[kjb]

As a still relatively new theatre goer (a year) I've been surprised at the number of plays I've seen which use video/film as an effect in the theatre.

Is this a new thing as technology makes it possible?
Is it necessary, or is it just another special effect available to the Director?

Plays I've seen which have used it are:

6 characters in search of an author (unavoidable here though, I'd say given it was based around documentary makers)
Speaking in tongues
Julius Caesar - RSC
Enron
Twelfth Night - RSC (just a little bit - a storm/wave effect)

I can't help but think that it may be a bit of a cheat....either that or it's assuming the audience can't imagine up the ideas themselves without this extra help.....or is it just a natural extension to the use of sets and props?

[armadillo]

I wonder what the first use of video on stage was - anyone remember there earliest experience of it? Complicite got in there early I think. Who was the first to use video of a newsreader for example?

Cleverest use I remember was in The History Boys where characters walked in an out of videos - leaving the classroom and appearing on screen in the corridor.

[wickedgrin]

I think it's a fairly recent addition to staging shows due to advances in technology.

I think it can work very well in theatre - adding another dimension or atmosphere. It is used by directors to make a straight play more filmic and interesting to a modern audience who need more visual stimulation to keep their attention.

Somtimes it can be used badly of course as a cost cutting exercise - projections instead of any scenery. Remember Woman in White - shudder!!!

[Matthew Winn]

I think video and projection can be good, but only when done with imagination. The West Yorkshire Playhouse production of Singin' In The Rain came in for criticism for its use of projection, but I quite liked it because the "scribble" style of the drawings added a new dimension to the show. But The Woman In White fell flat for me because in that case all the projections said to me was "We can't be bothered to paint some cloths". SITR did something with projection that couldn't be done in another way; TWIW did little more than a set of cloths could do, only it did it blurry and washed out.

[nlc]

Kneehigh's Brief Encounter had the best use of film and video I've seen. That production was brilliant altogether but they used a screen to represent the station and various other scenes really well.

[Jan Brock]

I wonder what the first use of video on stage was - anyone remember there earliest experience of it? Complicite got in there early I think.

That is a very good question but I have no idea what the answer is. In my time it has gone from non-existent to mandatory (in Rupert Goold's productions anyway) but I can't remember at all the first time I saw it.

[Weez]

I don't know the history of it (I became a regular theatre-goer in 2006 with Sunday in the Park with George; technically no film or video, but awesome projections, so this kind of thing has been in the theatre longer than I have), but I don't see the harm in it. Creators of theatre *should* embrace new technologies. I wouldn't fancy having to see every show outdoors because no one invented spotlights, or only ever seeing musicals where the leads were cast primarily for their ability to reach the back of the stalls over a full orchestra rather than being pleasant to listen to or good at acting. Sure, film, TV, and projections probably aren't always going to be necessary or done well, but if they can add to rather than detract from a production, then bring it ON.

[PaulT]

We have been going into London regularly to go to the theatre for about five years now.

I think that the first time I saw video/television being used was in Richard II at the Old Vic with Kevin Spacey. It was done in modern dress and had a "here and now" feel about it. The King's procession had a news camera man filming and we could see it on a big screen. It was really effective and added (to my mind) to an amazing production.

I agree that Kneehigh's Brief Encounter used film and video brilliantly.

I liked how it was used in The History Boys too.

[curzon]

Those people above who are so disparaging about the projections in WIW must be entirely unaware of the technical mastery involved in that show (regardless of whether you approved aesthetically). Dudley's hugely complicated projections allowed a flexibity of approach and viewpoint which could never be achieved with conventional scenery. The idea that the production team went down this route to avoid "painting a few cloths" is frankly laughable and is clearly the opinion of someone who has never tried to incorporate video into a production. Even the simplest use of projection adds a whole new set of problems for the production and technical teams as well as the performers.
Personally I loved the WIW designs but clearly they were not to everyone's taste...

Seb

[Jan Brock]

I think that the first time I saw video/television being used was in Richard II at the Old Vic with Kevin Spacey.

My reaction to its use there was "Oh dear, poor old Trevor jumping on the bandwagon with video - how old hat". Same as when Nicholas Hytner used it in Henry V. I think it must have been in use for a decade or so before that. "Julius Caesar" seems to be play that gets video integrated into it quite often (including the current Stratford version ?).