During a CCN & Variety Town Hall Event back in February, Timothée Chalamet sat down with Matthew McConaughey to discuss their time together filming Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar and Chalamet’s recent Oscar nomination for Marty Supreme.
As the conversation continued, he expressed his disinterest in occupying a medium that, in his eyes, has no cultural interest: “I don’t want to be working in ballet or opera or things where it’s like, ‘Hey! Keep this thing alive.’ Even though it’s like no one cares about this anymore.”
Moments later, he retracted his statement: “All respect to the ballet and opera people out there… I’m taking shots for no reason.”
Following the interview, debates flooded the internet, with users expressing outrage for his blatant disrespect of the two art forms. One X user wrote, “Ok I did not hear this. This sucks.”
TikTok influencer Aisha Rae highlighted the financial disparity between going to the movie theater versus attending an opera or ballet performance, captioning her video: “You cannot be dissing an art that costs WAY more to see than what YOUR art costs to see.”
Likewise, celebrities across the entertainment industry have condemned his statement, with Doja Cat releasing a TikTok (which has since been deleted) arguing that there’s “an etiquette” around ballet and opera, highlighting the rigorous dedication and practice for the respective crafts.
Misty Copeland, a renowned American ballet performer, responded to Chalamet, asserting, “It’s often mistaken that when something is popular, it’s meaningful or more impactful. There’s a reason that opera and ballet have been around for over 400 years.”
Composer Eric Whitacre furthered both points by suggesting artists like Chalamet practice humility: “…humility teaches you that you don’t know everything.”
From theater, opera, and ballet to painting and orchestras, traditional artistic media are losing general audiences, while readily accessible industries (like Chalamet’s) are adapting to the demand of digitized spaces.
This isn’t to say that traditional art doesn’t have an audience; it most certainly does, yet it’s slowly disappearing from the public’s entertainment zeitgeist.
With that being said, is Chalamet wrong, or is what he said a reflection of our cultural priorities?
A Brief History Lesson: Ballet, Opera, and the Intersection of Art
Emerging in the European courts of the late Renaissance and early Baroque periods, ballet and opera have always shared a symbiotic relationship. Each laid the foundation for art to encompass both music and drama as a means to convey a structured narrative.
The Baroque period (1600-1750) introduced the combination of the two art forms as they were integrated into court performances. This became standard, particularly for the French court, as balletic interludes often intertwined with operatic performance and aided the narrative.
Alongside live theater, drawing, painting, ballet, and opera have established the precedent that art is meant to be shared. Artistic expression isn’t a monolith; in fact, Chalamet’s industry exists because of the advancements made through traditional dance, music, and live performance.
Art is meant to intersect; to weave and blend elements from various practices as a means to portray a story, capture a moment in time, and let the audience cast their own interpretations. Film acting, AKA your literal job, Mr. Chalamet, borrows from theater techniques.
In 1897, Konstantin Stanislavski and Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko created the “Moscow Art Theater,” or “The Stanislavski System,” in response to a shift in acting focused on realism (long before cinema became popular).
When it was brought to America in 1923, this practice became known as “method acting,” something Chalamet implemented when preparing to play Bob Dylan in A Complete Unknown.
Traditional Art Isn’t Dying; It’s Just Expensive
According to a recent industry report, operas and ballets have 1-3 million viewers each, depending on the year. Compared to the 19.7 million people who tuned in to the Academy Awards last year, the disparity is intense. What it boils down to is accessibility and what modern audiences are willing to spend on entertainment.
If someone decided to attend a Broadway show, such as the production of Othello starring Denzel Washington and Jake Gyllenhaal, orchestra and mezzanine seats would cost $921 apiece. Similarly, the stage adaptation of Good Night, and Good Luck, starring George Clooney, costs $303.75 on average.
Broadway isn’t the only one offering expensive tickets; attending the New York City Ballet’s Nutcracker started at $122. Needless to say, the price points aren’t appetizing, but why is this the case?
Broadway investors support the high-ticket prices because they want the opportunity to recoup their expenses. Since the pandemic, stage productions have become more expensive to put on, causing producers to lose money.
The solution to attracting audiences? Offer short runs while casting high-profile celebrities and accommodating actors who need to return to the film industry.
Additionally, Broadway has taken a page out of Ticketmaster’s playbook, setting dynamic pricing for their tickets. If a show is in high demand but has limited seating, your bank account will be begging and crying for help.
Live performance has become a luxury, blocking the average person from experiencing it. Film and television, especially with the rise and domination of streaming, are not only more accessible but also deliver any stage production right to your screen.
Platforms such as Disney+ offer recordings of popular musicals such as Hamilton and Newsies. There’s even an online streaming service called National Theatre at Home dedicated to providing recordings of live theater.
Do People Truly Care About the Arts?
As Doja Cat said in her video, “There’s still an audience; people give a f*ck.”
Regardless of popularity, there’s always an audience for something; it’s a matter of reaching their needs. In the case of traditional art, high price points build gates that are impossible for the average viewer to open.
While I’m not entirely defending the Little Women actor, his comment highlights the consequence of inaccessibility. Without exposure, a medium loses its social relevance, and with social media holding our attention spans hostage, we cycle through trends without critically thinking or taking meaning from them.
Most notably, and a point I often see ignored, is the active defunding of artistic programs and industries. In June 2024, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis cut $32 million in the arts from the state budget. Due to a last-minute veto, applicants for these funds, including children’s orchestras, dance education programs, and more, received nothing they applied for.
Almost a year later, the Trump Administration began canceling the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) grants, affecting organizations such as Summer Stage in New York City and Open Studio Project in Chicago.
With an active destruction of the arts from federal and state governments, coupled with high prices and quick, bite-sized content, preservation for all forms of art is vital; art is our cultural currency — it’s how we understand and connect with one another. It’s impossible to commit to or practice any form without dabbling or being inspired by others. Art intersects; different kinds borrow from one another to make sense of the world we live in.
It’s not a matter of caring for an art form, but respecting it.
Want to see more HCFSU? Be sure to follow us on Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and Pinterest!