BackStage Utah

luvbeefcakes wrote on Mar 9^th, 2008 at 9:19pm:

(Emphasis mine.  //Wildcard)

Don't wish to pick on luvbeefcakes, so I won't, but this raises aninteresting point...  suppose there is a show that opens, and you've never heard of it.  Matter of fact, nobody in the area seems to have heard of it, and there's been very little "buzz" and no "leaks" about the production.

So.  Would you go see a show you know nothing about?  Why or why not?  If not, what would somehow compel you to go?

Discuss.

Quote:


The only times I go to a show of which I've heard nothing about is if I knew from SOMEONE (say a review?) that one of the principals gives a stellar performance. �I'd go to watch and learn from them. �But that's just me. �This was the case with Vertical Hour at Pioneer. �Awesome performances from ALL the cast....

....and the tickets were free.

I'll go and see shows that I know nothing about (at least production wise) if It's from an author I know, or directed by someone I respect.  However, I've done that with certain companies in this town, and have been both pleasantly surprised and shockingly appaled by what I've seen.  However as performing artists we should strive to see as much theatre as we can and try to support everyone, no matter how weird we think their concept is or how lacking the talent pool is in the show.

There is a strong tendency for some folks in our community (and no LUVBEEFCAKES, I'm not singling you out) to be negative about everything unless it comes from their own creative instincts.  I for instance have loved some stuff that I've seen where other people have hated it, and vice-versa.  Remember Opinions are like A##holes, everyone has one.

Quote:


Uh, oh....I just realized that the majority of the shows I saw last year were on comp tickets.

kitchensinger wrote on Mar 10^th, 2008 at 10:56am:

You know, I don't think anyone has ever given me comp tickets for a show they're in.  I've gotten comps for future shows at theaters I've worked at, but I generally haven't used them because either: a) I had absolutely no interest in seeing the show, or b) I was bitter because I wasn't cast in the show.  (yes, I know that's a little childish.  But I figure it's better than going to see the show and then griping about how much better I would have been--which probably wouldn't be true, anyway).  That doesn't mean I don't see shows.  It also doesn't mean I pay to see them.  It means I get my parents to take me.  Which is way more pitful than using comps.  Hm... my parents are going on vacation again next month... wonder if that means I get any of their season tickets this time...

Oh, right.  On topic.  For a show I know nothing about, I'm most likely to go see it if someone I know and like is in it.  And if it's a comedy.  I don't use my leisure time and spending money to see something depressing or thought-provoking.  I prefer to be entertained.

Not a lot ofpeople give me comps to their shows, either. Most local theaters are pretty stingy with comps, and a lot of people, like me, can really only comp their immediate families. Irely on comps accrued at the theaters where I work.

kitchensinger wrote on Mar 10^th, 2008 at 12:39pm:

A wise person knows things.  A shrewd person knows people.

Quote:

Sure.... but it would expedite my decision if nudity, sexiness and gutter language were involved.

Speaking from first-hand experience.... Utah is a crap market for the new, unconventional and/or buzzless. This is not to say that "this is the place" is the only place largely peopled by feckless and fearful, lemminglike mall-zombies who would rather the tepid familiarity of an Applebee's potato-puck and a Drew Barrymore movie...... but there certainly is more than enough along the Wasatch (and overflowing the cashboxes at the Hale theaters).

spiker wrote on Mar 10^th, 2008 at 9:39pm:


To a well outside the mainstream, niche-demographic.

mr. spiker wrote on Mar 10^th, 2008 at 11:13pm:


Sometimes I wonder if it IS insurmountable, though. �I think that's why you see the same shows over and over...and "new-old" sells. �It's so tough to carve out a new niche when it comes to the arts. �The more sophisticated stuff just doesn't seem to be in demand. �Why is it that Utah Symphony and Opera can sell-out the Capital Theatre for heavy rep operas, but when a new start-up company puts on lighter, more crowd-pleasing operas, no one comes? �They're using the same media channels...radio, print, TV news press releases. �There's DEFINITELY a barrier to entry when it comes to new rep AND new companies. �I think that if theatres want to specialize in more obscure, unknown stuff, they're going to have to do some serious creative marketing.

One idea I have is for a company that wants to specialize in lesser-known stuff to somehow do a "merger" with a more established company with a solid market base. �Kind-of like a "branding" if you will. �This way the market from the established parent company can feed into the company with newer rep. �They could share marketing, and even offer both theatres on season ticket sales, for example.

I just don't think the normal media channels are enough. �The only market right now for new rep is performers who can appreciate the stuff. �And that's no good cuz we all go for comp tickets.

Tshep wrote on Mar 11^th, 2008 at 8:24am:


I very much agree with this. Utah audiences don't seek out an individual show,they seek out a one-stop shop for all their theatre needs.This is whyI'd like to see the successful theatres with built-in audiences take more risks.

Of course, you're not going to see Hale do"Hedwig and the Angry Inch". But there are many ways to be new, different and interesting.

Tshep wrote on Mar 11^th, 2008 at 8:24am:

I'm still failing to grasp this.

If you want to do shows that aren't mainstream, that are new and unconventional ... what other choice is there but to target a niche market? I fail to see how the Utah market is different than any other - Little Mermaid is outgrossing Passing Strange, I expect. Only a small percentage of people will support anything outside the "mainstream", which is why it's called "mainstream".

You can stomp your feet and hold your breath until the mall-zombies suddenly start begging for a production of August: Osage County at the Hale. Or you can find another audience.

Perhaps there's some middle ground where the theatre is neither "mass-market" nor "outsider"?

mr. spiker wrote on Mar 11^th, 2008 at 9:38am:


I think new rep companies need to find a way to broaden the demand for new shows...not just find a niche. �I don't think a theatre can survive that way. �So motivating people to check out the shows is going to take strategy, like we discussed. �

I agree that US&O's market IS entrenched. �This is the lesson I think new companies can learn. �Remember the controversial merger a while back between the symphony and opera? �I wish I could get a hold of the change in ticket sales for the opera before and after the merge. �It would be interesting to see what that merger did for their sales. �I think we can also learn a lesson from this idea of "entrenchment" and "social strata."

Now back to the question about what's in it for the parent company. �Well, for one...I would think that people in the theatre business-for-the-masses are still very open to new rep. �Infact, I'll bet they're itching for it...but they feel they need to do shows that sell tickets. �I think they would be VERY open to the idea of starting a "farm team" just to get their hands into new stuff. � I also think the new rep, ESPECIALLY if it is challenging, would only add to the perceived level of overall quality and "professionalism" of the theatre. �And with some shrewd marketing, they could get their entrenched patrons convinced that only the very sophisticated, intelligent, and cultured patrons buy the season ticket package that includes the "new rep farm team." �This is kind-of the strategy with the "chamber series" with Utah Symphony.

You ask what motivates us to see a new show. �Well, performers are apart from the crowd. �We're going to go for the passion of it and the education. �But when we're talking ticket sales....you have to talk emotional advertising. �Speak to the patron's ego...and start with thosen entrenched audiences.

OK, I've mentioned this before. �I'll do it again. �The place to start this movement is in Sugarhouse, I tell you!!!!!

That Granite Furniture store SHOULD NOT be an office highrise. �It should be a theater!! �It's a monument and a perfect location to start a movement like this up. �And the area's SO trendy and totally bustling on the weekends but the only thing to do after dinner is to go to the stupid dollar theater.

The residents in the area would embrace this....and the folks who come from far and near....

I tell you...if you build it those Phillistines will come....well, maybe as a co-op with a theater like Hale...

Quote:

The new topic being...  a cultural critique of Utah?  Fair enough, but for the most part, these replies do address the fundamental question of how to attract an audience (albeit, I phrased it from the opposite perspective).

Quote:


I agree with this, and expand it to the broader notion that my estimation of a company's ability to handle their material is an important motivation. Sometimes knowing your limitations is good.

Combination of artists and material is a big motivator. If Ron Jewett is directing "Man of La Mancha", I know I want to see it.

Thinking about,so many of the shows I've paid to since the mid to late 90s in the have held the same appeal/motivation for me: "there's this girl in the cast . . ." (the girl in question has changed several times).

Although that actually did lead me to a FEW good ones, I hereby cross that off my list of reasons to see a show,and I resolve to see more plays for better reasons

I just wanted to toss in here. The idea that Utah is a "provincial" and "uncultured" area i think is a fallacy. If you listen to the voices we have even heard in this thread, it proves the point that there is culture and appreciation for all levels of the arts here. I think the biggest issue with unknown or buzz-less shows is simply appeal factors. No different then artsy film verses big blockbuster. No one is saying that one doesn't furthers the medium more than the other, but they both serve their function. And what is out-stream today becomes mainstream tomorrow. I think it is good that there are those that are fascinated with the avant garde, things discovered in their often become the basis for the art of tomorrow, but I also don't think that peoples apparent lack of interest in the strange or unsual fare of the theatre world means they are somehow incapable of appreciating it.

I agree with those who have stated that local theatres with well established audience base can go further in their education of their audiences by giving them new and fresh takes on old materials as well as the occasional unknown piece of theatre. But cult followings of unheard of shows, and the avant garde will never achieve the same popularity as "mainstream" because if it did it would cease to be what it claims to be: "edgey" you have to be on the fringe to be that, not in the heart of the populace.

For me storytelling is the biggest thing to motivate me to go to a show, and is also the determining factor in if I enjoy it or not. Does the show tell a story i want to hear? If it does i will go, if it doesn't i wont. If it does it well i will go again and this time bring other people. I rarely go see a show just because I have free tickets or time, I am picky I guess. For example don't ask me to go and sit through "Footloose" or "Cats" or "South Pacific" or... well the list goes on, those are just shows with stories that i don't care to hear or see...and i don't care if my mom is in them or my best friend Directed it.

As for the hypothesis that no one knows anything about it...that alone is quite a bit of buzz, and I would go see it. I would try just about anything once i guess.