they could through films.

There is strong demand for the filming of great shows!

[Plum]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:26pm

Well, the Sondheim-ites can say his shows have been pretty well-preserved on film, too, from West Side Story through Passion and many in between. :)

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:38pm

well, there is the new york public library for the performing arts at lincoln center's theatre on tape and film collection. that has a whole lot of taped shows...like almost everything on broadway since the 70's.

[Matt_G]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:40pm

Yes, but the problem with that is that not only do you have to go to New York City to view them, you can't just go in and do that anyways.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:44pm

sorry, i should have directly addressed that as a response to jo's idea to dedicate more tax payer dollars towards the "preserving of visual arts performances for posterity" when that in fact is being done already, at least as it relates to broadway and off broadway.

[StrStruckDreamr9]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:48pm

I have a semi-related question. I know that shows are taped and clips from these tapes are used during the Tony's or television appearances/performances, etc. What happens to these tapes? Are they kept by the theater?

[saddle shoe side kick]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:49pm

I think that the shows should make and market professionally made copies of shows. There are so many shows taht I saw years ago that I want to see again!
Jason Raize and Heather Headly in The Lion King
Kerry Butler in Beauty and the Beast would be fantastic
The original Aida cast that made me choose theatre...
Kathy Brier and Jennifer Gambatese in Hairspray.
I realize that bootlegs are extremely illegal... I just wish there was some other way to see my favorite casts and shows that are no longer on Broadway. It's sad. -Penny

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 7:53pm

there are more than a few issues that need worked out. it's not like you can call up the guy who did you wedding and have him set up a camera in the back of the theatre. there are union issues both with equity and with iatse and with usa829 and with i'm sure the videotapers union! geez, the hoops through which you have to jump just to tape a rehearsal are legion.

[shira467]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 8:03pm

Technically it is stealing yes. However, if they are not produced legally, then they aren't losing money. As it's been said, no one who owns a Wicked Video is going to say "I don't need to see it, I have it at home". There is something thrilling about seeing a performance live. And if you can't, it would be nice if you could watch it, filmed nicely, and enjoy the show.

Yes, there are Union issues, etc....However, can you pay them a fair base fee (after all, it's not like they are doing extra work because it's being taped. The actors and musicians I mean. They are doing what they normally would.) and a percentage of profits. Obviously, it's more complicated than that, but should it be?

Sell them for a fair price, and they will sell. There is a community that will purchase them, no doubt in my mind. And that's my input.

Also, I agree with Matt_G on everything as well.

[lna]

Posted: 8/19/04 at 8:13pm

Regarding the clips that are used for promotion, I believe there is a very strict limit as to how much of the show can be taped. As far as I know, the whole show isn't taped, only selected parts. Less than a half hour, I think. I don't know what happens to the tapes.

I don't think the decisions to make movies are any easier; they expect to have a much wider audience for a movie, yet many movies never get made.

We might think there's a huge audience for filming shows, but I don't think the numbers are anything near what the producers want to make money. (Sales of most cast albums are very low compared to other music genres.) Heck, the petition to get BFO filmed originally had around 2000 people before it got a burst of publicity; that's barely more than the number of people who fill the Imperial every night. I think the producers would need to see around 50,000 signatures before they made their decision based on numbers (if they weren't already planning to film the show).

Then there's the live vs. tape issue. Some people believe that theater is meant to be experienced live, and that, for artistic reasons, the performances should not be captured. The tapes at Lincoln Center are often used for study, perhaps for those who are recreating the show to see how it was done in the past. But one idea is that you want to stage everything new, approach it with a fresh eye, and you can't do that if you are adhering too strictly what was done before.

However, I'm sure the reason that most shows aren't taped is simply a matter of money. It's expensive to tape a show, and to do a good, professional job, particularly on Broadway. And I don't think there's a large enough audience to make it worthwhile, in too many cases.

[Call*Me*Elphie]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:20pm

about there never being a replacement for theatre, and how sad it makes one feel... i have to say i agree. duh, bootlegs are illegal, but for a show that is ending or the original cast members leaving i think that there should be some preserved copy that can be purchased, i mean doesn't Idina Menzel want a copy of her staring in the original cast of WICKED?

cause i know i do... that show changed my life, i would pay hundreds of dollars to own it (i live in california) and that goes the same for BFO cause he's leaving like in a week!

if someone is truly addicted and head over heels in love with theatre, then having a video tape of a special show isn't going to keep them from seeing it!!

i say they make WICKED the movie... Mendel and Chenoweth need to come on back and make that one!

[QueenMuppet]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:33pm

I know it's illegal but what other option do some people have as a fan of a performer or a show? It's a totally different story if you are trying to make money out of your recordings but I have no problems with the fact that some people record shows for their own entertainment! And most performers have no problem with it either! In fact, I have yet to meet a performer who is against it (recording that is, not trading).
It happened to me a lot in the past when mentioning recordings to performers they asked me if I knew someone who could get them copies. I have also been approached by performers I know asking me to record shows for them... I couldn't believe it.

It's wrong if you are selling recordings for a lot of money but recording a show for your own 'pleasure'? Yes, it's illegal but some fans will continue to do so.

QM

Updated On: 8/21/04 at 08:33 PM

[TheQuibbler]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:36pm

While I think that bootlegs can take money away from a show (sometimes), I would do anything to have a copy of, oh, say, the "Into the Woods" revival. The show has closed, it can't make any more money. But, I guess I would feel differently about, say, "Wicked" because it's still running.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 8:46pm

If the performers want the tapes so badly, perhaps they should talk to their unions - part of the reason the shows aren't taped is union issues. If the union would approve it, and the actors didn't ask for money from the recordings, then they would be a lot more feasible for the producers.

[amasis]

Posted: 8/21/04 at 9:00pm

Rath, do you know why it can't be a similar arrangement to having an original cast recording done?