The eye contact exercise is clutch. I’ve done that many a time in different settings. It’s a very quick way to help bond a team together and really get everyone connecting.
I've been part of a group working with Patti Stiles (a Johnstonian improviser) and she has a great exercise that combines The Flow and The Game learning, I don't know the official name for it but I call it The Pyramid.
Theory: The Pyramid isolates the decision making parts of improv from its performance parts and provides opportunities for both immediate feedback on decisions as well as for more in depth discussion and examination.
Set up: 1 person on stage as the actor, 2 people in chairs front of the stage as the directors, 3 people in chairs behind them as the audience. Coach to the side
Method: Everything that happens on stage is pitched by the two directors, "pitched" because each member of the audience reacts to each pitch with either a loud negative "bzz/eh!" alarm sound or a loud "ding!" approval sound. If the pitch gets a ding then the actor on stage acts it out. Pitches start from the initiation/scene setting ("You are in an office." "You're ordering wine from a wine bar") and then what happens next ("A bear attacks". "You order more wine". "You go in for a kiss". "The receptionist weeps." etc. etc.). The coach records every pitch and whether it was accepted or rejected but also adjudicates inconclusive feedback from the audience. Once the scene reaches a climax, the coach ends the session and goes through the list of pitches and notes any notable acceptances or rejections.
Outcomes: Generally, the group will see that the audience wants a few beats of base reality, an intensified pattern, a rest of the game and return to base reality and then more pattern. That the audience wants to explore what's already been shown in the scene, not have new things constantly introduced. More advanced explorations can be about what are good comedic choices that will land with the audience.
Expansions: Each part of the pyramid can be made larger at the risk of muddying the water. Beware of expanding the audience in particular as the more inconclusive the immediate feedback is the more exercise risks going off the rails.
Caveats/advice: The audience needs to be loud, proud and go from the gut with their dings or ehs (it's important also to only have two sounds, one negative and one positive for clarity). Perhaps counter-intuitively, quiet, delayed, or "nice" feedback will work against the flow of the directors' decision making and become frustrating. The team/class might need to do preparatory feedback exercises before starting so as to become comfortable with both rejecting pitches and having pitches rejected. Some members of the team/class might want to sit out of being either a director or an audience member. Occasionally, after a long string of pitch rejections, the audience will accept a poor pitch just to get things moving. It's usually helpful to briefly acknowledge that in the post-scene run through and move on.
The eye contact exercise is clutch. I’ve done that many a time in different settings. It’s a very quick way to help bond a team together and really get everyone connecting.
So basically robots and ninjas?
I've been part of a group working with Patti Stiles (a Johnstonian improviser) and she has a great exercise that combines The Flow and The Game learning, I don't know the official name for it but I call it The Pyramid.
Theory: The Pyramid isolates the decision making parts of improv from its performance parts and provides opportunities for both immediate feedback on decisions as well as for more in depth discussion and examination.
Set up: 1 person on stage as the actor, 2 people in chairs front of the stage as the directors, 3 people in chairs behind them as the audience. Coach to the side
Method: Everything that happens on stage is pitched by the two directors, "pitched" because each member of the audience reacts to each pitch with either a loud negative "bzz/eh!" alarm sound or a loud "ding!" approval sound. If the pitch gets a ding then the actor on stage acts it out. Pitches start from the initiation/scene setting ("You are in an office." "You're ordering wine from a wine bar") and then what happens next ("A bear attacks". "You order more wine". "You go in for a kiss". "The receptionist weeps." etc. etc.). The coach records every pitch and whether it was accepted or rejected but also adjudicates inconclusive feedback from the audience. Once the scene reaches a climax, the coach ends the session and goes through the list of pitches and notes any notable acceptances or rejections.
Outcomes: Generally, the group will see that the audience wants a few beats of base reality, an intensified pattern, a rest of the game and return to base reality and then more pattern. That the audience wants to explore what's already been shown in the scene, not have new things constantly introduced. More advanced explorations can be about what are good comedic choices that will land with the audience.
Expansions: Each part of the pyramid can be made larger at the risk of muddying the water. Beware of expanding the audience in particular as the more inconclusive the immediate feedback is the more exercise risks going off the rails.
Caveats/advice: The audience needs to be loud, proud and go from the gut with their dings or ehs (it's important also to only have two sounds, one negative and one positive for clarity). Perhaps counter-intuitively, quiet, delayed, or "nice" feedback will work against the flow of the directors' decision making and become frustrating. The team/class might need to do preparatory feedback exercises before starting so as to become comfortable with both rejecting pitches and having pitches rejected. Some members of the team/class might want to sit out of being either a director or an audience member. Occasionally, after a long string of pitch rejections, the audience will accept a poor pitch just to get things moving. It's usually helpful to briefly acknowledge that in the post-scene run through and move on.
What a great way to break this down!