Moderators: happywaffle, arclight, bradisntclever
bradisntclever wrote: I know this because I was one of them when I used to see Maestros before taking classes and as a student.
Brad Hawkins wrote:There was one time I was in the wings, and whispered to Ruby that I hoped I'd get a five on this next scene. She replied (and I have no idea how she remembered this) that I couldn't win anyway. This did indeed take the wind out of my sails a little, which I think is what Spaz was suggesting.
eliz.rubywillmann wrote:So I don't know if this was me, or the other Ruby. But if it was me, let me just clarify that I feel my comment is being taken a bit out of context. My intent would have been only to express my personal belief that the scores/winnings don't matter at all. So when Brad said he wanted to get a five, my way of saying "don't worry about the score" was telling him that the score didn't matter. I in no way meant it to be received as a negative, discouraging or "competitive-heavy" comment. Sorry Brad if I hurt your ability to have fun in your scenes that night.
Spots wrote:There are audience members that consider EVERY possibility. You and I.... we could never predict, we could never anticipate the audience's thoughts and feelings.
Spots wrote:Brad, do you think you ever would have gotten involved in improv besides Maestro??? It's sort of an intriguing "parallel universe" question for me because I happen to think Maestro is a bad first impression of improv, both for the players and the audience.
Spots wrote:But the second there's an audience member who is pitting one improviser against another improviser... they've missed the boat. The concept is sort of lost yea? The show is great. I'm sure there are repeat viewers. But there's one poor bastard for every show who now thinks "improv is about one performer despite all the other performers".
Spots wrote:Just have fun.
sara farr wrote:You should TRY TO WIN MAESTRO. Right??
sara farr wrote:Wanna win Maestro? Get a bunch of people who love to watch you improvise to come see the show and cheer you on!!
Katherine wrote:I like Davis's idea and can see that it would be a very useful tool in the director's bag of tricks. It's a great way to keep the hard core score watchers in the audience engaged.
Another thought is this... as an audience member and as a cast member I have often wished the audience could vote to bring one eliminated player back to compete for the final round. They could be the Wild Card Player or something. I've only been in Maestro a few time, but I've seen it a lot, and I'd say the desire to see someone return to the stage hits me the vast majority of the time. If this seems sacrilegious to mess with The Almighty Point System, perhaps that person could play, but not for points. (For the record, I have always been eliminated in the first round, and while I've wished I could do some more scenes with everyone, I've never thought I should be the one to be brought back from the Maestro dead.)
A few weeks ago was one improvisor's last show for a while, so when she was eliminated, she gave a little speech of thanks to the audience for several years of support. Another eliminated cast member began to chant, "Let her stay! Let her stay!" The audience agreed and she stayed on. When she was eliminated again, the chant started again, and she was allowed to stay but not play for points. That scenario was an unusual one, but I think it shows that even the audience wants to overrule the score board sometimes. (This connects with Matt's point that every once in a while, the prize does not go to the top scoring player.)
I know one of the tenants of Maestro is that it's not fair. As performers, we have to be ok with that. As audience members, that unfairness is usually part of the fun of the show, but sometimes they so clearly want someone to stick around. What do you think of revivifying one player per game before the final round?
jillybee72 wrote:It is nothing personal, it's not how the performers feel at all. This is about how it looks to the audience. If there's a blow-out, everyone leaves in the 7th inning. It is not dramatic. Create dramatic tension.
LuBu McJohnson wrote:Well, it's not baseball. If you feel the need to create dramatic tension you can do so (tanking, trying to get a 1, etc.). But the show has been entertaining, despite the fact that a blow-out is apparent, many times.
jillybee72 wrote:LuBu McJohnson wrote:Well, it's not baseball. If you feel the need to create dramatic tension you can do so (tanking, trying to get a 1, etc.). But the show has been entertaining, despite the fact that a blow-out is apparent, many times.
Then why do you have points?
LuBu McJohnson wrote:But the show has been entertaining, despite the fact that a blow-out is apparent, many times.
jillybee72 wrote:It's not a huge dramatic deus ex machina being proposed, it's a simple selection of order to create the best finish. The "Loss Dragon" is far too big a metaphor. A right-sized metaphor would be the "Designated Hitter" which is a real thing that they use to make baseball more interesting.
The objection I'm hearing, in summary, is: "Who cares?" The answer is: "The audience, because they'd like to see a show that ends with a big finish." Your reply is, "The ending is a big finish no matter what!" and I trust you because you've seen more Maestros than I.
Chuy! wrote:I try my damndest not to think about anyone else's score but my own... You can damn sure bet I was completely aware that (with the help of some great players) I was one scene away from perfect fives on Saturday (even though I think the audience did vote five on the scene that was diplomatically for shape of show given a four by our esteemed director. A great directorial decision by Justin).
Brad Hawkins wrote:shando wrote:The shape of show thing that I see at the end of Maestro that can drive one nuts is say you have 4 people left, or 3, and some tie scores. And then people tied get put into a scene together and there can be no separation between them in the scoring. Like I said I haven't been in a while, so maybe that doesn't happen anymore, but it used to drive me bananas.
Chuy and Noah's dueling-preacher scene was one of those. There seem to be fewer non-solo scenes in the final round these days.
Justin D. wrote:First, everyone should play to win. And by play to win, I mean play to the best of their abilities and have fun.
Return to Improv Theory & Practice
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests