Love Never Dies. Australian or West End?

[iholland95]

Posted: 2/17/18 at 10:08pm

Which version of Love Never Dies do you prefer? The West End or Australian production? I personally prefer the West End production well because....ramin of course. But aside from that I really like the set and the costumes better. The beauty underneath is also a better version in my opinion. 

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 2/17/18 at 10:29pm

Neither. I like some of the music but the book is absolutely ridiculous.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 2/17/18 at 10:29pm

Yep. Neither. Nothing can make this show good.

[Dolly80]

Posted: 2/18/18 at 4:05am

Agree with the above. It says it all about ALW’s inability to let a show go when it’s fundamentally bad.

He blames the designers for its failure (Bob Crowley in London) and neglects to own up to the fact the story and book are STUPID. And boring. Let it die already.

[Lot666]

Posted: 2/19/18 at 11:05am

I like different aspects of each version. While the edits made for Australia improved and clarified the storyline, I do not like the repositioning of "Till I Hear You Sing" to the top of the show. I think the original London "Prologue/Coney Island Waltz" sequence was far superior to the Australian/US Touring version and would like to see it reinstated (with "Till I Hear You Sing" moved back to its original position). On the other hand, I very much like the new lyrics for Dear Old Friend and the updates to The Beauty Underneath, including the insertion of the Phantom of the Opera title song excerpt as the intro to Beauty Underneath.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 2/19/18 at 1:39pm

I think the current version is definitely an improvement over the original. I don't really like "'Til I Hear You Sing" as a prologue. I'd be curious to see the current version open with that brief prelude and then straight into the "Cony Island Waltz." Then put "'Till I Hear You Sing" back in it's original spot after the scene with Giry and Meg. I don't know if that would really make a difference though. I do like the new "Beauty Underneath" with the excerpt from the Phantom title song described above as well as the new "Streets of Cony Island" sequence near the end, but again do those changes make the show successful now? Probably not.

[Justin D]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 9:46am

Just curious, was any reason ever given for the Beauty Underneath rewrite?

I love the lea din with POTO but I prefer the tune in the original more than the new one, so was just wondering why.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 12:45pm

The Beauty Underneath is just a terrible song and should be thrown out and completely rethought.  It was ALW's attempt to mirror the original show yet again by replicating the style and scene of its title song.  It's just way too obvious and deliberate.  The orchestrations are even more out of place than the original number it attempts to replicate.  But as far as the productions go, the London version of The Beauty Underneath  was without a doubt, one of the WORST numbers I've ever seen on stage of any musical.  Dear God, it was shockingly hideous and creepy in a way that didn't seem to be intended.  I remember laughing out loud in the theatre watching it unfold.  The Australian version improved a bit, visually and the revised US Tour version isn't much better, especially since it now musically links itself to its predecessor, making it all the more obviously forced.  They might as well just have the Phantom sing to the audience, "LOOK FOLKS!  REMEMBER WHEN I DID THIS WITH HIS MOM?  IT ALSO HAD THE SUDDEN APPEARANCE OF AN ELECTRIC GUITAR!  I WOULD CREEP AROUND AND SHOW HER THINGS LIKE I'M DOING NOW!  REMEMBER THAT?  HUH?  DO YOU?"

[Elfuhbuh]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 1:18pm

The Australian version is a good improvement over the London production, but I just don't think anything will ever make this show 100% work. The problem lies in the fact that Phantom never needed a sequel. The ending to Phantom was so tragically beautiful that there was just no need to bring the Phantom and Christine back together. It undermines the entire point of what happened in the original show and, in turn, the original novel.

Still, I do like popping in the DVD every once in a while for the visuals and the score, and I'll probably try to catch the tour when it comes around. I just watch the entire thing as some bizarre alternate universe story, because there's just no way I can watch it as an actual sequel. 

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 2:36pm

I've only seen the DVD of the Australian production and some clips of London (as well as the cast recordings of both)

Have to agree with Lot on "Till I hear you sing" seemed better placed in London.  Story wise I understand when they moved everything around, why they cut the prologue and went with that as the opening to set the whole thing up as the Phantom pining for Christine (you have to remember, when they did the World Premiere, they were trying to shy away from this being a bona-fide sequel to Phantom, so the idea was you could see this without having seen the original - which was a mis step)  But when I finally saw the prologue of the original and saw how coney island gradually came to life - it was pretty fantastic.  And I think that moving that to it's original place would move Act 1 a lot better.

 

Other than that though, I thought all the changes they made for Australia were much much better than the original.  (And set design, that was absolutely the case)

[Pernigraniline]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 4:30pm

The Australian and US Tour are better musicals (as in a cohesive whole) - but NOTHING can ever top the Original Original London Production - which had to be seen to be believed. It escalated from one bizarre set piece to another. A hotel balcony shaped as female genitalia, whilst the Phantom and Christine sang about making whoopee in a dark alley. The Robo-Gorilla playing the bongo-synthetiser, whilst robots and a table with human legs walked across the stage at the end of act 1. By act 2, the scenery budget had gone and we had a whole stage of wallpaper appearing for Christines dressing room, and a wooden frame as the opera house. Meg having a total breakdown after being sold by her mother as a prostitute, and twenty minutes of Christine dying. Whilst singing soprano, which takes some talent let me tell you. The audience were in shock at those early performances before the changes, let me tell you.

[ermengarde]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 4:55pm

Little known to many on here, there's actually a third version- a production in Denmark using the Australian libretto translated into Danish. Still pretty awful but pretty to look at... like every production of LND.

With all the callbacks to the original Phantom... why don't they just do the original Phantom? ALW has had many flops in his life, but he usually just moves on. Why is he still beating this dead horse? He's never going to make the changes necessary to make this a hit, so what's the point?

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 5:25pm

Pernigraniline said: "The Australian and US Tour are better musicals (as in a cohesive whole) - but NOTHING can ever top the Original Original London Production - which had to be seen to be believed. It escalated from one bizarre set piece to another. A hotel balcony shaped as female genitalia, whilst the Phantom and Christine sang about making whoopee in a dark alley. The Robo-Gorilla playing the bongo-synthetiser, whilst robots and a table with human legs walked across the stage at the end of act 1. By act 2, the scenery budget had gone and we had awhole stage of wallpaper appearingfor Christines dressing room, and a wooden frame as the opera house. Meg having a total breakdown after being sold by her mother as a prostitute,and twenty minutes of Christine dying. Whilst singing soprano, which takes some talent let me tell you. The audience were in shock at those early performances before the changes, let me tell you."

You just made me laugh out loud remembering going on to the forums every night after the previews and reading some of those early reports that spot on were what you described.  Particularly the gorilla and it taking Christine 20 minutes to die...  Too friggin funny.

[chernjam]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 5:27pm

ermengarde said: "Little known to many on here, there's actually a third version- a production in Denmark using the Australian libretto translated into Danish. Still pretty awful but pretty to look at... like every production of LND.

With all the callbacks to the original Phantom... why don't they just do the original Phantom? ALW has had many flops in his life, but he usually just moves on. Why is he still beating this dead horse? He's never going to make the changes necessary to make this a hit, so what's the point?


"

Obviously LND is not the flop that some of the LND-haters like to imagine it to be...  Investors aren't flocking to simply blow their money on these incarnations.  Obviously it's not a Phantom-like hit, but it must have been somewhat financially viable at this point

 

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 2/20/18 at 6:01pm

chernjam said: "ermengarde said: "Little known to many on here, there's actually a third version- a production in Denmark using the Australian libretto translated into Danish. Still pretty awful but pretty to look at... like every production of LND.

With all the callbacks to the original Phantom... why don't they just do the original Phantom? ALW has had many flops in his life, but he usually just moves on. Why is he still beating this dead horse? He's never going to make the changes necessary to make this a hit, so what's the point?


"

Obviously LND is not the flop that some of the LND-haters like to imagine it to be... Investors aren't flocking to simply blow their money on these incarnations. Obviously it's not a Phantom-like hit, but it must have been somewhat financially viable at this point

"

There does seem to be interest but I'm not sure financial viability is yet sure. The show was bankrolled for the last half of the London run and closed very much in the red, and even the Australian production did not turn a profit and had its Brisbane dates cancelled. I'm not sure how the Danish production did. I don't believe the Germans took so well to it, but I think it did OK in Japan. As for America, the amount of discounting so early in the tour does not bode well. At this point the show has so much baggage that no-one would invest in it unless they genuinely liked it enough to do so - it's not one where any investor is likely to see a return.

[Lot666]

Posted: 2/21/18 at 8:52am

chernjam said: "...when I finally saw the prologue of the original and saw how coney island gradually came to life - it was pretty fantastic."

It was spellbinding. When Madam Giry turned to the audience and spread her arms and the gates of Phantasma appeared and swung out...just gorgeous.

[Lot666]

Posted: 2/21/18 at 9:20am

Pernigraniline said: "a wooden frame as the opera house"

As with the original London "Prologue/Coney Island Waltz", I actually thought this staging of the aria was superior to the Aussie/US Tour "peacock" staging. Yes, it was quite simple in comparison to the peacock spectacle, but what made it work was the revolve.

At the end of "Before the Performance", Christine stepped into the center of the revolve under a faux proscenium arch, which was ornately finished on one side and unfinished on the other. As "Devil Take the Hindmost (Quartet)" began, the unfinished side faced the audience and the proscenium began to turn very slowly. With Christine standing in silent contemplation, the Phantom and Raoul appeared in the wings at opposite sides of the revolving proscenium to perform "Devil Take the Hindmost (Quartet)", with Giry in the back and Gustave near the front of the stage. The slow rotation perfectly conveyed the escalating tension and Christine's internal struggle as the other four characters pulled her in different directions as voices in her head (in the Aussie/US Tour productions, this is not depicted at all; Christine is not even on the stage during this song, so Raoul and the Phantom do not sing "to" her as they did in London). By the time the song finished, the proscenium had made a complete revolution so that both the finished side and Christine were facing the audience. This was an inversion of the first time she ever sang on stage for the Phantom in "Think of Me", which began with the audience seeing her onstage and ended with the audience seeing her backstage. I thought it was brilliant.

Updated On: 2/21/18 at 09:20 AM

[Justin D]

Posted: 2/21/18 at 11:34am

As much as I agree the staging of that number was kinda cool, I cant see that there was any dramatic tension because as an audience member, you know that she will sing the Phantom's song and thus pick him, its the title song, so you know she does it. That's one of the weak plot points for me because as an audience member, there is no suspense over who she will choose in the end.

But again, the revolve was cool, shame it was also still so minimal. I always find that Bob Crowley tends to design for a specific area of the theatre: centre orchestra. his often use of forced perspective gets lost when you see it from the side and when you sit higher up you tend to see a lot of empty stage in many of his shows.

[Lot666]

Posted: 2/21/18 at 12:28pm

Justin D said: "As much as I agree the staging of that number was kinda cool, I cant see that there was any dramatic tension because as an audience member, you know that she will sing the Phantom's song and thus pick him, its the title song, so you know she does it. That's one of the weak plot points for me because as an audience member, there is no suspense over who she will choose in the end."

Based on this logic ("its the title song, so you know she does it"), the title song from the original Phantom would have to be the title of the opera he writes and demands that Christine star in.

In LND, you only know that she will sing the Phantom's song if you've already listened to the CD and therefore know how the show ends. Prior to Christine's actual performance of the song in the second act, there is no indication as to the name of the song. In fact, before that point, the song only manifests as a brief, stripped-down piano piece played by Gustave in the hotel room and then Christine's brief humming of the tune; the lyrics are not sung and no one ever mentions that the song is entitled "Love Neve Dies".

Despite the wager between the Phantom and Raoul, I never felt that Christine's performance of the aria represented the point at which she actually chose between her two suitors. When I first saw the show in London, I didn't assume at that point that she would stay with the Phantom and let Raoul go; for me, the decision was made afterwards, back in the dressing room when she and the Phantom sang "Ah, Christine!" ("The song was beautiful | It sounded beautiful | Every note, every word | And it felt beautiful | And I felt beautiful | Lost in the music once more | Feeling it rise up and soar | Alive once again"  ). This is the point at which she concedes that his music and passion are what have been missing from her life.

Justin D said: "But again, the revolve was cool, shame it was also still so minimal."

ALW can never win on this front. His elaborately staged shows (e.g., Phantom, the original Sunset Boulevard) are derisively described as "spectacles", but if he scales the visuals back (e.g., The Woman in White, the original Love Never Dies, the revival of Sunset Boulevard) critics complain that the sets are ineffectual.

Updated On: 2/21/18 at 12:28 PM