National Theatre

glenis burgess

2 October 2009,07:35 am

Saw Alls Well at Harrogate last night, saw Phaedra a few months ago.

I felt after Phaedra and after last night that the filming is really denying us the theatrical experience - if I want cllose-ups I'll watch the tv because the majoroity of the filming lst night gave us close-ups against a black background - apart from the quality of the acting it could have been amdram.

Surely the whole essence of seeing a live performance is that you see the characters and action in its context - the world created by the concept of director/designer/lighting designer in which the interpretationof the script happens, yet so often we were denied this in both NT Live screenings- for instance last night after the shaming of Parolles, the camera drew back slightly and we could see these wonderful colours on the backdrop - great orangy red and blue - where did they come from, when did they come in, why, what was that lighting change saying about the action in front of it - I'll never know because I never saw it. It was so good to see the whole stage and the placing and shape of the placing of the cast on the few occasions when the cameras did draw back and such a relief to get away from close-ups.

Please please please have the courage over the next NT live and trust the conceptual and imaginative capacity of your audience to give us the whole theatrical experience - yes, I agree with what was said on Phaedra that it should not be just a fixed camera at the back of the stalls, but give us some of the theatricality of the night.

PS can you also do something about the interview with Nicholas Hytner at the beginning - can you not have a real interviaewer who knows how the use an autocue - both Jeremy Irons and Alex Jennings looked really shifty trying to look at the autocue and remember what was on it.

John Casson

2 October 2009,11:53 am

I was moved by the production of All's Well and grateful for the broadcast: whatever it's imperfections without the filming I just would not have seen it. Well done and keep doing this!!!

That said STOP immediately having silly interviews before the two halves. If you feel you must talk do so only at the beginning and introduce the play WITHOU TELLING US THE STORY. You could give us some interesting background, like the date it was written and the source and other historical details we might not know.

As one of the researchers into the authorship question and the discovery of Henry Neville as the real writer behind the front man/pseudonym "William Shakespeare" I was struck how this play mirrored Neville's release from the Tower of London in 1603: how the title, themes and characters (such as the shamed wordy fool courtier Parolles) mirrored Neville's situation as a disgraced courtier (due to his involvement in the Essex Rebellion). It was also interesting to realise how it foreshadowed the last plays about forgiveness of shamed men. As a puppeteer I welcome the NT using shadow puppets (as well as the wonderful puppets in War Horse). One design point however is that using too much black makes it difficult to see characters who are wearing black...

Over all this is a development to be welcomed and I hope we will later see all the productions as those of us who have difficulty in coming to London or for whom you do not tour to other cities at least get a chance to see the plays.

Stephanie Ferguson

2 October 2009,1:46 pm

I also went to Harrogate last night and agree that the introduction from Alex Jenning was shocking: all swivelly eyes to autocue and folded arms. Either send him to media training or use a professional presenter. The interview before Act 2 was also a mistake and it blocked the flow of the play.

It was a pacy production with slick multi-media injections, but the set was a lift from Gormenghast and the costumes Tenniel's Alice. Not sure about the panto-style fifties frocks for the Florentines or the pussy-cat seduction outfits staright out of a lap-dancing club. Did she really have to suck his finger??!!

Also why alter the Bard? In my complete works it's the Countess of Rousillon. Why anglicise to Rossillion? It'll be Hamlet Prince of Norway next.

Clare Higgins was outstanding as the Countess and Conletth Hilll's camp Parolles a hoot: part Meatloaf, part Malvolio with a hint of John Inman. It will never replace being in the theatre, but it was a good night out. Drinks in the interval, please.

Peter Kussell

2 October 2009,2:40 pm

This is more a question for Shakespearean specialists out there....I found in the first act Helen was almost paraphrasing the lines from Julius Caesar, but using them in a positive, transformative sense:

"Men at some time are masters of their fates: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings". - (Act I, Scene II).

Helen's lines come almost at the same moment time-wise (end of Act 1) as in AWTEW:

"Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie

Which we ascribe to heaven. The fated sky

Gives us free scope, only doth backward pull

Our slow designs when we ourselves are dull." (I, 1: 218-221)

I found Helen in the play last night said these rhymed lines with great optimism and a positive attitude, unlike the cynicism of JC.

Thoughts of others out there?

Many thanks,

Peter

John Bramley

2 October 2009,2:32 pm

I saw the show last night at Warwick University Arts Centre in Coventry. There were no technical glitches, as far as I could tell. It was an enjoyable experience. The production itself was clear and all of a piece and made absolute sense. What an unusual experience to sit in a cinema and hear every word!

The introduction needs to be done more professionally. Did we need the actors' views? You don't get them when you go to the theatre. I found the interviews with the director and designer fascinating, but they interfered with the flow of the evening, and were too much like the TV, particularly the second one. Why weren't such interviews included in the programme (on sale here last night)? Much more interesting really than the academic articles.

Please avoid big close-ups in future - too filmy and one loses other characters' reactions or even, apparently, beautiful lighting effects. Sometimes when there 3 characters on stage the camera focused on the 2 who were speaking, but the third's reactions are crucial. What were Diana's reactions to the scheming of her mother and this bossy young French lady? We needed to see all three. This was one of the main faults of the filming.

We got little idea of the overall effect of the set and staging; more views from the auditorium would have helped, although I realise the vastness of the Olivier stage makes this difficult. Perhaps some of the limitations found in filming opera are not limitations after all. Aerial shots are just showing off.

Anyway, this is a great way to bring the NT to the nation. I am looking forward to seeing more, and better filmed, if that is not too arrogant a sentiment) shows.

Colette King

2 October 2009,4:18 pm

Two points:

1 We saw the production at Didsbury in Manchester and the sound was badly out of synch at the start - improved slighty during the performance but was not as clear as Phedra that was perfect in both sound and vision when we saw the play at the same cinema.

2 I think the interviews before and during the performance help to set the scene and flesh out the production concepts - keep it up.

If the poor quality of last nights sound was due to the theatre not the feed and one production was superb yet the second flawed - what can one do when the play has started - only hope that Cineworld staff keep their eye on the ball amd learn some lessons for January.

Jo Ann Warren

2 October 2009,4:08 pm

Completely enjoyed last evening's transmission of All's Well here in Toronto with friends.

The mis-fire with the whole opening section was a bit long but it was worth it to see GBH on film - twice! All other technical worked excellent on our end - the secadas definitely warmed us up on a chilly Autumn evening!

As community theatre people we just loved the preshow and intermission interviews with the Director and Designer. Brilliant to get 'inside their heads' and then see their thinking brought to life - as soon as Rae Smith said 'Mervyn Peake' the light bulb went off for me and it was 'but of course that's what I'm looking at'!

It's always such a wonderful opportunity to continue our learning from the very best and in this instance an opportunity we probably would never have were it not for NTLive!

My one minor flaw was that in contrast to Phèdre this was much more a 'film' production with lots of CUs and ECUs which do take away from the 'grand stage' theatrical experience as well as not letting you see the other characters reactions to the speaker.

Thank you for what I'm sure are tons of hours of hard work to provide us with these wonderful evenings at the theatre.

Well done and we can't wait for the next two shows!

Cheers

David Sabel

2 October 2009,4:59 pm

Hello everyone and welcome to the NT Live web chat! I am the producer of NT Live. We Hope you enjoyed last night's show and are thrilled to see a number of comments and questions already populating this forum. Marianne and Robin are here and we will endeavour to answer as many questions as possible in the time we have. Please ask away and don't forget to refresh your browser to see new posts!

Thanks for joining us...

Chris King

2 October 2009,4:31 pm

I watched the Live relay of 'All's Well That Ends Well' last night at Aberystwyth Arts Centre, HD + Dolby Digital (5.1?). (They have also relayed live opera from The Met - picture and sound quality excellent).

I enjoyed the performance from the NT, but the sound quality was generally rather poor and this did rather spoil the experience.

Most of the actors were fitted with personal mics - very well hidden, but many had severe lack of top, somewhat muffled. I guess that some actors 'shared' mics. Probably a nightmare to mix.

I am not suggesting that I could have done any better - obviously a difficult live performance to cover (with personals, costume changes etc.) and essential not to miss any lines! I don't wish to unfairly criticise the sound supervisor (Andy Rose), but for me it didn't work.

As the second experimental live relay from the National (I missed Phaedra) and the 'cinema' audience was 'expecting' to share the live experience of the audience in the Olivier Theatre - a large auditorium (in my experience) very good acoustically. The theatre atmosphere was completely lacking except for the audience applause.

I don't know how much experimentation preceded the decision to use personals, but I would have expected 'open' mics to have produced a more acceptable 'experience'. If the theatre audience could hear all the words (presumably without sound reinforcement) then so should the 'TV' / cinema audience.

Of course one should also take into account the camera coverage - should the sound perspective match the pictures? - somewhere there has to be a compromise.

In this case the close up 'sometimes poor quality, claustrophobic sound, though audible, did not always match the pictures and in my opinion was neither good TV / film sound nor good live theatre sound.

Open mics might be more risky, the perspective might not be correct for close ups, but (I think) I would have felt that I was in the theatre rather than a 'box'.

The camera coverage (Dir: Robin Lough) was also (obviously) a compromise and I am probably not qualified to comment accept as a 'viewer'. My main feeling was that there were insufficient wide shots to remind us that this was a stage production, not a film or TV production.

I am NOT suggesting a fixed wide shot of the stage, but an overall 'looser' feel to the tv/film coverage.

Chris King

Robin Lough

2 October 2009,5:02 pm

Hi Harry Guthrie

Thanks for that question.

The biggest challenge of filmng All's Well was the theatre itself. Filming on a thrust stage is considerably harder than filming a proscenium arch production. Camera angles are much more critical and whereas Phedre had a set that suited film aspect ratio, All's Well was a much more vertical production. Other than that, the challenges were very similar on both productions.

Robin Lough

2 October 2009,5:17 pm

Hi Judi Finklestein

So pleased you enjoyed the production. Last time I saw All's Well was in Stratford in the 1960s and, like you, being involved in this production revived my love of what's best in Shakespeare.

Marianne Elliott

2 October 2009,5:20 pm

@Frank Wicks

thank you! - it's great to read your comments. All's Well shouldn't really be seen as a problem play. it has its difficuculties, but so do a lot of Shakespeare's plays!

Robin Lough

2 October 2009,5:20 pm

Hi everyone

I see that you all have a lot of questions about the choice of camera angles. Working on a thrust stage like the Olivier, really narrows the options on where you can put cameras. Also, because of the steep rake of the seating, setting any cameras further back means that the eye lines between cameras don't match. I used 4 cameras across the front of the stage and one camera crane to cover the action. I don't think I could have visualised this story any better had I had more. Every production poses different challenges for a video director, and I hope that we answered most of them in the way we covered All's Well.

Simon Basketter

2 October 2009,5:21 pm

The publicity for these performances is an issue here in the UK too. You have to stumble across the listings for this initiative, maybe that could be looked into, there's no poster or information sheet at the cinema and nothing on the night.

Also I would have definitely bought a programme had there been one on sale.

nicola grove

2 October 2009,5:18 pm

I had wanted to see this production so much, and was thrilled not to have to flog up to London expensively, but instead to sit in the comfy seats of the Little Theatre Bath. Of course a filmed version of theatre can't be the same, and a lot is missed, but I loved every minute. As a storyteller, working with folk tale is my stock in trade and I found all the design references were a homage rather than derivative. Agree that sound quality was muffled. Claire Holman and OFD wonderful of course, Michelle Terry absolutely luminous.

I quite liked the interviews, agree that Alex Jennings needs some media training but as I love him as an actor I kind of didn't mind, it was quite touching. Note to Rae Smith, this is a bit sad, but you are wrong about the pilgrimage route going off track. The route she took is fFROM Santiago TO Rome and it goes through Haut Provence just near Rousssillon (I walked a stretch of it this

summer).

re the play itself, I love these late period comedies and find it so interesting the way the themes of resilient morally good heroines are let down by the callow men just recur and are replayed with variations. The change from France to Italy reminded me too of Winters Tale. So I thought the design was really grounded in a solid understanding of the late plays. I was moved by the references to war and Helena's wonderful soliloquy praying that the bullets would miss her lover - how many girls all over the world are echoing that sentiment now.

Hope it will be released eventually on DVD, I want to watch it again!

Meg Gale

2 October 2009,5:22 pm

We saw AWTEW at Winchester Screen last night having enjoyed Phèdre previously. As regular theatre goers we welcome the opportunity of being able to see plays screened locally and at a fraction of the cost. It is a very different experience to being in the theatre as many others have commented, but then that goes without saying. The quality of filming in both broadcasts has been superb and what you get from this format is the chance to see the actors up close. Even in the front row at the theatre you cannot do that! The quality of the acting really shows through in close up. With Phèdre the only fault I would say was the problem with lip-sync. Not so last night. It was all perfect. The set was fantastic and magical.

I have not seen AWTEW before and I felt setting it as a fairy tale was a brilliant idea and worked very well. Having seen it on screen I would love to have come to see it again at the Olivier, so perhaps with future screenings you allow for the opportunity to do so rather than screen at the end of the run. Screening may be an excellent way of encouraging people to make the trip up to London to see the show.

Do you have any plans to release Phèdre or AWTEW on DVD through the NT bookshop? I would love to own copies of both performances. I think they would make excellent teaching aids too. They would make a good replacement for the now sadly dated BBC Shakespeare of the 1970s.

Well done and thank you for making this experience available to so many people.

Robin Lough

2 October 2009,5:30 pm

Hi Frank Wicks

When we set out to do these live theatre relays, we wanted to make it clear that what we were doing was not cinema, and not theatre, but a live relay of a theatrical event. Whether it's a new genre I'm not sure. But, so far, audiences have responded very positively to the experience and are excited by the thought that what they're seeing is being performed live on the stage.

Peter Kussell

2 October 2009,5:36 pm

Re: DVDs Nicola Grove's and Simon Basketter's comments: Well really, if you believe DVDs on a little box with no people in the audience, no simultaneity with the event as it happens... and the kettle boiling...really,,,

My point is there are a lot of good people who would love to see it but who just were too busy with their lives, people in theatre and university...I know some...so there are 1000s more...And why not pick up the added £££s and publicity for the future! Let's not forget the residuals from DVDs which American films make to cover their expenses...

Marianne Elliott

2 October 2009,5:46 pm

@jane smith:

finally! - i get to do a show in New York! i am so excited that you saw it and liked it - who needs Broadway?!

Jeff Maxwell

2 October 2009,5:45 pm

A big thanks to all involved!

My question is about publicising.

NT now join Glyndebourne, Royal Opera / Ballet, and I think the Globe? And ENO? Not to mention the Met from New York in this form. Do you see yourselves in competition or do you intend to join together in promoting the experience as widely as possible?

The point is, more people must know in advance of these one-off events. Nothing could be worse than going to all that trouble (in your case mounting a special performance to get the cameras in) only to discover it playing to empty houses. Promote! Promote!

David Sabel

2 October 2009,5:51 pm

@ Chris, no definitely! thanks for your feedback, we are still piloting this and it's good to know. glad you are looking forward to Nation and Habit -- enjoy!

@Peter Allred, very sorry to hear there were problems in manchester. i will certainly take this up with the venue. again, the majority of our 320 venues all experienced an excellent transmission, so i am very sorry for those who didn't.

nicola grove

2 October 2009,5:52 pm

me again.

as a live theatre addict of course a dvd is no substitute, what do you take me for??? but there are some productions that you do want to bottle and revist because they make you think about the meaning, and its meaning in your own life. and I want my granddaughters to see it.

When i played hermione 40 years ago at university I was taken to task for being too bleak at the end. All of these plays leave a question mark over the development of the relationships - isabella and the duke, helena and bertram, hermione and leontes, hero and claudio. and so they should! I get the feeling that Shakespeare had lost interest in the characters of young men by this time. . It's the girls all the time who are interesting...

David Sabel

2 October 2009,6:00 pm

@gabriel, really glad you enjoyed. i used to live in nyc and was a regular BAM goer so i'm happy we're there --

couldn't agree more, it's a great play and i think this production proves it. it's tricky and has many troublesome or curious areas in terms of story structure, character motivations, style....which is why it's rarely done, but i think this can only serve to enrich it and give the director and craetive team great freedom.

Marianne Elliott

2 October 2009,5:59 pm

@Gabriel Miller;

I think this is known as a problem play because some of it seems too incongruous. Over the years there have been differing opinions about the characters. Some have said helena is a calculating vixen, some have said Bertram is a callow, worthless youth, others have said that the play is really a story about Parolles, Others have admired the Countess - her warmth and charm - but dismissed the rest of the play.

In rehearsals we certainly found that major aspects of the story happen offstage, which doesn't really help us follow the through lines of the characters. This was why i decided to stage some of them, for example, the bed-swap, which is very difficult to believe, and the wedding of Helena and Bertram.

George Rainsford, the actor who plays Bertram, completely understood why hs character would run away to the wars, but felt he had little chance of portraying that to the audience.

The ending is famously difficult. it seems to be written as a happy ending but it is all tied up so quickly and bertram has two lines to express his change of mind.

The language is possibly one of the most difficult of all Shakespeare plays. It is peppered with words that we simply don't use or know any more.

Lori Ransom

2 October 2009,6:02 pm

Am just delighted by NT's initiative in bringing these performances to people around the world, inc. to my home in Toronto. Have also enjoyed the opportunity to read through the on line postings this afternoon--hope this will continue.

It think it was someone from the west coast of my country who commented on poor turnout. We had a good turnout at one of a few theatres in which it was run in Toronto, though we weren't sold out as similar performances have been. Suspect it's not only the advertising but the fact that many don't know this play.

I want to applaud NT for choosing plays that are not regularly performed at least here in Canada. And I very much look forward to the new plays, The Nation and The Habit of Art--such new offerings can often take years to be offered live on the stages of our country.

Yes the interviews could stand some polish, but am sure you'll work on this. Was good to have some background on the design choices for a play I did not know. Might suggest you run them during the 20 minute interval, instead of after the interval before the second half. Didn't really need to be reminded of the full theatrical experience of standing around the lobby looking aimlessly while waiting to be called back to our seats.

By the way, was privileged to enjoy The Observer this summer life in London. Must get back to work!

Roy Bartolomei

4 October 2009,6:44 pm

We saw the Saturday evening rerun in Boca Raton, Florida.

A play like All's Well is almost never performed in the U.S., so it was wonderful to get up so close to such a marvelous production. I cannot imagine something like this holding on to a movie-theater audience without closeups. This inevitably means closing OFF some of the stage for a time. We agree with Mr. Lough that this format involves compromise. For us, the feeling of a live stage performance was never lost. The balance worked.

About promotion. I realize that the national is still in the process of putting together a network of theaters. A certain amount of trial and error is inevitable. We saw Phedre at a theater 90 minutes north of us. Someone had evidently done some publicity, and of course the Mirren name was a strong selling point. The performance was very well attended (not always easy to achieve in the off season in Florida). A simple cast list and plot summary were handed out to all.

We opted to go to a theater further south for All's Well. This was their first NTLive screening. The only publicity f I'm aware of was an email from NTLive. There was also , I was told, a listing in the local events magazine. The theater had no signage for the performance, not even inside. Only about 20 people attended.

I hope the Boca Theater will not give up on NTLive. Perhaps the National needs to do a little education with participating theaters.

Heather Arlen

10 October 2009,3:43 pm

After scrolling through the comments above I have to say how much I enjoyed your production - from a small city in Southern Ontario Canada, for $20, I (more or less) attended a performance of the National Theatre in London! I was thrilled to have this opportunity. I loved it all! It was so beautifully done, I was in awe. Still am.

I hate it that so many people are spewing out criticisms - as if they are little martinets who cannot 'do' but can only criticize what someone else has done.

I say hurray for all the actors, technicians, directors, producers, and everyone who goes into preparing such a production, and then, wonder of wonders, transmits it around the world.

A heartfelt thank you to you all.

And I can't wait for the next one!

ANDREW nowell

11 October 2009,9:01 pm

Saw the performance in Aldeburgh. We thought it was majic, all of it including the interviews. Of course there were some glitches but what do people expect with a new technique. If only everything could be perfect from the beginning!

It seems churlish to compare the merits of seeing the performance in the theatre with seeing it on the screen. Many of us cannot easiy get to the NT and back home that night.

Keep it up.

David Sabel

15 October 2009,6:03 pm

Dear Heather and all curious as to how NT Live works...

One of the key decisions early on when we decided to do NT Live was to allow total freedom in the auditorium so as to prioritise cameras. Often, when theatre or opera is filmed, the cameras are squeezed into positions where the least amount of paying seats will be lost and they will be least obtrusive to audience views. Unfortunately, this can lead to very static views, cutting from one camera to the next, which adds to the "dead" feel you can encounter with recorded performance.

We wanted to give the cameras freedom and have moving shots -- not in order to create a film, but to capture the performance in the most dynamic way possible. The idea is to communicate as close as we can the excitement of live performance and to honour the design and direction of the stage production in how we capture it on screen.

We hold the house that night off sale until we know where camera platforms will be going. Phedre had 5 cameras -- 2 tracking cameras along a platform at the front, 2 on a platform in the centre stalls and a crane. All's Well had 4 tracking cameras (on 4 separate platforms), a crane and 2 fixed cameras, one that was the wide shot of the auditorium and one that had a fisheye lens, giving a wide, slightly distorted view of the whole stage. Once we know which seats are lost to cameras, we fill every available one remaining, so there is still a full house!

We only charge £10, though, and warn audiences that there may be restricted views. We set up monitors in the auditoirum so the theatre audience can see what cinema audiences are watching. The feel is a bit like a TV studio for the night, where we have prioritised cameras and, thus, audiences watching in cinemas.

On the production side: We hold two full camera rehearsals before an NT Live show. After the first rehearsal, we play back the recording at our friendly neighbours at the British Film Institute to see what it looks and sounds like on the big screen and take notes.

Seeing it up on the cinema screen has been a huge advantage. The camera director and stage director confer and the camera director will do any adjustments to script, camera angles, etc, before going through notes with the cameramen. The rehearsals are full run-throughs -- we don't stop, it's an opportunity for the cameramen to go through the shots and for us to see how it's looking.

The actual filming: the camera setup comes back in for the night of the live recording. The cameras are fed to an outdoor broadcast (OB) truck where the camera director and vision mixer sit, directing and mixing the show live. The OB truck is connected to a satellite uplink truck which takes the feed and beams it up to space. It is then beamed back down where all the cinemas receive the live feed via their own satellite dish and it is decoded and fed through their digital projector. All this is simultaneous!

The broadcast goes out live across the UK and Europe, and in some cases live in North America. The satellite feed is turned around on to a different satellite for North America, whereby the same process at the cinema end happens. Many venues in North America choose to show the broadcast several hours delayed, in order to accomodate the difference in time zones. Where it is not possible to show it live due to time zones or technical constraints, the recording is shown.

And that's pretty much how it all happens. Hope it all makes sense and you've found it interesting. It's a very challenging and exciting process and we are learning so much with each new production.

We continue to try new things and will always do so -- I suspect we'll never be entirely satisfied and will always strive to get better each time.

Any more questions, do please post them --