Impact of Bloo's win on future show designs

[PamahoNow]

If you search the internet you will find a sign on the camera that says "WINK HERE"

Is it photo shop...is it real...

I can tell you this EVERYONE was looking for it on Saturday night...including the folks in the really good seats

It said "#WINK" I believe, and it was on the camera.

[31rabbit]

I've been told that Tom Blair has a very channel of communications with the corps, that he takes into account anything they'll give him about the architecture of their show and things to highlight. of course he makes the final decisions on what to air, but it's a process that takes the corps' insight into account.

SO

the question on my mind is, should the effect judges ignore the Jumbotron?
and even if they're not looking at it, the surge of applause The Wink garnered can't be ignored as easily.



on the one hand, taking the up-close-and-personal shots into account offers corps a chance to express themselves, to integrate incredibly fine precision and attention to detail. as a fan I think that the large TV is interesting and depending on my seat I'll find myself watching it during certain parts of the show if it presents a better angle or view
on the other hand, its a perspective that is out of the performing corps hands. unless the videocasting crew agrees completely to the wishes of the corps, it is a performance element that is outside of their control.

mugging for the camera isn't anything new, and for the most part it's good fun (see: the opening of Crown 2011). but Effect scoring for close-up shots broadcast live onto a jumbo tron is an interesting proposition, and I wonder if the judges have the freedom to reward whatever they see fit or if they're told to only look at the 'organic' perspective of the show and not attend to 'synthetic' perspectives.

but one thing I'm sure is being discussed in the wake of 2016 BC is 'what opportunities do we have to engage with the crowd via camera close-ups?' and that's just part of the new High Level of Detail of the activity (see: academy's tombstones) that can be engaged with in live-time.

Edited August 17, 2016 by 31rabbit

[Jurassic Lancer]

I mentioned earlier that I think that Bluecoats design process is more fluid and nuanced than most corps. First, I should revise that assertion by saying more fluid than many corps, but this is my observation.

I think, and correct me if I am wrong, most corps come to Spring Training with most if not all the drill and staging written in advance. The music book has been pretty firmly settled. (As I have mentioned before, Great Gig in the Sky wasn’t settled upon as the ballad until about the beginning of Spring Training.)

Members start filling up their dot books as they are learning the show, and the primary goal is to get the whole show on the field as expeditiously as possible. Corps that get the plan on the field the fastest are usually cheered by their fans, such this last Spring when Cadets had upwards of nine minutes of the show on the field by the time they moved to Ada, OH, with over two weeks of Spring Training left to go. Blue Stars had their complete show on the field with well over a week to spare, if I recall correctly. There were also reports of other corps happy to have their shows on the field early so that the corps could start cleaning and get several reps of the show in before the Tour Premier. (Blue Knights are an exception, but that is another can of worms entirely.)

As these reports kept coming in last Spring, I was getting more and more anxious, because it seemed to me like Bluecoats were taking their own sweet time getting the show on the field. When Cadets broke camp for Ada, Bluecoats had about six minutes on the field, and as it turned out, two of those minutes would completely change by the next rehearsal. It was this constant going back and forth on the design and shape of the show I am talking about.

For example, after the corps came out of the rewind section, they transitioned into “Great Gig in the Sky.” The design staff would give the basic instructions on how the corps was to transition, and how to move the props, some of which moved from the number two side of the field to the number one side. They would first move them to one spot, then discuss, and move them around some more. When they settled on their location, they would say something like, “OK, I want four trumpets to climb on top of that prop over there … no it doesn’t matter who for now, I just want to see what it looks like. OK, I want four more trumpets, it doesn’t matter who, to run up the ramp, and then hang onto the top with one hand. I want the rest of the trumpets to form a circle around the 20 yard line next to the prop. OK now, sit down …. Don’t worry about how to do it, we will figure that out later … OK, baris, get your trombones, and sit down in a bunch on the 15 yard line and face the back …” In other words the general ideas were in the minds of the designers, but the details were very fluid. So fluid, in fact, the next night, the trumpet circle was no longer an open form, but a solid block. The trombones who were initially on the 15 were moved to the 40 yard line, and the correct personnel were staged on the props.

This is just an example of what the whole process looked like to me. I am not exaggerating when I tell you that every single rehearsal I would turn to my wife and comment, “Yup, this section has changed from last night … yup, this section, too," etc.

After ensemble, the design staff would have certain sections of the corps stick around to work on “projects.” A project might be having the guard toss flags over the props on the number two side of the field in Todo Tiende. That was a project that made it into the show. I know there were other projects that didn’t. This is what I mean by a very fluid design process.

Edited August 17, 2016 by Jurassic Lancer

[Shempy]

I mentioned earlier that I think that Bluecoats design process is more fluid and nuanced than most corps. First, I should revise that assertion by saying more fluid than many corps, but this is my observation.

I think, and correct me if I am wrong, most corps come to Spring Training with most if not all the drill and staging written in advance. The music book has been pretty firmly settled. (As I have mentioned before, Great Gig in the Sky wasn’t settled upon as the ballad until about the beginning of Spring Training.)

Members start filling up their dot books as they are learning the show, and the primary goal is to get the whole show on the field as expeditiously as possible. Corps that get the plan on the field the fastest are usually cheered by their fans, such this last Spring when Cadets had upwards of nine minutes of the show on the field by the time they moved to Ada, OH, with over two weeks of Spring Training left to go. Blue Stars had their complete show on the field with well over a week to spare, if I recall correctly. There were also reports of other corps happy to have their shows on the field early so that the corps could start cleaning and get several reps of the show in before the Tour Premier. (Blue Knights are an exception, but that is another can of worms entirely.)

As these reports kept coming in last Spring, I was getting more and more anxious, because it seemed to me like Bluecoats were taking their own sweet time getting the show on the field. When Cadets broke camp for Ada, Bluecoats had about six minutes on the field, and as it turned out, two of those minutes would completely change by the next rehearsal. It was this constant going back and forth on the design and shape of the show I am talking about.

For example, after the corps came out of the rewind section, they transitioned into “Great Gig in the Sky.” The design staff would give the basic instructions on how the corps was to transition, and how to move the props, some of which moved from the number two side of the field to the number one side. They would first move them to one spot, then discuss, and move them around some more. When they settled on their location, they would say something like, “OK, I want four trumpets to climb on top of that prop over there … no it doesn’t matter who for now, I just want to see what it looks like. OK, I want four more trumpets, it doesn’t matter who, to run up the ramp, and then hang onto the top with one hand. I want the rest of the trumpets to form a circle around the 20 yard line next to the prop. OK now, sit down …. Don’t worry about how to do it, we will figure that out later … OK, baris, get your trombones, and sit down in a bunch on the 15 yard line and face the back …” In other words the general ideas were in the minds of the designers, but the details were very fluid. So fluid, in fact, the next night, the trumpet circle was no longer an open form, but a solid block. The trombones who were initially on the 15 were moved to the 40 yard line, and the correct personnel were staged on the props.

This is just an example of what the whole process looked like to me. I am not exaggerating when I tell you that every single rehearsal I would turn to my wife and comment, “Yup, this section has changed from last night … yup, this section, too," etc.

After ensemble, the design staff would have certain sections of the corps stick around to work on “projects.” A project might be having the guard toss flags over the props on the number two side of the field in Todo Tiende. That was a project that made it into the show. I know there were other projects that didn’t. This is what I mean by a very fluid design process.

What I think is more notable from your writing is the level of MM creative involvement in the final product on the field. Very cool.

[Tony Flores]

That show was just fun...I loved watching it all 3 nights. Reminded me of old drum corps in that they didn't tell a story, they just blew me away with sound and cool visuals. If the activity can use that model in the future, that'd be great. Not to take away from the story tellers, they do it well...jwillis35 described it best. Watching that show you could see the golden age of drum corps in that show.

The bluecoats "Made Drum Corps Fun Again"

[MikeRapp]

What I think is more notable from your writing is the level of MM creative involvement in the final product on the field. Very cool.

It's the theatre design process. I have a friend who created one of the biggest hits on Broadway last season and that is prcisely the process they used to finally put the end product on the stage. They were changing singificant parts of the show right up until opening night. You can only do that if you trust your creative talent and directly involve them in the creative process.

Oh, and they have to be great at what they do.

[MikeRapp]

It's the theatre design process. I have a friend who created one of the biggest hits on Broadway last season and that is prcisely the process they used to finally put the end product on the stage. They were changing singificant parts of the show right up until opening night. You can only do that if you trust your creative talent and directly involve them in the creative process.

Oh, and they have to be great at what they do.

I might also add that this design process requires experienced marching members. You cannot do that with 160 high schoolers. It worked for Something Rotten because they had a superstar roster of designers and writers, and Tony winning actors.

[corpsband]

That show was just fun...I loved watching it all 3 nights. Reminded me of old drum corps in that they didn't tell a story, they just blew me away with sound and cool visuals. If the activity can use that model in the future, that'd be great. Not to take away from the story tellers, they do it well...jwillis35 described it best. Watching that show you could see the golden age of drum corps in that show.

The bluecoats "Made Drum Corps Fun Again"

Definitely my reaction as well. Very fun experience. One of the keys to this was member "buy in". It was clear from the first moment that the members were having fun and were clearly inviting the audience to join them on the playground!

From a design standpoint, the blending of the familiar with new worked really well. Old school Madison meets new school winter percussion played well with fans that otherwise might have been reluctant to embrace an electronic score.

[Bruckner8]

Nothing about #TheWink was planned. After he did it the first time, THEN the meme showed up with the sign "Wink Here" hanging from the camera.

Now, to be sure, EVERYONE at Bloo had something to say to Shayne, re: what he should do for semis and finals. Imagine the rest of the MMs hanging out with him in the food line the next day: "Dude, that was awesome! You should do [insert 1000 recommendations for both semis and finals]" He heard ideas from staff, family and volunteers, lol.

It was all his decision, AFAIK.

(Even if it wasn't, he certainly put on an amazing acting performance!)

[Lance]

I've been told that Tom Blair has a very channel of communications with the corps, that he takes into account anything they'll give him about the architecture of their show and things to highlight. of course he makes the final decisions on what to air, but it's a process that takes the corps' insight into account.

SO

the question on my mind is, should the effect judges ignore the Jumbotron?

and even if they're not looking at it, the surge of applause The Wink garnered can't be ignored as easily.

on the one hand, taking the up-close-and-personal shots into account offers corps a chance to express themselves, to integrate incredibly fine precision and attention to detail. as a fan I think that the large TV is interesting and depending on my seat I'll find myself watching it during certain parts of the show if it presents a better angle or view

on the other hand, its a perspective that is out of the performing corps hands. unless the videocasting crew agrees completely to the wishes of the corps, it is a performance element that is outside of their control.

mugging for the camera isn't anything new, and for the most part it's good fun (see: the opening of Crown 2011). but Effect scoring for close-up shots broadcast live onto a jumbo tron is an interesting proposition, and I wonder if the judges have the freedom to reward whatever they see fit or if they're told to only look at the 'organic' perspective of the show and not attend to 'synthetic' perspectives.

but one thing I'm sure is being discussed in the wake of 2016 BC is 'what opportunities do we have to engage with the crowd via camera close-ups?' and that's just part of the new High Level of Detail of the activity (see: academy's tombstones) that can be engaged with in live-time.

it was a cute, endearing moment

i really don't see it changing much about the design of shows, or approaches to camera work