EDIT by DL: The first posts have been moved from http://www.controlbooth.com/forums/lighting/10911-lighting-cirques-mystere.html, to keep that one focused on Mystere, and start a new thread for this topic.
Yeah...all the reasons you put forth are why I find him to be flashy and trashy. Maybe showy is a better word.
But you have proved my point Derek. The original poster talked about how much Vegas is about "Hey look what we can afford."
Which by your own admission is how Lafortune designs. He is (was) not restricted by budget or space limitations. A "ooh I can put a light here approach" if you will. Along with no script comes no (light) plot. The fact of the matter is Lafortune himself has admitted that he's not someone young designers should talk to because of his unique approach.
Given his unlimted budget and creation proscess...I find that more flashy and trashy. Spectacular? Yes. But more eye candy than thought out. Lafortune is a fantastic designer by all means. But I find Mystere just as flashy as Ka.
That being said I like Mystere...better than most other Cirque or Dragon shows I've seen. They funny thing about Mystere is that they built the space more like a tent then they did a theatre which is evident when you tour backstage.
It should be noted that the same Lighting Designer, Luc Lafortune, lit Mystere and KA, as well as O and Zumanity and many of CDS's touring shows. All were done with a "design as you go" approach. Unlike theatre, no script arrives from the playwright with everything more or less set in stone, and all bocking complete in a rehearsal hall before a show even moves into the theatre. Once the architectural and scenic elements are complete, all Cirque artistic and production staff spend about six months in the space putting the show together. This is known as the "creation" process, and is what leads to the "hang a light here; now leave that one, but hang another light there" approach. A very unique (and expensive) approach, which usually (but not always) results in a spectacular production. Cirque shows are also never truly finished; modifications continue to be made to even Mystere, after sixteen years.
Mystere is my favorite of all Las Vegas CDS shows as well. Perhaps it's because it was their first in a resident purpose-built space, and not in a tent meant to tour. Unlike others, it seems to me to rely more on the human-achievement elements, and not on gimmickry such as massive pools of water, hydraulics, and projections.
EDIT: Lighting fixtures have gotten more efficient and reliable since 1993, but no more "flashy." Except for LED sources like the ShowPix/StudioPix and high-powered ShowGuns/Syncrolites/BigLites (which have not been used in a Cirque show to date), what toys are you speaking? Of all things I have heard Mr. Lafortune referred to as (both positive and negative), "flash and trash" is not one of them.
Mystere has nowhere near 3000+ units. More like 1000 conventionals and 30 movers (Clay Paky Stage Zooms, IIRC).
Yeah...all the reasons you put forth are why I find him to be flashy and trashy. Maybe showy is a better word.
But you have proved my point Derek. The original poster talked about how much Vegas is about "Hey look what we can afford."
Which by your own admission is how Lafortune designs. He is (was) not restricted by budget or space limitations. A "ooh I can put a light here approach" if you will. Along with no script comes no (light) plot. The fact of the matter is Lafortune himself has admitted that he's not someone young designers should talk to because of his unique approach.
Given his unlimted budget and creation proscess...I find that more flashy and trashy. Spectacular? Yes. But more eye candy than thought out. Lafortune is a fantastic designer by all means. But I find Mystere just as flashy as Ka.
That being said I like Mystere...better than most other Cirque or Dragon shows I've seen. They funny thing about Mystere is that they built the space more like a tent then they did a theatre which is evident when you tour backstage.
Last edited by a moderator: