Opera House of Wax
“Ms. Zambello’s production has plenty of 3-D-friendly texture. The opening scene includes women standing next to a trough of water, dipping their hair in and flinging it back, spraying the stage with water. A real donkey, chicken and black stallion appear. Two acrobats dance and flip across the stage. Confetti flies and ribbons wave. Cast members light cigarettes and warm themselves by real fires; others rappel down the orange-hued city walls.” [Wall Street Journal]
I wonder if people realize that live productions actually take place in 3-D?
Some are too stupid to care. They think anything that can be characterized as new technology is an improvement.
The performance was sold to Friends at prices about 20% of the normal level, but I cannot see how in practice they could do this regularly especially in old horse shoe style theatre like Covent Garden. Important parts of the action were invisible as the soloist emoted into the huge wide screen boom mounted cameras.
The intermittent appearance of the black clad cam operator, like some hi-tech insect, was like some post modern gloss on the excesses of the production.
About 20% of the normal level (i.e., around GBP 35 per seat), or about 20% above the normal level? The former makes sense.
It’s a pity this technology won’t be used to capture Achim Freyer’s L.A. Ring cycle. To judge from descriptions, a conventional taping for home viewing purposes couldn’t have captured its particular virtues, and I’d have been a lot more interested in seeing it on the big screen in 3D than yet another Carmen.
SF Guy, the more I learn about the Ring Cycle, the more I’d like to see the L.A. Ring. I’m convinced that Wagner’s masterwork would survive the treatment.
Cruz–I’m sure the Ring can survive a lot of treatments, from cardboard rocks to laser swords. If you’re currently into Ring research, I recommend Shaw’s The Perfect Wagnerite, which I find both perceptive and very entertaining. As to video versions, I think the first one is still the best, the 1980 Patrice Chereau/Pierre Boulez production from Bayreuth, with Gwyneth Jones as Brunnhilde. It uses a combination of traditional and 19th century costuming, to suggest the industrial age issues that Wagner was commenting upon behind the myths; it’s strange to think that when it premiered, this production was highly controversial.
Thanks, SF Guy.
I’m going to put in a word for the Kupfer/Barenboim Ring. The Chereau is well directed and well conducted, but Jones is a drawback for me, and I haven’t wanted to go back to it. Evans is a smaller-scaled Brünnhilde in every way, but easier on my ears, and Tomlinson is a wonderful Wotan, even better than McIntyre I’d say. The rest of the casts are roughly equal on balance, though I think Secunde is an exceptionally moving Sieglinde, and Elming is a hunk and has been directed to bring out Siegmund’s feral, “wolfy” aspect in a way you won’t see elsewhere. Both Siegfrieds give it a good try, at least, and here too, I find Jerusalem marginally superior. There are some longueurs, letdowns and missteps in both cases. Kupfer and Barenboim lapse most notably in the last scene of Siegfried, a real disappointment. On the other hand, Kupfer’s weird green Rhine water is superb!
You can find fair-sized chunks of both Rings on Youtube and compare for yourself. (What a fun project!)
I’ll try to attend these Finishing School lessons in private.
What a shame that the ENO production was not filmed. “The Cubic Ring” as it was nicknamed back then, looks impressive on pictures, and the singing is top notch.
How bizarre that the ROH declined to comment on the filming. The filming sounds too intrusive for the audience actually in the house. I hope they received a discount for the performance.
Accordomg to Strephon above, they paid 20% extra for the privilege of blocked sightlines. I’d love to know how management convinced the high rollers that this was a must-see (figuratively speaking) performance.
That’s “According” of course. (Bad right hand!)
No SFguy – they paid 80% less than usual. The prices were slashed to 20% of their usual value. I don’t think this Carmen revival has been selling too well anyway.
You’re right–I misread Strephon’s post. Thanks for the correction!
Were there any singers? Other than a passing reference to the fact that they were young I saw no mention. But I suppose if the concept is good enough you can do opera without singers nowadays.
Bryan Hymel, who discussed having to sing and dial back the size of the gestures in the face of close cameras, is a singer.
You know? There was a time when Glyndebourne would just close the house, set the stage and bring the cameras onto the stage to film the action. If I am not wrong, their Traviata video with Marie McLaughlin was filmed just like that; with the cameras mingling in the stage while the singers did their thing.
Wasn’t the ENO Cesare filmed “Live” in studio conditions? Live singing and live orchestra by no audience, actually, not even at the opera, but at a sound studio? Any other ENO or Glyndefourne videos filmes just like that?
If stuff like this is going to be recorded, why not take the time to then record it at a time when the audience will not be bothered?
A very small thing: hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars, that’s why.
wow, what a detailed explanation. i am at a loss for words to thank you for the time to actually sharing your expertise. Thank you.
Well, there’s more to it that that, yes. I always think it’s apparent when a production is filmed without an audience. No matter how strong the performances (I’m thinking the Boulez/Chereau Ring, e.g.) there’s something a little cold and uninvolved without the public in place.
The 3D filming is an experiment, with the understanding that the audience will have their view blocked a significant part of the time: that’s why the tickets are so deeply discounted, almost complimentary. More standard relays of live performances like the Met’s HD telecasts are not nearly so intrusive — and, presumably, as technology continues to improve, the cameras will grow smaller and less visible.
well, cieca Carissima, i understand that, but then, taking away the fact that there are people who actually think it cool to be able to brag about I was there when it was filmed (even if i wasn’t able to see jack shit). I think there could be a better way to film these performances than making people pay to not be able to see anything.
Yes, there is an artificial or sanitized aura about them but then, opera was not meant for video, so there already is an artificiality about opera on video.
How about filming several dress rehearsals that are open to the public (even if it is invited public) so the filming feels more like a performance to the performers and you can use these filming as a way to make your patrons feel all important.
I understand the thousands on top of thousands, but if we are going to actually film in 3-d (and want it to work), then I am not sure actual performances are the best way to go, given the camera angles that will be needed for the 3-d experience to work for the audience in the theater.
Doing it in front of a paying audience will hurt the paying audience (in theory) and not using good 3-d angles will hurt the people in the theater (and DVD sales) I am not sure how the 2 can be married into one evening; at least right now. I agree with you that as cameras get smaller, they will be less intrusive.
Just saying…
A compromise approach was used for the Australian Opera/Luhrmann Boheme; the performance was fully recorded with an audience, but additional filming of the intimate scenes was done to allow special lighting and closer camera placement. Perhaps something similar could be used to adjust for the special needs of 3D.
This approach has also been used to record several stage performances, including the RSC Nicholas Nickleby and the National Theatre Oklahoma! with Hugh Jackman. It can be a tricky proposition, however–the response of the unseen audience seems to appear and disappear at will in Oklahoma!, and the now-you-hear-’em, now-you-don’t gets unsettling after awhile.
BTW, I find the absence of the audience in the Boulez/Chereau Ring far less bothersome than those overhead camera angles in the Met version, which take us completely away from an audience perspective. Not really sure why I find it so much more distancing, but there it is.
I had no idea the Chereau Ring had been filmed without an audience.
Lindoro–My first exposure to the Chereau Ring was when PBS aired it on the installment plan as part of the Great Performances series (back in those halcyon pre-Riverdance, pre-Self-Help-Guru days). I remember there being a Making-Of.. documentary that aired at the time, describing the filming process and commenting upon the lack of an audience. Maybe it’s because the conception is analytical and a shade detached to begin with, but the absence of an audience hasn’t lessened my enjoyment one bit.
I think also that with the Carmen in particular part of the idea is to capture the “you are there in the posh Royal Opera House” feeling, which means shots of the audience arriving, applause and so forth, the better to make it seem like an event. I remember reading that the HD audiences seem to like more rather than less reminding that they are witnessing a live performance with audience rather than something staged just for cameras. The model would seem to be the rock concert film, where, again, there’s a strong sense of the presence of a live audience.
A lot of the audience for opera on video is people who don’t go to the opera house all that often or at all, and so maybe for them, the clear reminder of the presence of the live audience helps them to feel more like they are “going to the opera.”
If I remember correctly, the procedure for filming (or videotaping) operas at Bayreuth was to wait until the festival finished, then pull out all the seats in the auditorium and install the recording equipment in the open space. Then each day the company would perform a single act of the opera twice. I assume that there was a bit of extra time budgeted to get pickup shots that were missed in the two attempts, or to re-record musical sections that might have gone awry. (For sure that was done in the Tristan from the 1980s, because Rene Kollo lipsynchs most of the third act.)
To record the entire Ring would have taken something under two weeks, then.
I’m surprised you can’t hear the acoustic of the empty house, definitely brighter and more lively than the mellower sound of the fully populated Festspielhaus.
The Meistersinger and Tristan from the last couple of years were taped in the more standard “you are there” manner, with a live audience present.
Perhaps to make up for the blocked visuals that filming in front of a live audience entails, how about providing dvds after the fact. That way, the opera has a live audience to add a frison and the audience gets to see what it missed.
Sanford – good idea – 3D-DVDs still under construction, though.
I went to the filming – from where I was sitting, you could always look at the monitors if you missed some shots, and many of them were well worth missing.
There were ominous notices everywhere (and on the tickets) to warn that you were being filmed and might appear on screens all over the globe, and so some people had obviously dressed for the occasion (fascinators, evening dress, but also jeans and singlets). I had carefully positioned myself behind the cameras and ducked when they turned towards me).
It was a ho-hum performance, with a decidedly C cast, but I bet the donkey looks good in 3D.
And yes – the atmosphere is quite different if the filming takes place in front of an audience.
Lindoro – if faulty memory serves, in the early 1980s PBS actually showed studio-centric English-language productions of Macbeth (Particia Johnson as the Lady) and Cosi (with Hampson among the cast members), which I assume originated in the UK.
The Cosi was a Miller production for the BBC. Ashley Putnam, Jean Rigby, Rosie Ashe, Antony Rolfe-Johnson, Hampson, and John Rawnsley.
I think the economics will rule out anything but taping live performances these days. The luxuries that existed for Bayreuth 30 years ago are probably long gone. America is dealing with decreased ticket sales and donor contributions, Germany long has been spending money on reunification that was not an issue in 1980, the arts in the UK will facing some challenging budget cuts given the developments of last week, we’ve all read hear about the problems in Italy, etc. Plus union regulations have only grown stricter and expensive with time (no union ever grows more lenient). So the cost of filming special recording sessions (with or without audiences) plus the decline in income just doesn’t add up. I can’t see us ever returning to the past on this issue.