A Quote by Kate Bush

We deliberately chose a small theatre so that the show was still intimate and the audience would become a part of the show. — © Kate Bush
We deliberately chose a small theatre so that the show was still intimate and the audience would become a part of the show.
I would love to be on a really good show and share all the stuff that goes into creating a big TV show and get my audience into it. I think that makes it personal and makes the audience feel like they're a part of it.
My solo show, 'A Lot More Me,' is part drag show, part burlesque show, part circus show, and part fashion show.
When the theater is gothic it matches the sensibility of the show. It's also very intimate. The audience is very close to the performers. The show is scary and the scary stuff always works best with an intimacy with the audience. And the show is erotic, and I think erotic always works best when it's close to the audience, as well.
Only in the theatre was it possible to see the performers and to be warmed by their personal charm, to respond to their efforts and to feel their response to the applause and appreciative laughter of the audience. It had an intimate quality; audience and actors conspired to make a little oasis of happiness and mirth within the walls of the theatre. Try as we will, we cannot be intimate with a shadow on a screen, nor a voice from a box.
I don't believe, in a show like ours, that you really want to see character growth. That's just my opinion. Maybe to a small degree, but nothing serious. To that end, it doesn't have the same importance that it would have, if you were on an hour-long show. I think an audience gets really hungry for a character to grow and change on an hour-long show, and I think I would be more antsy.
My progression into acting was pretty slow. I was constantly performing in different kinds of small shows. One year I would be in a magic show, the next year in a circus show, then a small play, and then a dance show.
The idea of the show is that it's active and that children will become involved and watch the show, but also participate in the show. And I didn't know if that would work.
You especially want to strive for that nuance on a show like 'The Flash,' which is different from 'Legends' in the sense that it's really, at its heart, a smaller show. It's a more intimate show, in a way.
'Freaks and Geeks' was my favorite show when it was on, by a wide measure. And that's the show I wanted to do. I noodled with the idea of doing a show about teenagers that told small stories, small moments of personal growth.
When you introduce a character and show him for the first time, don't show him fully lit. Don't show him one hundred percent to the audience. Show maybe fifty percent or sixty percent so the audience can fill in the dark spots.
My show is an anti-show and the audience have to want to listen. I'm sitting down, there's only one of me, I don't talk much to the audience and it is very quiet. I wouldn't be able to do that kind of show if people didn't know me and my material.
It's so much better for me to do a talk show. You still have that energy of the audience, and the audience is just as important as that guest that's sitting next to me. It's not about me and that guest exchanging energy and talking. It's about everything that's going on in that room, and they're as much a part of the show as anything. I like this better than anything I've ever done.
I was only ever part of 'Lost' - a very small part of an extremely talented writers' room, where as a writer, it's sort of your job to sublimate your ego and work in the service of the show and the show's voice.
'Ragtime' was the most magical show that I've done. I had an incredible experience with that, with the show itself, with the cast, with the audience. The response to that show - my God, it really blew me away, the reactions to that show, the way it changed their lives and altered their thinking, their own self-discovery.
For me, a show's a show. I try to put on the best show I can for whatever audience or time slot I get.
It is one of my targets to show people that a lot of things that are part of their landscape - that people are universal - are the result of some very precise historical changes. All my analyses are against the idea of universal necessities in human existence. They show the arbitrariness of institutions and show which space of freedom we can still enjoy and how many changes can still be made.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!