Is the theatre interval becoming a thing of the past?

It really depends on the show, a panto with no interval would kill the performers and having no bar makes no financial sense, theatre is a business after all.

The problem for me is how uncomfortable most theatre seats are. The longer things go on, the more fidgety I get. Interval usually comes as a relief for a chance to stretch my legs.

Sometimes it's nice to see a shortish play, no interval and get home early, especially if I'm getting up early for work the next day, but I also enjoy getting really absorbed in a long play, and over 2 hours really needs an interval IMO. So I hope both will continue and I don't think there's much evidence of the interval disappearing.

I assume bar takings are balanced against being able to send bar staff home by 8pm, and the other reduced costs associated with putting on a shorter play e.g. any other staff who are paid hourly, costs of heating/air conditioning/lighting/security, maybe a shorter rehearsal period? If bars are open after the show, people might spend more then because they're not limited to 20 mins, or prioritising the toilet queue. The article seems to over-simplify the cost v revenue issue.

"But anecdotally, theatregoers across the capital have complained about attending shows where their viewing experience has been disrupted by other people’s constant trips to the bathroom." I doubt that's related to whether or not there's an interval, but more about how much people drink before and during the show, the type of show, audience demographics.

It mentions the Globe not having intervals after Covid as though that is still the case, but they are back to being the same as every other theatre in having intervals for longer shows (2+ hours). As far as I remember after Covid they revived a couple of their shorter touring productions from pre-Covid, which meant they could reopen quicker, and no interval solved the problem of audience mingling at a time of social distancing. It wasn't to be more authentic as the quote from Michelle Terry implies.

It does seem that there is an increasing tendency for plays to be written for no interval, with the length designed to accommodate this. For really dramatic pieces, I prefer the flow not to be broken even for quite long performances The majority of existing (older) plays would seem to be designed to have a break, with sometimes a climax or a change of scene at the end of the first half.

This no interval approach has lead to many very short pieces which help those that don’t want late finishes. . However, while they may be very desirable and worthwhile viewing, I can be discouraged from going as I need to balance the travel time and cost against the length of the experience. I certainly don’t calculate value in terms of pounds per minute but sometimes the pay off is not likely to be worthwhile from my selfish perspective.

As ever, as is desirable, I expect the mixture to continue.

Nowadays it seems a predilection to munch and slurp whilst in your seat - in many cases bought to you so you don't even have the "inconvienance" to go to the bar - or wander in and out to visit the loo during a performance with no considreration to others I'm beginning to wonder if the said audience members even knows the purpose of an interval.
Are audiences reverting to the conduct of audiences in Shakespearian times - minus the throwing of rotten fruit and veg at the actors?

As remarked elsewhere,  Globe performances without interval were only just introduced after pandemic when it first reopened  to avoid undue mixing. The only performance this season without will be Comedy of Errors which is relatively short. It was never intended to abandon intervals on a permanent basis; bar income is far too valuable. Guardian gives false impression of what Terry said.

It would be very wise to check reviews before going to Globe. Audiences leaving during performances and at interval are not uncommon.

Place was packed and I enjoyed every minute but confess to nipping out once

There have always been shows without an interval, thinking Come From Away, Constellation and Last 5 Years - this is not new. It would be bonkers to have an interval in Six etc.

That’s not really a new thing. HBO used to be like that 20-odd years ago. Stuff like The Sopranos and Six Feet Under would vary from episode to episode.

And before that I think the BBC used to be more easygoing about lengths as well. Fawlty Towers, Boys From The Blackstuff, I Claudius, Our Friends in the North, I’m sure they all had varying lengths.

It does make sense to allow the programme to be as long as it needs, and not having to resort to a cliffhanger every eight minutes or so to accommodate adverts.

To bring it back to theatre though, I think the stage version of Fawlty Towers probably could have done with being a one-act.

Yes, anything under 2h I think twice before booking. Why should I pay £35 for an 80 min show for a “bad” seat (Six, unless you rely on rush) when I can pay the same or less for a better seat and a longer show? I agree that some shows like Six don’t need an interval, but I would feel “ripped off”!