Is the theatre interval becoming a thing of the past?

[hannechalk]

Today in the Guardian:

www.theguardian.com/stage/article/2024/aug/18/is-the-theatre-interval-becoming-a-thing-of-the-past?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

If it is up to two hours, I can manage without. 

And please also close the bar. 

[lynette]

At the moment I can manage two hours, like The Years the other day, no problem. Some can’t though so we need to think carefully about encouraging a no interval policy. As for the bar, yeah, dump.

[Jon]

Aug 18, 2024 14:10:47 GMT hannechalk said:

Today in the Guardian:

www.theguardian.com/stage/article/2024/aug/18/is-the-theatre-interval-becoming-a-thing-of-the-past?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

If it is up to two hours, I can manage without. 

And please also close the bar. 

It really depends on the show, a panto with no interval would kill the performers and having no bar makes no financial sense, theatre is a business after all.

[Talisman]

Try Einstein on the Beach by Glass

Around 5 hours with no interval

Accepted that audience can go in and out

[marob]

The problem for me is how uncomfortable most theatre seats are. The longer things go on, the more fidgety I get. Interval usually comes as a relief for a chance to stretch my legs.

[wefox]

Intervals for me are important. A Chorus Line could do with one (for me).

Why I may need an interval:
-toillet break (even though I try to go before or after the show to avoid the interval queues)
-buy a programm or merch
-most important, wake up! Sometimes I don’t sleep well or not at all! (usually on my arrival day, since I fly early so I can catch a matinee if available). I never fell really asleep at a show, but there were a few times where a break was a lifesaver for me. Being able to stand up and walk around, strech my legs, explore the theatre venue, all that get me more alert and ready for the second act

[cavocado]

Sometimes it's nice to see a shortish play, no interval and get home early, especially if I'm getting up early for work the next day, but I also enjoy getting really absorbed in a long play, and over 2 hours really needs an interval IMO. So I hope both will continue and I don't think there's much evidence of the interval disappearing.

I assume bar takings are balanced against being able to send bar staff home by 8pm, and the other reduced costs associated with putting on a shorter play e.g. any other staff who are paid hourly, costs of heating/air conditioning/lighting/security, maybe a shorter rehearsal period? If bars are open after the show, people might spend more then because they're not limited to 20 mins, or prioritising the toilet queue. The article seems to over-simplify the cost v revenue issue.

"But anecdotally, theatregoers across the capital have complained about attending shows where their viewing experience has been disrupted by other people’s constant trips to the bathroom." I doubt that's related to whether or not there's an interval, but more about how much people drink before and during the show, the type of show, audience demographics.

It mentions the Globe not having intervals after Covid as though that is still the case, but they are back to being the same as every other theatre in having intervals for longer shows (2+ hours). As far as I remember after Covid they revived a couple of their shorter touring productions from pre-Covid, which meant they could reopen quicker, and no interval solved the problem of audience mingling at a time of social distancing. It wasn't to be more authentic as the quote from Michelle Terry implies.

[showgirl]

Although you don't book with the intention of leaving at the interval, it can also be a welcome opportunity to escape!

[Talisman]

It does seem that there is an increasing tendency for plays to be written for no interval, with the length designed to accommodate this. For really dramatic pieces, I prefer the flow not to be broken even for quite long performances The majority of existing (older) plays would seem to be designed to have a break, with sometimes a climax or a change of scene at the end of the first half.

This no interval approach has lead to many very short pieces which help those that don’t want late finishes. . However, while they may be very desirable and worthwhile viewing, I can be discouraged from going as I need to balance the travel time and cost against the length of the experience. I certainly don’t calculate value in terms of pounds per minute but sometimes the pay off is not likely to be worthwhile from my selfish perspective.

As ever, as is desirable, I expect the mixture to continue.

[sph]

I doubt the interval is going anywhere. It suits the structure of many shows, while some are better left as a one-act. It comes down to what works better for the show. In the West End I think theatres prefer two acts because of bar takings.

On a semi-related note, I was thinking recently about how streaming services have revolutionised the way TV shows are written. Without the need to adhere to a particular time slot with commercial breaks, TV shows are now a blank slate in terms of structure. Episode one can be 47 minutes, episode two can be 36, and episode 3 can be 57 etc. No need for built-in cliffhanger moments for the ad breaks either.

I doubt this will fully transfer to theatre though.

[kit66]

Nowadays it seems a predilection to munch and slurp whilst in your seat - in many cases bought to you so you don't even have the "inconvienance" to go to the bar - or wander in and out to visit the loo during a performance with no considreration to others I'm beginning to wonder if the said audience members even knows the purpose of an interval.
Are audiences reverting to the conduct of audiences in Shakespearian times - minus the throwing of rotten fruit and veg at the actors?

[dahlia]

I’m team interval as a whole, but I don’t mind if the show’s around the 90 minute mark.

It’s interesting that one of the people quoted on the article is Webster about Macbeth, though. Yes, there was no interval at the Donmar Macbeth - but there was a break. They needed a break, and used the Porter to make one. And I think that whether you enjoyed the Porter scene or not, it absolutely did jar the audience out of the play and out of the immersion or experience.

For me an interval is about physical comfort (stretching, loo, water if it's a hot theatre, bar if it's that kind of night, getting away from bothersome seat neighbours) and having a chance to build anticipation for the second half - I enjoy the feeling of curtains up twice. I don’t particularly want to see anything at the Globe without a chance to stretch my legs, that’s too uncomfortable for me, so will remember to check before booking if they're doing fewer intervals.

[Talisman]

As remarked elsewhere,  Globe performances without interval were only just introduced after pandemic when it first reopened  to avoid undue mixing. The only performance this season without will be Comedy of Errors which is relatively short. It was never intended to abandon intervals on a permanent basis; bar income is far too valuable. Guardian gives false impression of what Terry said.

It would be very wise to check reviews before going to Globe. Audiences leaving during performances and at interval are not uncommon.

[anthony40]

Aug 18, 2024 14:26:57 GMT Talisman said:

Try Einstein on the Beach by Glass

Around 5 hours with no interval

Accepted that audience can go in and out

Personally, I think that's far to long! That's a commitment and that length of time is asking a lot of the audience.

[Talisman]

Place was packed and I enjoyed every minute but confess to nipping out once

[oxfordsimon]

I love epic theatre.

All three parts of Henry VI at the Courtyard in Stratford was an incredible day.

I saw the first three of the James Plays at the National. Brilliant.

The intervals were absolutely necessary to allow everyone to maintain focus and energy.

I think the longest I have been without a break was a near full text Hamlet (Stephen Dillane, Donald Sinden and more). That had the interval after two and a half hours.

Some of the Wagner I have seen had long acts and total run times over five hours. And those intervals were vital!

Having said that, I think my personal limit is around 100 minutes before things get uncomfortable.

Plays that were written with intervals in mind do have that structure embedded into the text so you need to be careful when seeking to alter that. The space that intervals give you can be theatrically very necessary.

I have only directed one piece without an interval and I was always very conscious of pacing to ensure we kept the run time under 100 minutes.

Setting aside the financial need for theatres to generate bar income, I do believe that intervals serve dramatic purposes as well as helping the audience with comfort and breathing space.

[Phantom of London]

There have always been shows without an interval, thinking Come From Away, Constellation and Last 5 Years - this is not new. It would be bonkers to have an interval in Six etc.

[longinthetooth]

I feel cheated without an interval. At the end I can't help thinking, "is that it?" and feeling I haven't had my money's worth as the show's too short! I would guess I'm in the vast minority, though.

[marob]

Aug 18, 2024 17:03:55 GMT sph said:

On a semi-related note, I was thinking recently about how streaming services have revolutionised the way TV shows are written. Without the need to adhere to a particular time slot with commercial breaks, TV shows are now a blank slate in terms of structure. Episode one can be 47 minutes, episode two can be 36, and episode 3 can be 57 etc. No need for built-in cliffhanger moments for the ad breaks either.

I doubt this will fully transfer to theatre though.

That’s not really a new thing. HBO used to be like that 20-odd years ago. Stuff like The Sopranos and Six Feet Under would vary from episode to episode.

And before that I think the BBC used to be more easygoing about lengths as well. Fawlty Towers, Boys From The Blackstuff, I Claudius, Our Friends in the North, I’m sure they all had varying lengths.

It does make sense to allow the programme to be as long as it needs, and not having to resort to a cliffhanger every eight minutes or so to accommodate adverts.

To bring it back to theatre though, I think the stage version of Fawlty Towers probably could have done with being a one-act.

[Dawnstar]

I prefer to have an interval once a piece gets much over the hour and a half mark but I also find it annoying if intervals are too long. For example I'm thinking about going to a concert performance of Die Meisteringer von Nurnberg next month but the second interval is an hour long & when theatregoing on your own hanging around with nothing to do for an hour is very tedious.

[wefox]

Aug 18, 2024 18:56:00 GMT longinthetooth said:

I feel cheated without an interval. At the end I can't help thinking, "is that it?" and feeling I haven't had my money's worth as the show's too short! I would guess I'm in the vast minority, though.

Yes, anything under 2h I think twice before booking. Why should I pay £35 for an 80 min show for a “bad” seat (Six, unless you rely on rush) when I can pay the same or less for a better seat and a longer show? I agree that some shows like Six don’t need an interval, but I would feel “ripped off”!

[Talisman]

Aug 18, 2024 20:10:33 GMT Dawnstar said:

I prefer to have an interval once a piece gets much over the hour and a half mark but I also find it annoying if intervals are too long. For example I'm thinking about going to a concert performance of Die Meisteringer von Nurnberg next month but the second interval is an hour long & when theatregoing on your own hanging around with nothing to do for an hour is very tedious.

Seeing all four parts of the ring cycle is challenging, not because of the opera but because of endless intervals!

[blamerobots]

For something sub-90 minutes, an interval is definitely up to the discretion of the director whether it would significantly interrupt the flow of the play.

But I also think for longer pieces it also should be up to the director too. I really thought the lack of interval in the Old Vic's Machinal was essential to the atmosphere.

[Phantom of London]

I too also think that after 90 minutes an interval is needed, it also give the benefit to recalibrate, it is not unusual for me to Google something in the interval. Also not unusual for me to pop out to Pret, order a coffee, whilst using their toilet.

A good musical/play should set up a cliffhanger/dilemma to set up the second part.

[sph]

Aug 18, 2024 19:15:10 GMT marob said:

Aug 18, 2024 17:03:55 GMT sph said:

On a semi-related note, I was thinking recently about how streaming services have revolutionised the way TV shows are written. Without the need to adhere to a particular time slot with commercial breaks, TV shows are now a blank slate in terms of structure. Episode one can be 47 minutes, episode two can be 36, and episode 3 can be 57 etc. No need for built-in cliffhanger moments for the ad breaks either.

I doubt this will fully transfer to theatre though.

That’s not really a new thing. HBO used to be like that 20-odd years ago. Stuff like The Sopranos and Six Feet Under would vary from episode to episode.

And before that I think the BBC used to be more easygoing about lengths as well. Fawlty Towers, Boys From The Blackstuff, I Claudius, Our Friends in the North, I’m sure they all had varying lengths.

It does make sense to allow the programme to be as long as it needs, and not having to resort to a cliffhanger every eight minutes or so to accommodate adverts.

To bring it back to theatre though, I think the stage version of Fawlty Towers probably could have done with being a one-act.

It may have happened sometimes, but the industry standard, particularly in the US, was the 1-hour or half-hour slot with two or four "acts" so to speak. Streaming moved TV away from so many of the restrictions that come with the rules and regulations of a "network" broadcast.

But back to theatre: I do think length is an issue most of the time. Theatre is usually a full evening out, so most shows are touching the 2hrs 30 mark when they come down. For the benefit of both audience and performers, a break is practical. Yes, arguably there are films that are easily the same length as the average musical, but they do not have the issues of live performers to deal with, nor is navigating a cinema during a showing if you need the bathroom etc as difficult as a crowded theatre.