Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Andrew Yang proposes Broadway rescue plan | |
| Posted by: StageLover 05:57 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| among other things | |
| Link | https://deadline.com/2021/04/andrew-yang-broadway-new-york-mayor-race-public-private-ticket-rescue-plan-1234727955/ |
| reply to this message | |
| a comment on netflix/disney diana/hamilton | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 10:01 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 09:45 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: Andrew Yang proposes Broadway rescue plan - StageLover 05:57 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| Let's just keep in mind... Disney bought Hamilton because it is a global phenomenon, and paid as much as they did for it with the intention to sell tickets to a cinema run. They likely will still eventually do that. Netflix bought Diana because it is new and it is Diana... they have a big investment in the Diana story right now, with lots of other stuff on it. They didn't buy it because it was so good it deserved to be seen or because it was an established hit, or a buzzed about show sure to to BE a hit on broadway... it's apparently none of those things. (and i bet the producers are happy to gamble that this film might spark new interest rather than kill some, and either way they got lucky with a subject matter that's very appealing to the biggest streaming platform/producers in the world) Most stage productions do not have these very specific things going for them to get them filmed and bought. So I don't think we can look to either and their success as an example or standard that can be applied almost anything else. (it's also yet to be seen what success Diana will have for Netflix, if it will have actually been "worth" whatever they paid for it. But their goal is to keep you watching and clicking the next thing and trusting they'll have more content you might want to consume so you keep paying monthly). |
|
| reply to this message |
| Hmmm... | |
| Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 06:52 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: Andrew Yang proposes Broadway rescue plan - StageLover 05:57 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| Another element of Yang’s proposal would establish a pilot program to support high-quality streaming of theater productions. “In 2020, Netflix revenue was estimated at $25 billion in a category that’s roughly 3 times bigger than that,” the proposal states. “With the world home-bound in quarantine, Netflix posted positive cash flows for the first time since 2011, profiting greatly off of every day consumers. These massive companies have cornered the market in at-home streaming and most content generation is being lost to these monopolies. A Yang administration will establish a pilot program to support high-quality streaming of theatre productions, particularly, but not limited to, those on Broadway.” | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hmmm... | |
| Posted by: ryhog 08:37 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: Hmmm... - MockingbirdGirl 06:52 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| this is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of at least two things: the interest of Broadway producers in this, and the economics of it. In other words, this (like a lot of what he seems to go after) is glib naiveté. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hmmm... | |
| Posted by: lowwriter 10:27 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hmmm... - ryhog 08:37 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| I think the pandemic has shown that Broadway producers and theater owners are going to have to rethink how they are going to finance shows. It is in their best interest to film productions to be aired later not only to raise income but for posterity. I don’t think the old model of production is going to work in the future though it isn’t clear what the new models will be. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hmmm... | |
| Posted by: ryhog 11:02 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hmmm... - lowwriter 10:27 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| I agree there will be new models (there always have been actually) and we don't know what they will be. The Hamilton (film to air later) model only works for shows that reach a certain level of mojo. And note who paid for the filming. Imagine if you were barely able to capitalize and eke by for a few years on Broadway, eventually recouping. Who is going to finance your film? Imagine if you are a critical flop and tank at the box office? Who wants to stream that show? I don't see how you build a model based on streaming if the intention is to maintain some semblance of Broadway. We can also discuss the Diana model, which I think is equally absurd. I am not a fan, and I think there is a lot of sentiment in the business that agrees with me. And if I were the kind of person who was kept up at night I would be wondering how long it would be before Netflix cuts Broadway out of the deal. Why bother? I have a dozen reasons I don't want any part of this. Sorry. (That said, I am not suggesting that we don't need to find new ways to make theatre even though we have to also acknowledge that Broadway in the aggregate is doing pretty fine from the pure aggregate business side. ) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Hmmm.. Glib naiveté? | |
| Posted by: ShowGoer 09:50 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hmmm... - ryhog 08:37 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| I'm surprised you so cavalierly dismiss the idea – the producer sure aren't, from Hamilton (one of the biggest smashes ever releasing its film adaptation straight to streaming long before the Broadway show has run its course) to Diana (who not only financed their filming before the show opened, but are putting it up on Netflix only a month before the stage production starts previews). (Also don't forget that Come From Away is also filming their Broadway production this fall, before it resumes performances.) People have been talking about this for years.... https://nypost.com/2015/12/30/streaming-is-the-future-of-broadway-producer/ ...and years.... https://www.forbes.com/sites/leeseymour/2018/05/14/is-streaming-the-future-of-broadway/?sh=28bacde26f76 ... long before Covid; and now that a global pandemic has proved both the appetite for it, and the need for additional revenue streams and expanded business models, people are still talking about it, more than ever.3 3 months ago: https://fortune.com/2020/12/13/covid-live-theater-broadway-west-end-reopening-innovation/ ...and now: https://www.wsj.com/articles/keep-the-virtual-crowds-coming-11616535029 Unless you've read all of these articles, or have spoken to even more producers and artistic directors than I have, I'm not sure Yang is the one with a fundamental misunderstanding of interest and economics. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Hamilton was meant to be released in movie theaters | |
| Posted by: dramedy 10:42 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: Hmmm.. Glib naiveté? - ShowGoer 09:50 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| But Disney changed to streaming because of covid. I wonder what it would have made in theaters—probably $100m. | |
| Link | https://www.google.com/amp/s/deadline.com/2020/05/hamilton-movie-july-3-streming-release-disney-plus-75-million-lin-manuel-miranda-1202932220/amp/ |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hamilton was meant to be released in movie theaters | |
| Posted by: ryhog 10:51 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: Hamilton was meant to be released in movie theaters - dramedy 10:42 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| as I said, Hamilton is sui generis. The other question is when that release would have been absent the pandemic. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hamilton was meant to be released in movie theaters | |
| Posted by: Manager-561 11:20 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hamilton was meant to be released in movie theaters - ryhog 10:51 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| That release would have been October 2021. It was already set before the pandemic changed things. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hmmm.. Glib naiveté? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 10:15 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: Hmmm.. Glib naiveté? - ShowGoer 09:50 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| I have probably read all of those articles or close to it. I have engaged with a lot of people; I have no idea how it compares to you in quantity, but there is not much quality in what you link. (Your first link to Ken D. kinda makes the point, no?) Here's the thing: Hamilton is sui generis as we all know, and it had banked well over a half a billion dollars in just under 2000 performances before it streamed anything. And that kinda serves up the economic argument. Yes, Netflix, Disney, et al will jump on the shows they can sell, but what happens to the ones they can't (which is most of them). Several possible answers, none of which are good for Broadway, the theatre, or New York City. Do you know how we make sure Netflix keeps buying? Do you know how Netflix short-circuits the production of these things? Think about it and get back to me. It is not pretty. I am happy to discuss this, in any depth you can throw my way. I stand by my two word description that struck a nerve. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Well... | |
| Last Edit: ShowGoer 06:19 am EDT 04/06/21 | |
| Posted by: ShowGoer 06:09 am EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hmmm.. Glib naiveté? - ryhog 10:15 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| Those two words haven’t so much struck a nerve with me, as just thinking you’re suffering from the “glib naïveté” you accuse him of. But I’m not saying Yang has all the answers, or that his pilot program makes much sense or will be all that effective, any more than (I think) you’re believing that this is all about Netflix, or that Netflix and Disney are the only streamers. Here’s the thing: you’re making this all about the streaming services; I’m making a larger point and saying it’s about the producers, as a way to preserve their shows, enhance awareness of their theater companies, and strengthen their long-term investments. I’m simply saying, and I’m confident in this, that a post-pandemic world, with it without Andrew Yang as mayor, will be moving more and more towards, not a SHIFT to streaming, but making either concurrent or -eventual- streaming a regular part of the theatrical product, much as the advent of home video in the late 70s and 1980s made video sales on VHS and later DVD a regular part of theirs. Virtually every off-Broadway theatre company and regional resident theater company that I’m aware of is planning/hoping to make it part of their model going forward (for the reasons Terry Teachout cites – during the last year countless theater fans have watched productions online from theaters not only that they’ve never attended and maybe will never visit, but that in some cases they’d never even heard of); I happened to wake up this morning to emails from four such theater companies just from overnight, including the Mint, Bay Street Theatre, and two outside NY, all referencing current or future streaming plans. And with major movie adaptations still a rare thing, virtually every Broadway production will want to make videorecordings happen, whether a smash hit or even some semi-flops (to be honest, it remains to be seen, for example, whether Diana actually opens next winter: it’s possible that in advance of filming they made the deal in advance to sell it and see a partial return on their investment, and that with the show loaded in already, if advance sales are dismal and/or critical and public response lacking, that they’ll have enough time to give notice after it drops on Netflix that the show will not reopen). But much as the major record labels stopped routinely bidding on cast album rights in the 1990s-2000s and the original cast recording became more frequently part of the show’s capitalization (Kurt Deutsch was, I believe, first among others in pushing first-class productions towards this model as the albums by RCA and Sony became rarer and rarer) – I am 100% positive that something of the same will become the rule, not the exception, here as well. (Make fun of Davenport all you want - I can join you in that in some respects - but there’s an argument that his Daddy Long Legs will prove to have had longer ‘legs’ than, say, best musical nominees as diverse as The Visit, Bright Star, The Scottsboro Boys and Groundhog Day purely because that original production was filmed.). Obviously everyone would love the $75-million sale to Disney + .... but the Diana example proves, and I’m sure they hope, the Come From Away example WILL prove, that the interest is there from the producers and the interest is there from the audiences. Maybe by selling to BroadwayHD or Broadway on Demand, maybe by putting it themselves on iTunes, maybe a service that hadn’t been invented yet... but there are more options if a show has been filmed than if it hasn’t. We’re not going to see every single show professionally filmed at all, let alone streamed during their runs... but I believe it will eventually become the rule rather than the exception. Apologies if it seems this discussion has turned snarky, but check back with me in a few years and we’ll see who’s exhibiting quality thinking. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Well... | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 09:49 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 09:41 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: Well... - ShowGoer 06:09 am EDT 04/06/21 | |
|
|
|
| I don't doubt what you're saying will be true. But I want to point out that VHS and DVDs were never released until well after the movie had left theaters, well after all possible ticket sales were made. Now for the movies that are released concurrently in a few theaters and on streaming, that is either a strategy to get people to watch in the comfort of their home and for (often) cheaper than the cinema for smaller movies with niche appeal rather than not getting their ticket money at all (like Bachelorette did several years ago), or major releases that are stunts or crown jewels for the major streaming service releasing them (like The Irishman did). I still think it is bonkers to release a movie people *would* pay for in theaters onto a streaming service they already pay for. I know MANY casual film fans who wanted to see Irishman but were happy to watch (for free, to them) on their home TV. Netflix for sure lost probably $30 per couple I know who watched at home but would have seen it in theaters if home viewing wasn't a choice, especially at the same time as in theaters (some who'd watch at home would pay for it in theaters just to have an opinion at the relevant time... so even having a cinema release for just 3 weeks and then concurrent on Netflix would have made them extra money I'm sure. (I also can't image this is good for the movie with regard to the experience the viewer has with it, good movie or not, without the full potential impact of the film when seen in an actually dark room with a truly big screen, and competing with the distraction of every noise or pet sound or buzzing phone, let alone people's propensity for casual texting and talking in movie when at home... so why are filmmakers in favor of this kind of release?) AND, second point... seeing a static thing made for viewing on a screen in a room in a smaller room on a smaller screen is not at all the same thing as viewing a play/musical meant to be experienced live (and directed/acted/designed for that) but seeing it on a screen in your home. It really a different thing on so many profound levels. The main thing I'd look forward to if concurrent theater streaming happens in this country is the accessibility and affordability for people to try out plays and musicals they never would have, in a proper first rate (hopefully) professional production... and can be part of the experience of hearing about it, seeing it, and talking about it, when everyone else is. I'm sure it would do wonders for the Tonys ratings. But while many things transfer film to stage-film (acknowledging of course something will always be lost in the experience of watching a live play on a screen rather than live in the theater it's performed in), many do not. Take something like Imelda's GYPSY which was filmed for broadcast. I have heard that live it was legendary, brilliant etc. I have been scared to even see the film of it because all I hear is that it doesn't play well... it's broad, it's intense in a bad way... the kind of thing that could turn people off of live theater or musicals or Gypsy. For every Hamilton there's at least one london Gypsy. Now of course I'm still very glad it was filmed, as I am every piece of theater that is lucky enough to get filmed... but I wouldn't think it would help the production or the people who see it via the film instead of live, while it's running and they have the chance to force people to see it live. And if I don't like it on the streaming film I see first, the chances are slim I'll buy a real ticket to try it again live just because friends say "no it's really much better live." And if that's my thinking, imagine people who aren't obsessed with theater! They'll watch 20 min and turn it off and move on... and if it was on netflix, they paid nothing for it! ha. It's also QUITE a different proposition for a home viewer if a stage-film is streaming on a platform they already pay for or which they might want to because it offers *many* other movies, series, specials etc... vs paying separately $25 for a single viewing of the stage-film. I would pay that for almost anything I'm mildly interested in... but if it starts becoming a battle between popular streamers and the stage shows they get vs pay-per-show ... I bet many will just happily settle with only seeing the stage-films that the services they already pay for will have. If that happens, how will producers of the pay-per-show films count on their show bringing in those streaming sales? Oh it's all so complex! |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Well... | |
| Posted by: ryhog 10:14 am EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: Well... - ShowGoer 06:09 am EDT 04/06/21 | |
|
|
|
| I don't find what you wrote snark. I did not limit what I said to Netflix/Disney, but what I was trying to emphasize was the outlets that could produce meaningful coin for a production. I was writing about commercial Broadway productions because that's what Yang was talking about, whereas you seem mostly to be talking about non-profit companies. I think the dynamic, motivation, and economics are almost completely different. I don't think what theatre lovers think about the Mint etc all translates at all, and I would also note that these things are not professionally filmed full productions, nor are they even possible without concessions that will obviously evaporate in short order. Bottom line, I think filming is bad for the theatre because it diminishes/depreciates/imperils the art form. You don't see that, so we have to disagree about that. I also confess that I think Yang adores glib solutions that are ultimately lazy at best. In this particular case, I think his grand solution betrays a lack of familiarity with the subject. Just curious: has anyone ever seen him at the theatre? I haven't. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Well... | |
| Posted by: LynnB 08:16 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Well... - ryhog 10:14 am EDT 04/06/21 | |
|
|
|
| “Bottom line, I think filming is bad for the theatre because it diminishes/depreciates/imperils the art form. ... I also confess that I think Yang adores glib solutions that are ultimately lazy at best. In this particular case, I think his grand solution betrays a lack of familiarity with the subject.” I agree on both counts. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hmmm... | |
| Last Edit: singleticket 09:48 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| Posted by: singleticket 09:47 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Hmmm... - ryhog 08:37 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| It does feel glib. The Deadline article actually organizes the material better than Yang's proposal. That was nice of Deadline. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| There’s a lot of broadway shows | |
| Posted by: dramedy 06:56 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
| In reply to: Hmmm... - MockingbirdGirl 06:52 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| That I’d be willing to pay $25 or higher especially plays. If they found a way to do it regionally so tristate couldn’t stream but others could might be a workable model also. For tourist like me, it’s not worth the hotel and food for a day to see a mediocre play or musical—the combination could cost several hundred dollars. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| I can't imagine this being viable unless streaming films are released *after* the show closes in NYC (or even 1st tour) | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 09:23 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: There’s a lot of broadway shows - dramedy 06:56 pm EDT 04/05/21 | |
|
|
|
| Producers (and many others) are banking on you knowing that you might have a worthwhile experience in a theater seeing the show live, one you're willing to role the dice and dollars on. If people start to know that many shows they might pay to see live are available streaming at the same time or soon after, I think a LOT of people will choose to save their money and watch at home. And while watching a filmed production is better than not at all, it is a usually a severely compromised experience of the show and production compared to what chemistry or theater energy magic might mix to give you a good experience. You're far more likely, I assume, to give a show a *second* chance for $25 streaming, or see something you missed entirely on stage. Also, as a tourist are you often finding yourself flying and hoteling for *one* show? No you're likely seeing 3-9 shows at least in your visit. Each show is still going to want a chance at taking one of those slots. I do not want to get to a world where Broadway shows play 3 months to qualify for awards and to get the film done and then move on because it's way cheaper to sell the video and too many people don't bother paying for tickets. I'd say the show has to close in nyc, or at least have been running a full year or two first, and probably a tour has gone out, before producers will want the streaming film out there to anyone with a screen and a chair. And while I assume for people who love live theater, this may not impact them much because they know the magic of being there live even if they don't like the show... I know for sure there are shows I wouldn't have seen, which were magic for me live but wouldn't have been on video. And also for most people, i think, even a well made stage film is distanced and boring and not like it is live... in many ways I don't think it will help sell the show to the audience. I dunno... it's tricky to pull off well, and expensive. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I can't imagine this being viable unless streaming films are released *after* the show closes in NYC (or even 1st tour) | |
| Posted by: ryhog 11:03 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
| In reply to: I can't imagine this being viable unless streaming films are released *after* the show closes in NYC (or even 1st tour) - Chazwaza 09:23 pm EDT 04/06/21 | |
|
|
|
| good thoughts here and in your other post I read . I think we also have to remember that we are not typical in relation to any of this and that factors in. I think also about the shows that open, run 3 months and close. "We" all had time to see them, but nobody else paid them much mind. Why would we expect them to be more interested on streaming? It's not like there is a shortage of choices. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.070704 seconds.