marchingartist Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 Choreography is harder than marching. There, I said it. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyGranite Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 Choreography is harder than marching. There, I said it. OMG!!! The (blank) is about to hit the fan!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 Choreography is harder than marching. There, I said it. at times yes. not an absolute blanket though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1977Kingsmen Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 I really think the OP hit it right on the head. Us dinos just need to fade away. I read a post once that said todays corps could learn a 70s show in ten minutes. I still try to look at it as drum corps. Yes it has changed. Kinda feel if crown doesnt win this year perhaps i am done. Who would have ever thought drum corps would be like this today. Hell we had to wait for drum corps world to come out to know whats going on. Long live the Kingsmen is my thought forever gone but not in our minds. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BozzlyB Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 Choreography is harder than marching. There, I said it. So are a lot of things that have no place (or should have a very LIMITED) place in drum corps. Your point? Something being hard doesn't make it worthwhile in and of itself . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashevillemurphy Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 (edited) I was in "the band" in HS (76-80 7th-12th) and we had "choreography" even then ... we knelt, laid down, danced, and even marched at different tempos at the same time, and ran around too ... we were one of the first in the area to go "corps style" as it was called back then ... so the combo of movement and marching has been around a long time. Edited August 8, 2012 by ashevillemurphy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cainan Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 Perhaps it is in fact time to take a page out of figure skating and look at adding some compulsories... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 I was positively thrilled with the fact that the silent movie, "The Artist", won the Best Picture of the Year in 2012. The Old loved it. The Young loved it. Americans loved it. The French adored it. The Chinese loved it. The entire world that got a chance to see it fell instantly in love with it. It had no sound from actors except a couple of words uttered at the end. It had no color. It was in black and white. It had no props. When it first came out, it was not highly budgeted, nor highly publicized. It had trouble getting sponsors. "You want to do a SILENT MOVIE?" ... "like from the early 1920's?" ... "Are you nuts?" ... said most potential movie investors. But its creators believed in it. And the movie was made. It instantly became a classic. What were its endearing qualities to millions of movie goers around the world? Well, it was about an actor who was his own film producer that would not give in to "change". He saw change taking place all around him. But he did not care for that change, and stayed steadfast in his quest not to produce "talking films" but instead to continue to act and produce "silent films", as he had for years and years with great success. The public left him. They moved onto "change" of the new-fangled "talking movie". But he would not change to what he believed were superior acting found, not in the spoken word (usually English) but in the unspoken communication that could reach an audience with the universal communication of facial expressions, eyes, etc., and emotions the unspoken word could provide from one human being to another -- and be understood by all, no matter their native tongue. Facial expressions from a talented actor that could communicate more effectively and more grandly than 1,000 spoken words ever could. This movie was different. It brought us back to an age of Grandness where the noise was put aside, where technology and the newest gadgets were set aside. Where gratuitous sex and violence as a means of pandering to short attention spans was set aside. Where all the "new toys" of cinema technology were set aside. Where marquee-familiar multi-millionaire overpriced actors and actresses who think of themselves as self important and bigger than the film itself are all the rage. The movie, "The Artist" is a magnificent work of cinematic genius because it had the capacity to bring us back to a time before "change", where things were simpler, but not of high technological quality, where older silent movies were universally accepted as inferior in most respects compared to "the modern" movies, but were MORE magnificent in its offerings nonetheless because it reached our hearts like no other modern film with all its technological advancements has been able to do. "The Artist" demonstrated to the world that time absolutely can be made to stand still when it's put in the hands of a few people with enormous talent and an appreciation for things that are timeless and "good", but which were momentarily lost in a quest for "the next big thing". THAT'S the genius that is at work in "The Artist". The movie did not just respect its past. It went further. Much further. It recreated its own movie past. And the world fell in love with that. If you hadn't brought up The Artist, I would have. The plot within the film is rather the opposite of drum corps' situation, I think, and not helpful to your point: if audiences are going to abandon drum corps for not being technologically up to date, as they did silent films, then all we can do is slow the tide of their departure. But precious few fans have departed because drum corps hasn't changed enough! More germane, perhaps, is this point: The Artist was a critical hit and rewarded by its peers, and was reasonably successful with audiences (though it was by no means a smash hit: US $44 million = 71st; worldwide $133 million = 60th). This is a film that largely adopted the style of movies from 1927 that nonetheless earned, as it were, first place with the judges. How successful would a DCI show in the style of, say, 1972, be with the judges? With the audience? Is it possible today for a show to succeed with No synthesizers or sampling? No amplification? G bugles? Two valves? Symmetrical drill? No pit? Etc.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan guy Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 I would rather watch a horn line dance across the field than march. Dance looks better than straight marching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) How successful would a DCI show in the style of, say, 1972, be with the judges? With the audience? Is it possible today for a show to succeed with No synthesizers or sampling? No amplification? G bugles? Two valves? Symmetrical drill? No pit? Etc.? I think it's all about the context. If it's presented as a one-off exhibition, akin to an alumni corps performance, it would be fine. It wouldn't be judged, but the audience would likely enjoy it. If it's a competitive corps going retro, they'll get destroyed by today's judging, and likely ravaged by the audience. I'd venture to guess they'd have a difficult time retaining members, as today's kids would laugh a designer out of the room, let alone want to perform that stuff. Even Surf's pseudo-retro Bridgemen tribute was designed differently than the original Bridgemen stuff. If they'd copied the original it would have been a complete disaster. Edited August 9, 2012 by Kamarag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.