I would perhaps ask you to consider how you are engaging with theatre yourself. Indeed Theatre is suffering, as are all Arts at the moment, including film, especially independent film industries. However, this by no means signifies that the art is dying. The reason why I ask you to consider how you're engaging with Theatre is because you may be unaware of how theatre is being used in a way that is different to how you're experiencing it. Theatre can be completely inexpensive, completely portable, and completely inclusive. I have been involved in theatre workshops that have been run in school classrooms, drama studios, hotel rooms and basements. No one has been required to have any experience with it, and as you see in the video above, it is incredibly easy to integrate into a school's curriculum to aid with other subjects such as English Lit. Theatre can be used in detention centres, prisons, classrooms, elderly homes, the list is endless. It can ( and I stress the 'can') be the everyman's art form. Of course, it too has is glamorous and exclusive sides in Broadway and the West End, but its roots should (and I stress the 'should') be in telling stories about everyday life, or even better a life experience that none of us are exposed to, educating and enlightening the audience, a building block for compassion. As everyday life is continual, there are always stories to tell, therefore the Theatre Art form is impossible to eradicate, and in fact only grows larger as new theatre companies are set up, new genres and ways of presenting theatre are created and so on and so forth. I am truly an avid cinema lover, but I can say that with my own personal experience of it, I have found it harder to understand how to break into it, from either an acting point (which is understandably exclusive and elusive) of view, or a writing and filming point of view. Of course, you could probably be incredibly resourceful and film something on your phone and get great software for your computer and make something etc, but don't you immediately sense that to pick up a script and have no tools at your disposal other than your imagination is much more accessible for people, who perhaps don't have those resources at their fingertips? And that really is what it comes down to for me, Art must be accessible to everyone. Also, it must be said that theatre and film continue to influence each other and there have been many exciting crossovers between the two disciplines, for example, when experienced film makers such as Danny Boyle have directed theatre (e.g. Frankenstein, London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony), and vice versa, theatre directors such as Stephen Daldry entering the film sector (think Billy Elliot)- and of course at the very beginnings of film and cinema with the silent greats: Chaplin, Keaton, Lloyd, who were more or less capturing vaudeville disciplines (theatre) on camera. (A great example is Chaplin's City Lights, where there are many scenes that are set up in such a way that emulates a theatre stage). As for "true forms of acting", there are an immense number of popular blockbusters where I think we can all recall an actor's performance as "yelling really loud and flinging [their] body around", and yes it is absolutely true this often happens on stage. In one way, you are correct to separate the styles of acting for the stage and acting for the screen. However, I don't feel that it is fair, or even possible to compare the two and say one is better or 'truer' than the other. If an actor where to give a screen performance (i.e. an incredibly introspective performance, where the smallest eye flicker can be detected and a small sigh can speak volumes) in an 800 seat theatre and I am at the very back, I am not going to be able to see the actor doing anything whatsoever and all that character and 'acting' is lost. An actor on a stage has a very hard job of having to make sure that if even if they are 'whispering' on stage, the audience all the way at the very back of the theatre has to feel like the person on stage is talking directly to them. Of course, acting for the screen is incredibly intimate. Anything and everything is picked up by the camera so if your attention is elsewhere for a second, you can see it. However, for me, there is an underlying necessity between both disciplines, and it is what you mentioned as 'true acting', that is, truthfulness. I have seen performances both on the stage and on film that have moved me tears and dying with laughter, and I find that really happens to me when the actor is just being honest through that character they are playing. There is a growing trend of "hyper-realism" in acting, and for that I feel the "fun" of the art form is really taking a beating. I think in Theatre, it has more of a freedom to stand up and say "this is just a performance by the way, we can all laugh at ourselves and have fun here, and yes things go wrong because its all live but let's go with it together". Films I sometimes feel are worried to do that, in fear that they will not be taken seriously. Of course, there's also the fact that many actors start their careers in theatre (true, a lot of British and European actors, but Americans have a strong theatre core training as well), just because it gives you that stamina, strength and understanding of character and transformation. Also, funnily, a lot of actors who don't have theatre backgrounds later in their careers try to find their way back into it, and I think that is an appreciation of how challenging it is, and many actors really test themselves and their craft on whether they can 'conquer the stage' if you like. In the end, I think it comes back to that idea that Theatre and Film constantly influence and feed each other, with actors, writers, directors and so on. Both can be incredibly communicative and relevant and both have to work at being that in order to survive the endless budget cuts.

Theatre is more alive now than every before, and every good film and tv actor has started with his/her training on the stage. There is nothing like learning how to act before a live audience. I'm sorry you don't honor the creative power of the relationship between the actor and the audience. I hope you will come into contact with great acting on the stage and appreciate how profound is the experience.

That's the stupidest comment in a long time, do you know how easy TV and screen acting is compared to the stage... The amount of work, memorisation and skill needed to keep a whole scene going with minute changes in facial expressions, body language and vocals. Compare that to a screen scene which is stopping and starting all the time where an actor can stop and look at the script if they need to. All great screen actors credit their talent and experience to the stage and always go back to it as well. Look at the likes of David Tennant, amazing on both and routinely says how important Theatre is