Kerry Butler: "Lincoln Center, make a deal with unions and broadcast your archive recordings"- Page 3

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 10:28am

sparksatmidnight is not wrong.

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 10:42am

I think a valid question about this, though, is will people continue to go to the theatre if streamings are regularly available?  I mean, I'm obviously not talking about most folks on the board here or a lot of other regular theatergoers.  But for the casual theatergoer, if they suddenly have the option to watch these archived recordings now from the comfort of their own home, will they get back to going to the theatre once this all is over?  I love the idea of the archives being available, but it could actually end up strangely doing more harm than good to the future of theatre if we make it too available.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 10:48am

The people I would see opting for streaming are folks:

* with disabilities that make traveling to the theatre or sitting for long periods difficult

* with super busy schedules who need to carve out time to watch a show maybe in 20-minute chunks

* who live just too far away to make any kind of even CASUAL theatregoing a regular thing

* etc.

I don't think it's a BAD thing to make theatre more accessible. I kind of doubt it would affect live performance revenue that much, especially when there is almost literally none of that right now anyway. And do people in the above descriptions make up that much of the box office?

What might be worth noting is what box office receipts were like for live shows that were running at the time their film adaptations came out: Annie, Les Miz, Phantom, Jersey Boys? I really don't know the answer to that one, but maybe someone here does. (From what I vaguely remember, Phantom did BETTER after the film, but Jersey Boys did worse.)

[schubox]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 11:02am

HogansHero said: "It is fantasy land to think that there is a huge audience for the archival recordings. Sure, folks here would be ecstatic, but it wold mostly go unnoticed. Want to excite kids about the theatre: give them something relatable. I have long felt (and expressed here many times) that showing films of stage shows often does more harm than good. I have loosened my feeling on that for the pandemic, but make no mistake not very many people are watching these things. It's to keep US from going crazy, but that's it."

This is a valid point. Outside of a few huge hits maybe (like The Producers) the audiences probably aren't lining up to watch the OBC of Bright Star, or Billy Elliot. or whatever else you can think of. Which, of course, would make the whole venture even less financially viable. Which is why I said it sucks knowing these things exist and that most people will never get to see them.

[schubox]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 11:05am

Broadway61004 said: "I think a valid question about this, though, is will people continue to go to the theatre if streamings are regularly available? I mean, I'm obviously not talking about most folks on the board here or a lot of other regular theatergoers. But for the casual theatergoer, if they suddenly have the option to watch these archived recordings now from the comfort of their own home, will they get back to going to the theatre once this all is over? I love the idea of the archives being available, but it could actually end up strangely doing more harm than good to the future of theatre if we make it too available."

It's probably difficult to tell. My parents go to local theater a lot, and will watch the PBS Broadway broadcasts, but they've been to NYC once and saw one show. And that was to visit me when I lived there. They love theater, but they aren't spending the time and money to go to NYC regularly, but they would absolutely watch more shows from their home.

[Kad]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 11:07am

After reading that post on the other board, I do regret and apologize for asserting that their recordings aren’t broadcast quality.

I don’t think streaming recorded productions would diminish the hunger to see live performance. It’s live performance, it can’t be replaced. And, honestly, I have yet to see a single recorded production that captures the feeling of seeing a show live.

As a potential revenue stream for theaters that currently have literally no revenue to speak of, sure! But frankly, the impression I get is that a lot of people want things streamed at low or no cost, which just isn’t viable (and kind of undercuts the “I miss theater and want to support it!” sentiment).

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 11:46am

schubox, your parents sound similar to mine! I grew up hearing cast albums in the house (not frequently but they were always around). I would go see national tours with them at least four or five times a year. Now they see a few local shows a year. But nowadays their retirement time and money are spent traveling (OK, not currently). They don't usually even venture out to see tours in San Francisco even though that's less than an hour away, unless they pair it with a get together/catch up with family. When I visited for a weekend to see the Hello Dolly tour, I asked if my mom wanted to go and she said, "...uh, do any of your friends want to go?"

But I'm sure they would watch streamed productions. Even if I had to remind them when they were on.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/28/20 at 12:53pm

Kad said: "I don’t think streaming recorded productions would diminish the hunger to see live performance. It’s live performance, it can’t be replaced. And, honestly, I have yet to see a single recorded production that captures the feeling of seeing a show live.

As a potential revenue stream for theaters that currently have literally no revenue to speak of, sure! But frankly, the impression I get is that a lot of people want things streamed at low or no cost, which just isn’t viable (and kind of undercuts the “I miss theater and want to support it!” sentiment). "

For you and me it would not diminish/replace/etc. But the concern is that most people have never bothered to go to the theatre and they will in fact think this is it. And assuming they like it enough in this second class form, and that a demand for such things builds, we end up with more of these and less of the real thing. And ultimately the theatre loses the battle and is itself diminished.

As a revenue source during the pandemic, I support showing anything that can bring in a few drachma. But bear in mind that when you speak of theatres in this context, you are talking about non-profits, not commercial Broadway, and most non-profits had already at least teased this idea before anyone had ever heard of covid-19.

This is all tough stuff, and pronouncements and edicts here don't go very far in solving the insoluble issues revolving around this.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 5/30/20 at 9:27pm

kennedy_rose said: "Sutton Ross said: "I completely agree, it's all so ridiculous. The lame things they've been streaming are so boring, but airing My Fair Lady with Lauren Ambrose? Yes please!"

I'd rather see it with Laura Benanti. I was there the day of the recording...the world needs to see her!"

Same. That's one cast/production that is the exception to any critiques of this idea I could make. If they managed to get it on TV, it would live on my DVR forever.

[MollyJeanneMusic]

Posted: 5/30/20 at 10:25pm

Kad said: "After reading that post on the other board, I do regret and apologize for asserting that their recordings aren’t broadcast quality.

I don’t think streaming recorded productions would diminish the hunger to see live performance. It’s live performance, it can’t be replaced. And, honestly, I have yet to see a single recorded production that captures the feeling of seeing a show live.

As a potential revenue stream for theaters that currently have literally no revenue to speak of, sure! But frankly, the impression I get is that a lot of people want things streamed at low or no cost, which just isn’t viable (and kind of undercuts the “I miss theater and want to support it!” sentiment).

"

The only proshot that comes close for me is Newsies.  And even that isn’t capturing the “live theatre experience.”  The show prompted me to get into musical theatre with a performance of Newsies Jr., and being on stage, seeing the lights, the behind-the-scenes stuff, made me feel like I was IN the proshot.  It wasn’t meant to capture the audience’s perspective, but rather the actor’s.

[binau]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 12:16pm

A piece on the Hamilton filming suggests it cost them 'less than 10 million $'. While perhaps more elaborate than a filming needs to be, reading this it is clear to me why the economics of filming these shows just don't seem to make financial sense for most shows. That's very expensive. 

Also, interestingly it was Disney's push that got it out sooner. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/movies/hamilton-movie-disney-streaming.html

 

 

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 12:25pm

Would there be a streaming platform interested in buying these shows, though, even if the unions and all agreed?  It would make zero sense for Lincoln Center to put them out there for free (I mean, I would love it and it would be so nice of them, but there would be zero money made off of it for them unless they had a contract with a service that was going to pay them to broadcast their shows).

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 12:33pm

I have said for YEARS now that shows should charge a $1 - $2 “preservation” fee with tickets to cover the costs of this.

[phantom39]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 12:43pm

qolbinau said: "A piece on the Hamilton filming suggests it cost them 'less than 10 million $'. While perhaps more elaborate than a filming needs to be, reading this it is clear to me why the economics of filming these shows just don't seem to make financial sense for most shows. That's very expensive.

Also, interestingly it was Disney's push that got it out sooner.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/movies/hamilton-movie-disney-streaming.html"

 

The cost of filming a show is much lower than that - for example, An American in Paris cost $930K to film in London, and Broadway's Memphis was around $1-2M

 

Updated On: 6/25/20 at 12:43 PM

[Jarethan]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 12:54pm

qolbinau said: "If a few big shows pulling in the big bucks means Broadway is a success, fine. Take Hamilton, POTO, Wicked and a few others out of the equation and you are left with a bloodbath of flops and failed shows that are barely in the consciousness of Manhattan let alone the rest of the world."

 

Also, I would add, we have read countless times on this board that those shows are actually pretty vulnerable because so much of their audience consists of tourists, many foreign, who are going to take a long time to return back to NYC.  The question has been raised as to what audience sizes they can expect when Broadway really does open for real (because there its either a vaccine or a treatment that is seriously good), since the return of tourists is likely to be a very slow process, not to mention how long it will take to get back to the record number of attendees.

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 2:03pm

Sorry to jump in and perhaps just confuse things. 

I don't know if the insular world of Broadway will survive to the middle of this century. The communications revolution might claim it just as the Internet and streaming has already claimed so many.. The Boston Globe and The Washington Post were on the ropes before Trump saved them. Streaming in one night can grab a number of viewers equal to a year of live theatergoers. (don't hold me on this. I couldn't find my slide rule). I'll bet that the presence of Seth and Christine Pedi on the daily Sirius Broadway channel has increased interest in Broadway.

That the film experience does not equal the live is a good thing for live theater. Yet undeniably the films that I've seen of Bandstand and The King and I. deliver a half to two thirds of the pleasure of the live viewing. The film viewers are not paying the same price as a for a live ticket. There is value.

It's very possible that only three or four of Broadway's best will account for half of the annual film revenue. But the great increase in scale of of viewers and upscale pricing of shows in demand will compensate.

I would also refrain from releasing the shows to the public until after it had closed, or if a run-forever show, until it had been on Broadway for two or three years.

Right now everyone with intellectual property rights in the play or musical get nothing for those rights after the show and tour are over. I'll bet they would like to license those rights for real money, or just sell all their rights outright to whomever is putting on the show. Everyone has a price. Roundabout, for example, has put on some memorable revivals, but they are always looking for money and I think that this has cut back on the number of musicals that they could perform. As in zero Broadway musicals.were planned this season.

In fact it would be extremely useful to study the history of Roundabout's She Loves Me..How did they procure all the needed rights and how much did it cost. How much, if any, profit have they made/expect to make off the streaming of the show. 

She Loves Me was not promoted much, and it would be very interesting to see if can turn a profit. Would Roundabout have liked to have streamed from the last weeks of Cabaret when Emma Stone took over as Sally? When she played Sally, I've never seen so many seats promoted to premium in such a short time.

[S394206H]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 6:05pm

HogansHero said: "It is fantasy land to think that there is a huge audience for the archival recordings. Sure, folks here would be ecstatic, but it wold mostly go unnoticed. Want to excite kids about the theatre: give them something relatable. I have long felt (and expressed here many times) that showing films of stage shows often does more harm than good. I have loosened my feeling on that for the pandemic, but make no mistake not very many people are watching these things. It's to keep US from going crazy, but that's it."

Agreed! As a designer, one thing that was always drilled into my head in school was to never actively seek out another production of something you’re working on- it kills a large part of your creative process because you automatically associate someone else’s work with what the show “should” look like. Sometimes it can’t be avoided, but I definitely think a lot of creativity gets stifled in widely-produced shows because creatives and actors already know what the show “should” be before they even start rehearsals.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 6:51pm

as per usual, especially on threads like these...HogansHero is the voice of reason...

 

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 6/25/20 at 9:34pm

Well, I'll be unreasonable and suggest that this is a decision that will make itself. As BroadwayHD starts to get some real productions in the library, West End King & I, She Loves Me, NY Philharmonic Carousel with Kelli and Nathan, it may become apparent before too long if the demand is there.

Kelli was rappin' on her Instagram site this week and it came out that one of her big issues is to be paid like a star of the large or small screen. I don't know how much Broadway pays its stars, but I always assumed that it was the least of the three.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 6/26/20 at 9:13am

I just want to chime in as someone who lives in "flyover country." I definitely will still attend live productions of shows I've seen filmed onstage. For instance, I still drove four hours to see The Light in the Piazza national tour even after the Live from Lincoln Center broadcast. 

I acknowledge that I am not your modal theatregoer here in the Midwest, but I think that here to the more casual theatregoers it's more about the experience of going to the theatre and sitting in the audience than the show itself. A lot of people attend our local touring productions because it's something to do around here. I know people who have season tickets and display no interest in the shows they see outside of attending performances. The Phantom of the Opera tour came here last season and it was still well attended despite the existence of the filmed stage production with Ramin Karimloo.

Similarly, I know people who see the same shows over and over when they go to NYC. Or shows that they have already seen on tour in our area.

So, what I'm trying to say is, I think there would still be interest in live theatre even if shows are filmed and broadcast.

Updated On: 6/26/20 at 09:13 AM

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 6/26/20 at 9:52am

I'm sounding too much like a cheerleader here. A lot of you understand the market and the audience much better than me.

I'd just say that in an era when Netflix and the movie streaming business and Spotify and the music streaming business are pulling in huge amounts of revenue, this is something that Broadway must explore.

[Luscious]

Posted: 6/26/20 at 10:02am

I agree with OlBlueEyes. I would gladly pay an "on demand" fee to see many of the archived recordings. Why can't BroadwayHD or some other streaming service strike a deal? I agree that all involved should be paid fairly, but to have these recordings sit on a shelf gathering dust, especially during times like these, makes little to no sense. Regardless of the obstacles, it could be worked out.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 6/26/20 at 10:04am

OlBlueEyes said: "I'm sounding too much like a cheerleader here. A lot of you understand the market and the audience much better than me.

I'd just say that in an era when Netflix and the movie streaming business and Spotify and the music streaming business are pulling in huge amounts of revenue, this is something that Broadway must explore."

No, Broadway must not explore that. Look, I applaud the producers of shows who do film them. I think it's great. However, that doesn't mean it needs to be the norm or done for every single show. Within this group of theatre fans, the ones that post here, I find that it's easy to miss the bigger picture. Yes, while there is a built in audience of theatre fans who would watch filmed shows, a vast majority of people wouldn't. The filming of a show costs a lot of money. Cast albums do as well, but not to the same extent as filming a show. Now, despite shows putting out cast albums, it's still a niche market and one that isn't profitable. Netflix and Spotify are pulling in revenue simply because the content that they offer are things that are more mainstream in terms of the audience it gets. Broadway, not at all the same way. It's apples and oranges. And, it's a great thing that CBS airs the Tonys every year. But, it always feels like every year the ratings get lower and lower, leaving us to wondering if at some point CBS would just drop the whole telecast altogether. 

ETA: libraries have reference material that can only be used in house. This is material is on various subjects. Now, can someone please explain to me, the difference between reference material that can only be used in house, VS say, the TOFT archive which is viewed the same way but in a video format.

Updated On: 6/26/20 at 10:04 AM

[darquegk]

Posted: 6/26/20 at 10:54am

If subscriptions and public response are through the roof for Disney’s distribution of Hamilton, this discussion could soon look a lot different.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 6/26/20 at 11:09am

darquegk said: "If subscriptions and public response are through the roof for Disney’s distribution of Hamilton, this discussion could soon look a lot different. "

No other show will match the inevitable success of the Hamilton film. Not even close.