Will BD 2010 Be Forgettable?

[Granny Smith]

The fact that "Spartacus" came from behind to win, and ended the season on such an emotional high ascribe almost a mythic quality to it.

I personally believe that Phantom could have finished fifth and it would be listed by many for years to come as a legendary show. However, the fact that it won certainly helps.

Part of the purpose of this post is to find out from each of you if the "connection" between the show and fans is important. It's clear that some designers write a show hoping that it will connect and they either succeed or fail, but it seems equally apparent that some shows are written knowing that it will at best appeal to only "elites" or those wearing green shirts and khaki pants.

Timeout! I've got another topic to post (that darned caffeinated coffee).

[3rd Glasgow BB]

It's a game changer so far as how corps will use accessories.

Remember SCVs asymmetric drill? It was a game changer but the show itself although great, is never classed as legendary.

[supersop]

BTW: Here is the Halftime List:

#1. 1993 Star (Barber and Bartok)

#2. 1984 Cadets (West Side Story)

#3. 2008 Phantom (Spartacus)

#4. 1989 SCV (Phantom of the Opera)

#5. 1988 Scouts (Maleguena)

P.S. Interesting to note the years of these "legendary" shows.

Those top 3 shows in '93 (Phantom, Cadets, Star) were all pretty awesome. But Star was a game-changing show, IMHO.

I would argue the top 3 or 4 shows of 1984, 1988/87, 1989 (top5), 1993 (top3), were all years where the upper echelon were STUPID GOOD!!! 2008 PR was a throwback to how the Passion found within a drum corps show used to be the norm. IT was the reckless abandon that triggered fuel for the fire.

Raw emotion and Passion are the key elements that make a "legendary" show. Of course you have to be wicked clean on top of it ........ but without the emotion and passion ... it's just another show.

[supersop]

I personally believe that Phantom could have finished fifth and it would be listed by many for years to come as a legendary show. However, the fact that it won certainly helps.

Part of the purpose of this post is to find out from each of you if the "connection" between the show and fans is important. It's clear that some designers write a show hoping that it will connect and they either succeed or fail, but it seems equally apparent that some shows are written knowing that it will at best appeal to only "elites" or those wearing green shirts and khaki pants.

Timeout! I've got another topic to post (that darned caffeinated coffee).

As stated, the "connection" only comes when the performers are putting their bare nekkid souls out on the front line. Passion and Raw Emotion are the elements that fans connect to the most. That's when you become blinded to ticks .... deaf to a frack ...... you're just mesmerized into knowing you're witnessing greatness of an epic level when you're standing before it. AND YOU NEVER FORGET IT!!!

EDIT: oh yeah ... the show design can't be crappy either ... I forgot about that :P

Edited August 6, 2010 by supersop

[Granny Smith]

Raw emotion and Passion are the key elements that make a "legendary" show. Of course you have to be wicked clean on top of it ........ but without the emotion and passion ... it's just another show.

Assuming that a show is relatively clean (maybe not "wicked clean") then do you think the "emotion and passion" trump the cleanliness of a show being memorable? Is it possible for a show like the Through a Glass, Darkly to be memorable/legendary since it is "wicked clean" but does not carry much (if any) emotional connection to the crowd?

If I were somehow young again and could march, I would choose to tryout with Phantom because it seems to be in their DNA to try to write shows from year to year that will connect with the crowd.

P.S. Whenever I get a chance I need to announce my favorite show of all time that also had all the elements: 1987 Cadets. I still cry, and scream and throw things when I experience this show.

[MagicBobert]

Raw emotion and Passion are the key elements that make a "legendary" show. Of course you have to be wicked clean on top of it ........

Not if you're Phantom '08... zing!

[saxfreq1128]

Spartacus is definitely one of my favorite shows of all time, but I think it might be too soon to call it 'legendary.'

One thing those other 4 shows have in common is that, watching them these years later, they don't feel dated. They're shows that I imagine would do very well today, and I feel like this sort of timelessness is a quality that legendary things tend to share. It's also what makes things that were much-beloved in their time seem so disappointing and underwhelming years later.

Who's to say that in 10 years, Spartacus, and BD 2010 for that matter, will have aged well?

Edited August 6, 2010 by saxfreq1128

[HockeyDad]

BD 2010 will be remembered as the last year before the G-7 left DCI and went their own way. So yes, it will be remembered.

[supersop]

Assuming that a show is relatively clean (maybe not "wicked clean") then do you think the "emotion and passion" trump the cleanliness of a show being memorable? Is it possible for a show like the Through a Glass, Darkly to be memorable/legendary since it is "wicked clean" but does not carry much (if any) emotional connection to the crowd?

If I were somehow young again and could march, I would choose to tryout with Phantom because it seems to be in their DNA to try to write shows from year to year that will connect with the crowd.

P.S. Whenever I get a chance I need to announce my favorite show of all time that also had all the elements: 1987 Cadets. I still cry, and scream and throw things when I experience this show.

Not if you're Phantom '08... zing!

I'm in agreement with Granny here ......... no ZING necessary. I also said earlier in the thread that the "CONNECTION" blinds the eye to ticks and deafens the ears to fracks.

You think I don't see tons of dirt in the 1990 Cadets of Bergen County? It's alllllll ticky tick tick tick ........ but there was something about the design of the show .. the flow .. the emotion. I didn't see or hear anything bad until a few years later when my buzz wore off (the buzz that comes with the ring). Star gets alot of juice for the 1990 show because their hornline was a monster and the show had a great design to it. They also had that raw emotion and power going for them. Cavies had a great show and were probably cleaner than the 3 of us ... but the "connection", "power", "emotion" was never really there.

((just for the record, 1990 Cadets were no wimpy hornline. If you listen to the first hit of the show the right channel mic spiked and crackled ... we broke the dang thing!! ..... and nothing on the recording sounds right after that. AND that was our Semi's performance (I guess Aungst thought drums had a better night in Semi's so they took that recording). If you watch the VOD, you'll notice tempos were a bit faster and the hornline sounded a lot better.))

Edited August 6, 2010 by supersop

[ajwdad]

Assuming that a show is relatively clean (maybe not "wicked clean") then do you think the "emotion and passion" trump the cleanliness of a show being memorable? Is it possible for a show like the Through a Glass, Darkly to be memorable/legendary since it is "wicked clean" but does not carry much (if any) emotional connection to the crowd?

If I were somehow young again and could march, I would choose to tryout with Phantom because it seems to be in their DNA to try to write shows from year to year that will connect with the crowd.

P.S. Whenever I get a chance I need to announce my favorite show of all time that also had all the elements: 1987 Cadets. I still cry, and scream and throw things when I experience this show.

Interesting. A show can be memorable for lots of reasons. But, to win, it should be "wicked clean" as that is the agreed upon judging criterion, or at least better than the field. To be memorable... Just has to have the connection with person watching or listening. Watching Phantom in 2008, clearly, was a visual treat. Not because it was clean, but because it was a great story line, acting, and even had a twist at the end. I have seen this show in person 4 times, and on VoD at least another 10 times. But, I don't remember any of the music, just the story, the goose-stepping, etc... Frankly, I would not listen to it ever. But watching it is a pure treat.

From a visual perspective, I tend to like the new and the corps that push the boundaries. Phantom 2008 did that, as did BD in 09 and 10. But, that is highly subjective, and I think that the judges are to objectively apply the criterion as they score the competition. To do less would cheapen the activity.

I disagree about the lack of emotion with the crowd, at least if this forum is any measurement. In this forum, I see a tremendous amount of emotion. Just not the happy, stand-up-and-cheer kind. But emotion just the same. Some stated that they were driven to wretch.