Film Broadway Bootlegs- Page 4

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:08am

I completely agree about BARE. Without the bootleg it would have faded into nothingness, but because of it they ended up selling far more cast recordings than they ever thought possible. They actually had to do a second pressing right away. Even funnier still, they couldn't figure out how so many people were even interested.

[CockeyedOptimist2]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:16am

CapnHook, I agree with you that it would be lovely if shows were compelling and original enough these days (there are some, I suppose) that people couldn't stop talking about it at intermission. I think I can be a bit idealistic with what I hope for from my theatrical experiences.

[wonderwaiter]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:28am

I wouldn't know what BARE was if it weren't for bootlegs. Bootlegs definitely played a central role in my awareness of that show.

Of course, now BARE is "out there" and bootlegs are readily available... and I find myself not giving a damn about that show. Oh, cruel mistress...

[CapnHook]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:42am

Sad, isn't it? Nowadays we go into most shows knowing that Shrek will save Fiona, Elle Woods gets her guy, and who wants to bet that Buddy the Elf is going to earn his true father's adoration? (or perhaps, toleration?)

Last time I saw a musical where I completely talked about it during intermission was PASSING STRANGE. Last time I saw a show which got me COMPLETELY INVOLVED on the edge of my seat was AUGUST: OSAGE COUNTY.

[uncageg]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:45am

Regarding "BARE". I saw the New York production. I saw it based on what I read. I never saw a bootleg. I was just keeping up on what was being done in NYC and picked it to see. A lot of people I know who wanted to see it (And were not able to get a ticket) had no idea about bootleg video. It was all word of mouth. I live in Denver and they were talking about it here....via word of mouth. Not video.

[CockeyedOptimist2]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:49am

The last time I had one of those experiences was the first time I saw Next to Normal. It was so refreshingly captivating and I just sat in awe at the end of Act I excited to see what would happen next! At Finian's Rainbow, too, I both talked about it the whole intermission, save for my trip to the merchandise stand to buy the CD.

Anyway, I hereby resolve that I shall never again turn my phone back on during intermission of a show. I will do my best to keep my mind in the theater even during intermission. I will be a good audience member in hopes that in return someone will bring me some good, fresh shows. A girl can dream, can't she?

[BwayBoundJoe]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:52am

So what...I have some bootlegs, but that doesn't mean that I don't support the theatre. I shell out a good amount of money to see well over 10 shows (broadway and touring) a year if not more, and maybe I would like to relive those memories with a video of the production. As far as texting, I feel at intermission it's fine, but the thought of something blocking all the signals durring the show sounds great to me. First time I saw wicked (with my school trip my junior year in high school) my vice-pricipal was snoring durring As long as your mine, and one of the history teachers recieved a phone call, answered, said he would "call you back honey...no...i'm at a play...ok, bye..."

[CockeyedOptimist2]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 1:00am

Probably a silly question re: blocking cell signals in theaters. Most theaters just ask you to turn off your phones or put them on silent so that they don't ring during the performances. At the Vivian Beaumont (perhaps at others), they ask you to turn OFF your cell phone as they interfere with sound equipment and stuff. Is that true? Is it the same as on a plane? If so, why would that be the case in just that theater?

I would be all for them blocking cell signals in theaters.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 1:26am

There's a great theatre in San Diego that was essentially built underground. I'm not sure when, and I don't believe it was thought of at the time, but a wonderful side effect of having to travel down three flights of stairs from the ground level is the fun fact that most people no longer have cell reception once they enter the theatre. It kinda sucks for those of us who perform there too because we can't get reception back stage.

Updated On: 7/6/10 at 01:26 AM

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 1:38am

I would be all for them blocking cell signals in theaters.

That they can't do. The jammers would interfere with their equipment.

[christian_drake]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 3:44am

If it weren't for Bootlegs, I wouldn't have seen my first Broadway show. I saw lots of videos of it online and it made me more and more excited to see it. If there weren't bootlegs of it, I wouldn't have seen the show and they wouldn't have my money from buying a ticket.

[James885]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 5:51am

I really don't see the harm in texting or calling during intermission. I usually have my phone out at intermission, as do most of the other people around me. It's not disturbing anyone so what's the harm?

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 6:24am

frontrow, you don't own any bootlegs at all? Not even audio recordings?

No, I have never collected them. For one thing, I cannot use audio boots on the radio simply because the sound is so horrible. (One of my guests wanted to use a track from a boot of CARRIE but as I pointed out the sound is all distorted every time it gets loud.)

I've seen several videos that friends have...always assuring me that the quality is good. I guess their idea of good quality filming and my own are just too far apart. Shaky cameras, bad focus or worse focus on the wrong area of the stage. You have to crank it up so high to hear the dialogue and then when the audience applauds you are hit with a deafening roar. I honestly don't know how anyone can sit through more than a few minutes of these tapes.

For me the boots take away the live experience. I know some people outside of NY have to rely on them to see shows, especially shows that close abruptly. But I would really prefer it if all shows got professional level videos done. In some ways I could see more commerce in making videos than in making cast albums. After SWEENEY TODD and others were taped for Pay TV in the early 80s I expected this was the way it would go...but with rare exceptions it didn't.

I wonder how many of the people who try to justify boots would really pay to get a proper commercial video of a show.

[tazber]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 7:10am

I only read the first two pages of this thread so forgive me is this has been stated.

I have no problem with bootlegs b/c I really and truly don't believe that they would stop anyone from actually paying to see the show. The people who watch boots are usually avid theatergoers and to them it is no substitute for the real thing.

Also, let's be honest, the quality of most boots is horrific. It doesn't even come close to replicating the experience live.


ETA - frc, I bet (and clearly this is just my opinion) that the majority of people who watch boots would pay for a professional recording. Again, the quality of most boots is pretty poor. To have a show professionally documented on video would be a must have for theater lovers.

Updated On: 7/6/10 at 07:10 AM

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 7:48am

People seem to think many performers are against this as well. I can tell you i have had 8 members of Carrie get the DVD from me and i know many people who film them (i never have i would be scared to death) who have artists, directors etc from those shows ask them for a copy. One guy who wrote an Off Broadway play ASKED someone to film the show for him.

I dont think it harms theatre, i spend a fortune on theatre, sometimes if im flying out to the states for example i will pick my list of shows to see many times based off botlegs

[sbflyfan]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 9:11am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buxUesf2JpA

This is a recent video clip of Annie Golden talking about being in the Broadway production "Leader of the Pack." What I find most amusing is at about 4:02, she pulls out a walkman and holds it up to the microphone and you hear audience applause, then she makes a joke about carrying around audience reactions for herself, but then goes on to explain it's a bootleg audio of the final performance!

[once a month]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 9:32am

I see nothing...I hear nothing...in fact, I have no idea what any of you are talking about.

[suttonfoster]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 10:56am

another reason (i think) why they don't want you taking pictures of the curtain or anything before or after the show is something about 9/11. i remember hearing an usher saying that we have to be really careful after 9/11

[jennafan]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:01pm

haha Updated On: 7/6/10 at 12:01 PM

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:13pm

I really don't see the harm in texting or calling during intermission. I usually have my phone out at intermission, as do most of the other people around me. It's not disturbing anyone so what's the harm?

I've been known to take out my phone to check my message/check the time at intermission. Unless the theatre has a stated rule against use of cells inside the theatre itself (as the Henry Miller/Sondheim does).

another reason (i think) why they don't want you taking pictures of the curtain or anything before or after the show is something about 9/11. i remember hearing an usher saying that we have to be really careful after 9/11

Yeah, it would be really bad if those terrorists got their hands on pictures of the Legally Blonde show curtain.

[wonderwaiter]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:15pm

If you take a picture of the show curtain, the tourists have won.

[julesboogie]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:19pm

"It's also kind of silly to me when people freak out over bootlegs of shows that have long closed. Once the production has closed and the tour has ended there's not really any more money to be made outside of the licensing fees for stock and regional productions. How does it hurt any of the actors or creators should someone choose to watch a bootleg of a production that has ended and one that they never would have been able to see otherwise?"

In fact there is money to be made. If i wanted to side step paying royalties, cheat a designer out of his money, not be creative, and just cut and paste his original set/lighting/costume design/choreography, all id need is a bootleg. It really is a problem. A friend of mine put her choreography on youtube to drum up interest. Soon she had a legal battle going with another choreographer for copying and pasting her work, without giving her credit. Its all too common to walk into a regional show and see the exact same design from BWAY and chances are they haven't paid for it. It irks me because it allows people to be lazy. Dont call yourself a designer if youre just cutting and pasting, without knowing what the real reason for the choice was. (i.e. several of the spelling bee production ive seen outside the originals.) If you want the original design, then you need to hire the original designer...otherwise try, i dont know... BEING CREATIVE.

That said, i enjoy having boots for things i havent gotten the opportunity to see. I do argue that for every one person that a bootleg wont keep out of the theatre, there is one that it will. Only true fans of the art form NEED to see it live. With one night to see a show and two options, do you see the one youve seen on bootleg, or experience the other one? Cant say that i wanted to see Legally Blonde after they aired it on mtv. Just saying. I might have seen it otherwise... and been disappointed. But thats beside the point.

But there is something to be said about capturing an incredible performance forever. (Ben Vereen in Pippin) If that were still open, wild horses couldnt keep me away.


I think they are equal parts harm and help, in the right or wrong hands.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:24pm

Cant say that i wanted to see Legally Blonde after they aired it on mtv. Just saying. I might have seen it otherwise... and been disappointed. But thats beside the point.

I felt the same way after seeing the MTV broadcast. It did not engage me in any way and I felt disconnected with the material. I ended up seeing the show live and I'm so glad I did. The electricty that the MTV broadcast lacked was there in spades. I am so glad I didn't let what I saw on MTV keep me away from the theatre.

[CandiceElyse]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:35pm

as far as bootlegs go, i try and stick to the rule of only having bootlegs from shows that i have paid the money to go see live. the only exceptions are shows that had already closed but those are pretty limited in my small collection. I love the idea of more shows filming professionally, but I don't think EVERY show should, just the shows who have earned it, that have become iconic, like Rent did. That way, people could always enjoy the classics. I wish Hairspray had done it, I wish Hair had too, since another revival is unlikely, and I certainly hope in 50 years when Wicked closes they will. Shows like this have earned their place in Broadway history and deserve to be preserved for people to enjoy past their time.

[Edna Turnblad]

Posted: 7/6/10 at 12:41pm

In regards to someone mentioning that theater is a live art form and should not be viewed through other means, specifically bootlegs, I do agree about it being an art form meant to be seen live and in person. However, what I think is good about bootlegs is that you aren't swept into the spectacle of all the sets and costumes of flashy shows like Wicked, and you are able to sort of see it through a filter that lets you hear the score and book, and decide if it's actually a good show. I don't know, does that make sense? I'm just saying that bootlegs take away the aspects that could draw your attention away from seeing flaws.