There is no point in blaming the audience for such results. There had surely been some lacks in the communication process or perhaps those productions could not fulfill the desires or needs of the audience.



Common belief says that theatre audience is different from a film audience. The point stands true until we draw a single and distinctive line to define two different set of people.

Actually what happens is that, people demonstrates different mindsets in respect to their expectations from both the medium. Most of them have a clear perception of what they can expect from a film show and a play. There is no hard and fast rule that a film buff can never be a great and dedicated theatre lover or an activist.

It is quite normal that people would have their own likings for specific genres but you can hardly tag someone with a watertight compound for a single media if he or she has access to others too.

Just think about Billy Elliot; as a movie, it got a classic stature and when it became part of the London theatre arena, Billy Elliot tickets are hard to find. Shows are always running houseful. People are still overwhelming to watch, over and over again, the story of a young boy who discovers a passion for the rest of his life. They could easily find a DVD of the film, yet they are happy to crowd the theatre arena, one after another evening.

“And suddenly I’m flying; flying like a bird" – the magic of these sentences in the theatre can hardly be proportioned by the movie that never wants to live any space for your imagination.

Mostly the problem starts when a stage production cannot overcome the shadows of the film or the original text. A super hit stage production like Mousetrap or Billy Elliot is more than a simple stage reproduction, they are beautiful translations of the original if not transmigrations.

Theatre and film have their own distinctive languages that sustain time in different formats. One needs to establish that language into action to run successful productions one evening after another.