Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Why do some think live remote viewing is better than taped? | |
| Posted by: dramedy 01:11 pm EDT 08/05/20 | |
|
|
|
| Lungs last month and 3 kings have several live performances that are broadcast. For me on the west coast, it is annoying to have to watch at 11am instead of seeing it taped in the evening. I’ve been watching stars in the house the next day. I see absolutely no difference in watching it “live” broadcast vs later viewing and why schedule 5 performances. But I think more than a few disagree and I’d really like to hear those opinions. Many subjects I can see both sides like abortion—but requiring live viewing stumps me. | |
| reply to this message |
| Do you mean, why do some THEATRES prefer to screen live rather than later viewing? | |
| Last Edit: MockingbirdGirl 01:22 pm EDT 08/05/20 | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 01:21 pm EDT 08/05/20 | |
| In reply to: Why do some think live remote viewing is better than taped? - dramedy 01:11 pm EDT 08/05/20 | |
|
|
|
| I imagine it's a combination of monetizing and replicating an approximation of the live theatre experience. Personally, I've enjoyed watching the live experiences and then doing Zoom conferences with friends to discuss. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Do you mean, why do some THEATRES prefer to screen live rather than later viewing? | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 10:30 pm EDT 08/08/20 | |
| In reply to: Do you mean, why do some THEATRES prefer to screen live rather than later viewing? - MockingbirdGirl 01:21 pm EDT 08/05/20 | |
|
|
|
| I think there's something of an energy and excitement knowing that what you're watching is truly happening live. Taped live is the next best thing, of course. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.012226 seconds.