Improvisation is not a presentational form, except in small doses, or as a game. It's a tool.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I think improvisation is a technique and a tool. I think that even the best of them fail most of the time, and in the end, the audience is not interested in how you got there but in what you're saying. The more clearly and concisely and artistically you say it, the more effective it is.
When improvisation is properly applied, it is compositional thinking, sped way up.
Improvisation has to do with exploring something like two brothers in a room together. You find out things about situations by discovering the things that they aren't saying. It's a way to explore scenes. Sometimes it's more useful than others, but it's always there to see if there's anything that you might improve.
The interesting thing about improvisation is you're making something up in front of the audience. Now music helps you out a little bit because you have an instrument that'll separate you from the audience.
The thing about improvisation is that it's not about what you say. It's listening to what other people say. It's about what you hear.
Improvisation is almost like the retarded cousin in the comedy world. We've been trying forever to get improvisation on TV. It's just like stand-up. It's best when it's just left alone. It doesn't translate always on TV. It's best live.
People's association with improvisation means one person playing an endless stream of notes over something, and it doesn't have to be.
I'm very bad with improvisation. I hate it.
To be a good improviser, you have to study composition as a parallel. Because what improvisation is, on a high level, is spontaneous composition.
Improvisation is a compositional method.