It’s been a week since Netflix’s Black Mirror: Bandersnatch  dropped, bringing a mainstream update to the choose-your-own-adventure  stories we all love. Last Friday, I sat down to watch with my boyfriend,  excited to finally experience something I’d been eagerly anticipating.  We played through, taking turns making the choices, until we hit a  credits scene. I think we saw about 3 endings.
In  the ensuing week, I’ve read numerous think-pieces about it, watched  Netflix’s behind-the-scenes videos, and dreamed about where this could  go. I especially love/fear this Westworld-esque take on how Netflix can use people’s choices to start marketing more directly to them. (I fully expect a future Black Mirror episode to delve more deeply into this idea. How meta.)
But as an immersive theater creator, I saw even more possibility. My first immersive theater show, SPIES!,  used a chat bot to allow the audience to vote between two choices for  the main characters to make at several points within the show,  ultimately leading to one of three endings.
I’d love to say “I did it first, Netflix!” (Narrator: She did not, in fact, do it first.)  but really, immersive theater at its best has been and IS the  embodiment of audience choice determining story experience. Even when  the ending doesn’t change, many shows have simultaneous scenes, and no  one in the audience sees the same thing. The difference in experience  for each person is one of the elements that makes immersive theater (and  Bandersnatch) so great to talk about. Your experience and my experience were different, and only together can we reconstruct the whole picture of the story.
I’d like to present what I see as the challenges, advantages, and personal preferences in audience-driven storytelling for both live theater and filmed TV or movies.
Challenges: Live vs. Filmed
- Logistical nightmares. Keeping  track of all the branches is really difficult, both for the  writer/creator, and for the actors. In my first iteration of the  flowchart for SPIES!, I imagined a story that branched at each choice,  ultimately ending up with eight different endings. I thought this would  be awesome until I consulted some actors, and they informed me that it  might make things difficult to remember. I also found writing three  endings to be plenty. The Bandersnatch  team has spoken about the difficulties of keeping the narrative  branches straight, and of the need to build a new software to handle the  script. The actors also had to learn several versions of the same  scene. I’d say that in both cases (live and filmed), there are similar  logistical challenges. 
- Emotional satisfaction. Audience choice and branching narratives can often interfere with the third rail (see: STORY GENIUS),  because if there are different endings, the emotional outcome will be  different. Some endings and branches will be inherently less satisfying.  And in a larger piece, if the whole group is voting, certain guests  will not get to see the choice they preferred come to fruition. It’s  easy to let the choice element be a gimmick, and to ignore the emotional  heart of the story. But that is never going to create the resonance  that makes a story stick with you. (My favorite Bandersnatch ending is definitely the most emotionally resonant one. THE BUNNY!!!) I’ve also been to “sandbox”  immersive theater shows that haven’t delivered a clear third rail  because I missed key scenes (my fault? the creator’s fault?) and left  feeling less than satisfied. 
 Audience members aren’t storytellers  and they choose things for different reasons. Some just want to “break”  the show. Some are over-eager, distracted by the “wrong” things, biased,  whatever. They are live people in a live theater setting, set loose.  Shepherding an audience member along on an emotional journey is a huge  challenge in linear storytelling. Make the thing non-linear, and who  knows what someone will get out of it.
 
As  audience choice becomes more incorporated into both live theater and  filmed works, writers cannot ignore the third rail. The challenge for  both is the same: don’t get distracted and let choice be a gimmick.
Advantages: Live vs. Filmed
- Ability to react and number of possibilities. Immersive  theater has actors who can change what they are doing immediately in  reaction to an audience member. They can improv better than any AI that  ever existed. There is no limit to the number of improvised iterations  they can make, although there is the limit of human memory on the number  of scripted iterations. In film, it’s the opposite. No limit to  scripted iterations (hypothetically. I realize that there are temporal  and financial limitations), but an absolute limit on improvised  iterations (I’d call this 0. Even with an elaborate AI, it’s not the  same as having a live person).
 Each has a different advantage, but  both have the opportunity to have a large number of possible reactions.  One has scripted, one has improvised.
 
- Reaching an audience. Obviously  going to hand this one to Netflix. No limit to how many people can be  watching at once, making different choices, replaying forever for the  low, low price of a monthly subscription. Immersive theater will always  have a smaller audience, in real time, paying more. Advantage: Netflix. 
Personal Preference: Live vs. filmed
So which do I prefer? I think that Bandersnatch  was a huge step forward in terms of showing people what is possible. (I  also really liked it! )I look forward to the future of audience choice  in filmed works, and I’d like to see more choices that feel natural and  are emotionally driven.
A real immersive theater “sandbox” has  tons of choice within a set of parameters. You can see different rooms,  follow different characters, choose different paths. I like the  options, but I like some guidance. (I was one of those who missed every  important scene in Sleep No More and spent too much time wandering around alone in the dark…still loved it, though!)
For  now I prefer immersive theater, surprising no one who knows me.  Experiencing something unique happen in real time is magical, even  moreso than having Stefan talk about his mother or not. (Or eat Frosted  Flakes over Sugar Puffs.)
Should  all immersive theater shows incorporate audience choice in terms of  voting between options? No, nor should all TV shows. Really. Don’t do  that. Please.
Do you agree?
YES | NO
(This post also appeared on Medium.com)