UPDATE:Now's the time to plan transitioning theatre to worldwide audiences.

[chicagodannyd]

Imagine people in Austria or Africa or Brazil, or anywhere in the USA, having access to watching a new exciting play, or an experimental play, or a new comedy, or new musical, all produced in New York and distributed by a new television network for theatre on HBO or on TUBI or IMDBtv.  Me personally?  I'd like to see comedies like, "You can dance with any gorilla as long as you go ape over me."  Hilarious!  Or, "The Dollar Store Lady."  TV sitcoms are essentially boring and lack creativity.  SNL is one note comedy, over and over.  Bring in new writers, new directors, new actors.  They are all over the country.  Don't repeat the history of Montgomery Wards or Sears and Robuck.  Take advantage of new technologies. Move on to new challenges.  Make live theatre available for audiences everywhere.  Today's camera technology is cheap and mobile and perfoms excellently.  It is no big deal to record a live performance digitally.  A subscription Broadway channel, televising plays large and small, muisicals, comedies and all of it, is the future!  

UPDATE:  We want to give our audience the opportunity to experience a virtual night at the theatre, each week, from every aspect, from the neighborhood, the history of the theatre, the play, and even going back stage after the performance to talk to the actors.  It’s a night in New York.  PLATFORM IDEA:

It’s called . . . . . . .  “A Night at the Theatre with host Tierza Scaccia” Tierza is a very experienced host and actor and a New Yorker.  Every second week she can have a guest co-host and New York icon:  Andrew Lloyd Webber, Joe Namath, Nathan Lane.

The show opens up with a rousing famous theatre song (maybe a Cohan, or Gershwin, or Webber tune) with SHOTS beginning with the New York skyline, followed by shots of Broadway, the Village, Central Park, Little Italy, etc.  We hear the voiceover:  “From New York City, the theatre hub of the world - Welcome to a night at the theatre with your host Tierza Scaccia!” 
Tierza is standing in front of the theatre.  She describes the neighborhood, the history of the theatre, and the play, its cast and some anecdotes.  Then we go into the theatre, sit and watch the performance.  After the performance, Tierza goes back stage, talks to the actors, and maybe tours the theatre.  
To experience a virtual night in New York City and see a real play, I would pay to see this as well as millions.  Anyone can check out Tierza Scaccia on Youtube.  She does it all.

Excellent idea for a subscription based television show – I think.  The actors would be well paid, and the vehicle is excellent for creating publicity for New York and for enhancing the tourist trade, after the success of a national vaccination program.

I am not associated with Tierza in any way.  I have just seen her work as a host and performer.  She projects well in front of the camera.

[Jordan Catalano]

The UK has been doing a great job with this all year, with even more on the way.

[JSquared2]

You do know that this concept already exists in many forms, right? Broadway HD for example?

[chicagodannyd]

Can we see a different play every week, including off Broadway, and off off Broadway productions?  Do we have a selection of musicals, comedies, dramas?  Or is it limited to just Broadway productions?  I am in support of inclusive opportunities for all performers, directors, writers in theatre in New York, not just a select few, the in-crowd.  Nothing is more exciting than a new experimental piece.  Ever see "You can dance with any gorilla as long as you go ape over me?"  Very creative and funny.  The author is a priest.  I saw it years ago.  Wouldn't it be exciting to see it on TV, coming from New York?

[Huss417]

Oh Well! I only thought you posted to the Off-Topic board!

[HogansHero]

what you are proposing would be terribly unhealthy for Broadway and while it is currently the rage among some non-profits, don't expect commercial Broadway producers to line up to vitiate what makes their assets unique. Theatre is live, with artists and audiences sharing an experience. Yes we have been given some great entertainment during the pandemic but I want live theatre back asap, and I don't like hearing ideas that are damaging to it. FWIW I think there is lots of great stuff available for viewing on a screen. Why are you fixated on broadcast TV; is that some kind of joke? (Which, well, it is lol) And please don't try analogizing theatre with large retailers: that's insulting. 

[sparksatmidnight]

As a Brazilian, no, it's not. Theatre is about a live communal experience and should remain that way. It went through basically every pandemic since ever without the need to 'plan transitioning to worldwide audiences' and it will go through this one, and the next one and the next after that.

[SouthernCakes]

I agree with Hogan, and can understand Broadways shows not doing it, it’d be great for the non-profits off Broadway. Love to see those shows get recorded even if it’s just a camera in the back of the house. So many shows I’ve missed because they only run for a limited time and can’t transfer, etc.

[broadwayguy2]

Only chiming in to say that a very well filmed version of a live theatre piece is equitable to a high tech, modernized souvenir program in my mind. No more and no less.

[unclevictor]

I like this idea!

[VintageSnarker]

chicagodannyd said: "Can we see a different play every week, including off Broadway, and off off Broadway productions?"

Are these all over Zoom or is someone going to fund 52 different productions?

[Ravenclaw]

What makes you think that people in Austria, Africa, and Brazil are deprived of theatre just because they're not near New York? There is great theatre all over the world, and most plays don't need a worldwide audience to consider themselves successes. I think that in general, preservation of theatre is an important practice which is, unfortunately, often prohibitively expensive, and the problem of access is notoriously difficult to solve, but framing the issue as a service from New York to enlighten the rest of the world is a little presumptive, in my opinion.

[blaxx]

Ravenclaw said: "What makes you think that people in Austria, Africa, and Brazil are deprived of theatre just because they're not near New York? There is great theatre all over the world, and most plays don't need a worldwide audience to consider themselves successes. I think that in general, preservation of theatre is an important practice which is, unfortunately, often prohibitively expensive, and the problem of access is notoriously difficult to solve,but framing the issue as a service from New York to enlighten the rest of the world is a little presumptive, in my opinion."

American theater is almost completely isolated from the rest of the world. Outside of the UK and perhaps Canada, America has a minimal perspective on theater creatives around the world. You think other countries' theater is sub par? Obviously not, it is as good if not better than American theater. 

This attitude of "only we do transcendent theatre" ( which doesn't seem to affect other artistic disciplines) is why posters think that it will be "a privilege" for foreign audiences to be exposed to American productions. 

[qolbinau]

Admittedly I can only speak for theatre I have seen all across Australia, New Zealand, Europe, some of Asia and of course the USA (I.e. not South America or Africa), and while there is of course good theatre everywhere, if we are speaking of musicals there is indeed something transcendent and special about New York theatre that I have not experienced elsewhere to the same extent. I am not American and am growing more frustrated at much of the culture and its influence on the world daily, but I personally feel we need to give credit where credit is due. New York is the centre of the world for musicals and I wish there was a way to put it more on the world stage.

[Tom5]

To paraphrase what Winston Churchill said about democracy: It's a terrible idea except for all the others.

[jimmycurry01]

When an entire industry is absent for more than a year, it is time to start thinking outside the box if any of that industry is to survive. This pandemic will either force a change in the industry, or it will falter. We can deny it all we want, but the theatre industry has reached a crossroad. I feel the OP is correct. A transition is going to have to happen. The question is, what does that transition look like, and how will it be commercially viable. Theatre on film is such a niche market. Audiences lose important aspects of the experience by merely watching a filmed production, and live-streaming comes with it's own unique set of problems.

Perhaps the transition needs to be to move away from the NYC theatre hub. Perhaps it is time to focus on smaller theatres throughout the country. Chicago has a number of storefront theatres that produce fantastic productions. Of course those shows would have to run a lifetime, or charge crazy prices, for anyone to make a true living off of them.

The industry is on life support, and is in very serious trouble of collapsing. The real-estate aspect alone has to be struggling, considering the fact that no rent is coming in. The performers are all having to find 9 to 5s, and many are having to leave the expensive city. Who knows what shows will actually come back once they are able to, and then how long they will last as the industry recovers (if it recovers)?

You can complain that transitioning to a film model will kill Broadway, but for right now it's already dead. We are all hoping for a resurrection that may not come. We can all say that it is ridiculous to say that Broadway is dead forever, but the truth is we don't know that it isn't. We don't know what the future of the industry looks like, and we need to be ready to embrace the changes that may be necessary for the industry to move on. In the meantime, I will hope for a May re-opening, and that it will get back to business as usual, somehow.

[Fan123]

I imagine that from an industry marketing perspective, it might even be a good idea to do something like this to help keep Broadway relevant and in the worldwide zeitgeist throughout this mess. Otherwise some fans are going to discover other great sources of theatre content and other pursuits, if they haven't already. Some will reignite their interest in Broadway post-shutdown, but some might not.
Additionally, this could be the best possible time to take greater advantage of a worldwide market willing to pay for online Broadway content. If it's literally impossible to get sufficient numbers of paying bums on seats in physical theatres, then it makes sense to seek additional markets. Such a transition to recording more content wouldn't necessarily need to be permanent (although personally I would hope that it would stick around).

[temms]

I find this thread somewhat heartening, because I come down on the side of filmed theatre is not theatre. Theatre is when everyone is in the same room breathing the same air, which is ironically the exact most deadly thing anyone can be doing right now.

We cannot do theatre right now. Eventually we will be able to again. I make my living doing it and so I am capital S screwed for the foreseeable future, but that's the way it is. We've mishandled this calamity thoroughly and the diminishment of theatre is one of the unfortunate but inevitable side effects. We, as a nation, have chosen to decimate theatre. 

I also hate watching things in my living room. Theatre gets me out. Watching Hamilton on the same couch where I binge the Great British Baking Show cheapens the whole idea of Hamilton to me. I like the poster above who likened it to a fancy souvenir program. Every person I know who runs a theatre and is trying to sell tickets to digital events is having a horrible go of it. The general public is not interested in paying money to sit in their living room watching something with bad production values. There is so much fantastic TV right now that is made for TV. You wouldn't go to a Broadway theatre to watch a 30 Rock marathon, unless it was a special event. You certainly wouldn't regularly go to Broadway theatres to binge TV, or at least I wouldn't.

I think about WWII and what a disruption that was. I can't help but think if it happened today, after about 6 months we'd be complaining that it's time for the boys to come home and get the women out of the factories, that Europe needs to fend for itself, that Pearl Harbor was no big deal because what do you think is going to happen at a military base plus it's Hawaii so who cares, and if Japan wants to bomb us let them because they're probably not going to bomb where I live. Frankly there are a lot of cities I wouldn't mind seeing bombed. It's just not worth upending our entire way of life.

We're at war. It will take some time to defeat the enemy. Theatre cannot happen until we do, unless we want more people to die. Throughout history people have made sacrifices and upended their lives in times of crisis, and that is where we are now. I think digital theatre is the worst of both worlds - TV with no production value. Theatre will be back, no question. I will still be doing it. Lots of people I know will still be doing it. We will make it work and we will rebuild and it will be different but equally wonderful. Trying to hold onto what we've lost by deciding that theatre and TV are the same will do way more damage in the long run than the pandemic.

[broadwayguy2]

@temms - filmed theatre is a 21st century souvenir program and I will die on that hill.

[HogansHero]

great post, Temms. I agree with everything you said. You may be screwed right now but at least you have your head screwed on properly. 

[temms]

Filmed theatre has its place, but not as a stand-in for the real thing. I think it's great for historical documentation, for research, even for entertainment - I'm not totally against it and there have been some wonderful filmed productions that I've enjoyed immensely, but they're not theatre. I know there are people with physical constraints that make going to the theatre a challenge and it's wonderful that they can still be a part of it, and also people who are geographically detached from a live theatre scene and unable to travel. So I'm not saying don't do it, I'm just saying that it's not the solution to what's going on right now which is a whole different situation.

Plus, it takes a large capital investment to do any sort of filming and distribution and that's even harder to come by now than it was already. I'd prefer to see the capital used toward more productions. I'd be very happy to see physical productions shrink; there's so much beautiful work that can be done with just lighting and staging and possibly projections, and I'd love to see how far that can go. I love a big-ass show as much as anyone but I'd rather see simpler, smaller shows for real than huge ones on film.

[Jordan Catalano]

Filmed theater is also a way to not only keep interest alive in a time when going isn’t possible but it, for decades now and will always continue to, will keep getting people interested in performing arts and make sure they still have paying customers.

[HogansHero]

I think we have several things converging, and interestingly this jurisdictional dispute between AEA and SAG-AFTRA (which AEA can't win) is dropped right in the middle of it. Showing filmed theatre as entertainment is fine and makes sense for so long as we don't have the real thing. Ditto, to an extent at least, keeping interest alive etc. But the inventory has pretty much been spent at this point and any new work that is added to the pile (in the US at least and we shall see about elsewhere) is a film. Then we have films that rely heavily on plays and stage actors and thus "feel" like theatre even though they are not, and that are produced safely in the style of some (but heaven knows not all) sports. This can and will continue for the duration. And then we have some truly artistic things that have been and can be done within the confines of the socially distant universe most of us are confronting. I think we will see more of this (e.g., the Angels piece we got to enjoy the last few days) but the question is how do we finance it? As Temms said, if we have learned one thing it is that folks (at least at anything approaching critical mass) are not willing to spend big bucks to sit home and watch TV. And theatre streaming is never going to get within a light year of the economies of Netflix, Amazon et al. Interesting stuff to discuss but there is no magic pill in any of this for us. 

[Jordan Catalano]

I think this is where some (a lot) of frustration comes in now. Because they haven’t even shown a small percent of 1% of filmed material out there. SO much exists but the unions (and I’m not even just talking about Lincoln Center) prevent anything being done with it. The inventory is just sitting there collecting the proverbial dust when it could be used to find new works, keep theater employees paid, etc etc.

[HogansHero]

Jordan, I think you may be technically correct but if you subtract things that are likely to attract less than 100 (or even 1000) viewers, what do you think the percentage is? I'm not sure I am following your last sentence. What are you referring to?