Articles: “Let’s Be Realistic: Can Theatre Beat Film at Recreating Life?” By Rob Weinert-Kendt

American Theatre – August 18, 2014

“Let’s Be Realistic: Can Theatre Beat Film at Recreating Life?” By Rob Weinert-Kendt

A Response

            This morning, on Tuesday, August 18, I woke up to check the websites of various newspapers and Theatre Blogs. On The American Theatre website, (an off-shoot of Theatre Communications Group), I found a newly uploaded article (Found HERE) that speaks on both realism and presentation in the theatre, vs the presented realism within Film. Writer, Rob Weinert-Kendt, used two productions to illustrate his argument: the unauthorized toddler/child production of The Lion King from his son’s summer camp, as well as a new play, John, at the Signature Theatre in New York by Annie Baker.

            This article came across both as a review of the two shows and their merits, as well as a social commentary of our perception of theatre in comparison to television. When watching small children on stage, Weinert-Kendt mentions that we as humans on display have the naturally tendency to ‘perform’ and stylize ourselves. Thus, when we watch theatre that is specifically meant to be ‘natural’ and mimetic of true behaviour – that is the deviation, the unnatural change of staged and displayed behaviour.

            Weinert-Kendt uses John as a way to speak about theatre’s near-inability to direct and focus your attention, except through clear and precise direction, design and recognition of an audience’s freedom of observation in the space. This is one aspect of live theatre that film will never truly be able to capture, due to the capacity of a camera lens and the absence of a real-time experience.  

            I love this article and highly recommend it – both for Weinert-Kendt’s excellent argument for live theatre over film, as well as for the sneaky review of John that is skillfully worked into this defence of the stage vs film. I also think it is important that I mention that the author does point out the merits of film and television as well, the great effect that a camera angle and perfect shot can have on the experience of an audience member.

            Personally, I love both mediums – but as argued in this article, I believe they are completely different mediums, whether or not the actors are being ‘natural’ or not. I think they are works that just fit better on stage than a screen, The Last Five Years, I’ve seen on stage and on film, and I honestly felt like the stage version was much clearer and easier to follow than the film. At the same time, there are things that films can do that wouldn’t be physically viable on stage – Game of Thrones for instance; I am very comforted by those characters (and dragons) being on a screen rather than a confined space with me. 

            Weinert-Kendt does an excellent job on answering this question with his review of John at the Signature Theatre in New York. He speaks to the skill of theatre makers in bringing this recreation of life to the stage, which I agree with entirely, but I would like to add that I believe proximity is also a large factor in the power of theatre as an art form. But if I spoke to this, I would drift into a discussion involving stylized theatre, which was not the subject of WK’s piece, and not the question of the morning.