Phantom to change to "re-staged" production in flagship productions?- Page 4

[toottoot]

Posted: 7/20/20 at 9:03pm

I opted to ask around, and someone involved with the Broadway production said they understand that it's only planned for the London production. Of course, caution that it is all a bunch of hearsay. But that's what I learned, fwiw.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 7/20/20 at 10:12pm

That’s so sad! I don’t understand it. I think the show could def use an update but keep the current staging just add more “spectacle.” New pyro etc.

[blaxx]

Posted: 7/20/20 at 10:22pm

If they implement it in the West End, Broadway won't be too far behind.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 7/20/20 at 10:26pm

I don't know if "too far behind" is accurate. I mean, how long did it take them to put Raul back into the scene to make "Wandering Child" a trio again on Broadway?

[thedrybandit]

Posted: 7/20/20 at 10:55pm

AEA AGMA SM said: "I don't know if "too far behind" is accurate. I mean, how long did it take them to put Raul back into the scene to make "Wandering Child" a trio again on Broadway?"

I believe they added Raoul back in around the time Norm Lewis came in as the Phantom, so a really long time.

[Lot666]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 7:41am

toottoot said: "I opted to ask around, and someone involved with the Broadway production said they understand that it's only planned for the London production. Of course, caution that it is all a bunch of hearsay. But that's what I learned, fwiw."

I've heard the opposite from NY cast members.

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 10:02am

Lot, would you mind sharing what you’ve heard please ?

I suppose there’s no chance in hoping that the chandelier was removed to fix it? Didn’t they say that it was condemned and needed some work even if the pandemic hadn’t happened?

Has anyone seen or heard about work being done at the Majestic?

And with every other post on this thread being “well I guess they could update the show a little” no wonder Mackintosh feels ok with doing this. I sincerely wish you guys would stop encouraging Mackintosh to alter our beloved show in any way. Although it sounds like its fate has been sealed and this board can get what it’s wanted for years: an “updated” Phantom

Updated On: 7/21/20 at 10:02 AM

[singerunlimited]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 10:15am

Totally agree, Phantom4ever. PHANTOM completely changed my life when I saw it for the first time over 20 years ago. There are countless elements to the show that keep me coming back over the years - at the top of the list is the thrilling opening sequence culminating in the chandelier's ascent from the stage to the ceiling.

I am completely sick over the prospect that Hal Prince's original production is being ousted in favor of a significantly subpar "updated" production. There is nothing exciting whatsoever about the Overture featuring the chandelier in a sack. When I saw the new tour for the first time, I was infuriated over this completely unnecessary change.

I would also love to know what the word on the street is regarding the Broadway production. If this is true, I don't understand why the mechanics involving the original chandelier can't be updated without having to lose that iconic set piece.

[Hot Pants]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 10:33am

This is just straight up disrespectful to Hal Prince. One of the advantages of Phantom running so long is that despite his passing, his work would continue to be seen and loved. Keep his staging. It’s worked for decades and it’ll continue to work now.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 10:36am

I’m not saying change it, but updating it with new technology seems like a great idea. It keeps it current and looking fresh. I saw it last year on Broadway and some of it felt so dated - like the fake body that falls down from the rafters. I think updating little things like that would help the show feel fresh. Not saying redo anything drastic. Also when the Phantom shoots the fire it felt so lackluster. Could update that, etc.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 11:00am

blaxx said: "If they implement it in the West End, Broadway won't be too far behind. "

It's nearly twice as much to run a show on Broadway than it is in the West End, and Phantom isn't doing anywhere near the financial business it needs to justify the expense of wholesale replacing the physical set, which would necessitate shutting down the show for several weeks, not to mention the time needed to tech the cast and crew on a new set.

[The8re phan]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 11:07am

Sorry to say, but this has NOTHING to do with improving the show, or making it technologically 'up-to-date'. 

Just like with the original London Les Mis, he is implementing these changes simply to save a few bucks paying the new designers and directors less than the royalties he has to pay to the show's original creators........

cause he simply hasn;t made enough money off these titles for the past 30+ years <insert side eye here>

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 11:25am

Umm.... We are already shut down for more than a few weeks... and every show will have to re-tech before reopening.

[toottoot]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 12:36pm

Lot666 said: "toottoot said: "I opted to ask around, and someone involved with the Broadway production said they understand that it's only planned for the London production. Of course, caution that it is all a bunch of hearsay. But that's what I learned, fwiw."

I've heard the opposite from NY cast members."

Iiiiiiiiinteresting. I'm going to personally withhold which area of production my sources are from, but I'll simply say it seems there's just rumors going around if that's the case. Who knows what holds weight. 

[MikeInTheDistrict]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 2:23pm

How were Les Miz's grosses before Mackintosh closed the original Broadway production? I wouldn't put it past him to just close the production, wait a few years, and then open a cheap, lackluster revival, as he did with Les Miz in 2006, which reused the old sets from the third national tour and reduced the orchestra by about ten musicians. And then again in 2009 with the "25th anniversary tour" with projections and no turntable that became the model for all his later productions.

[Elfuhbuh]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 2:35pm

Well, if this is true, my already bad birthday has just gotten worse. Yay.

[joevitus]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 3:05pm

I mean, I'm kinda blah on the rising chandelier as an effect, but am I to understand nothing rises in the touring production? It's already up there in place? Doesn't that kinda kill the whole point of the dialogue leading into the Overture? Do you just sit there in the dark listening to the Overture?

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 3:22pm

I thought the most recent Les Miz revival was excellent, even without the once-iconic turntable. I couldn't even tell the orchestra was smaller as well. I'm sure Phantom can still survive and thrive in the West End/B'way even if Lot 666 receives some technological updates. Place your trust in Lloyd Webber and Mackintosh.

[singerunlimited]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 3:31pm

joevitus - In the most recent tour, it was staged similarly to the filmed Royal Albert Hall production. When you enter the theatre, the (MUCH smaller) chandelier is already hanging over the audience in a sack. During the "Lot 666..." dialogue, it is slowly lowered from the ceiling to about the halfway point above the audience. The Overture begins, the covering over the chandelier is sucked away, and the chandelier immediately rises back to the ceiling, just a few bars into the Overture.

The rest of the Overture is spent watching the Hannibal rehearsal slowly begin to recreate on stage - some ballet dancers come out and set pieces are restored.

There are many videos of this online! Trust me, it is significantly less exciting than Hal Prince's original staging. Also, the chandelier itself completely pales in comparison to the look of the original.

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 3:44pm

If it does survive and thrive with ANY updates other than safety issues, I will definitely not be back. I'm sure CamMack does not care about losing my business 3 or 4 times of year, but it would break my heart to see this gem of a production altered in any way. 

And, FWIW, the revolve in Les Miserables is STILL very much iconic and I am waiting for the day when it somehow returns. 

To MikeintheDistrict, the original Broadway Les Miz never recovered from its post 9/11 slump. If you go back to the 2002 grosses, it went below 50% gross potential and stayed there for weeks. They announced a March 2003 closing, tickets sales surged, briefly, and it ultimately closed in May 2003. Phantom also was planning on closing in 2004 with the 'Eternally Yours" advertising campaign, but then the movie came out and 2005 was one of Phantom's best years ever, with month after month of sell-out audiences. 

I can understand that most theater-goers won't care if a show like Phantom has been changed or updated, and Cameron surely knows that even more than we all do. But there was something so comforting going into the Majestic and seeing that staging time and time again. There were (ugh I can't believe i'm using the past tense) so many moments that brought me joy and comfort that I'll miss.  Things like the ballerinas dancing in the dark as Christine and Raoul meet again. Listening to Christine sing "Wishing" and having the same lyrics mean different things to me depending on what problem I was trying to put behind me. Bringing a new friend or date to the show and having them whisper "now that was cool" when Raoul jumped into the trap door. Seeing the audience point at the Phantom in the catwalks above the proscenium. Watching the front row center tourists giggle with delight when the marskman stands in front of them with his gun. Having the managers look out into the audience and say "every seat sold!" on nights where the house was half empty and on nights where it was standing room only. Somehow noticing a new costume or costume detail every single time I see Masquerade. Watching the backdrop fall with reckless abandon and almost hitting Carlotta. Watching the chandelier rise during intermission and seeing people rush to get out of its way. Reflecting on the three times the music box plays during the show. Seeing the curtains literally and figuratively roll back time during the overture. Looking up as the Phantom shakes the chandelier and thinking.....yikes. Hearing the gasps of people who are shocked to see the Phantom appear out of the angel--realizing he just heard Christine profess her love to another man. Seeing the Phantom touch himself with pleasure (even though his fate has denied him the "joys of the flesh" )  as Christine sings for him. The play within a play atmosphere of the operas.  

 

Updated On: 7/21/20 at 03:44 PM

[joevitus]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 4:18pm

singerunlimited said: "joevitus - In the most recent tour, it was staged similarly to the filmed Royal Albert Hall production. When you enter the theatre, the (MUCH smaller) chandelier is already hanging over the audience in a sack. During the "Lot 666..." dialogue, it is slowly lowered from the ceiling to about the halfway point above the audience. The Overture begins, the covering over the chandelier is sucked away, and the chandelier immediately rises back to the ceiling, just a few bars into the Overture.

The rest of the Overture is spent watching the Hannibal rehearsal slowly begin to recreate on stage - some ballet dancers come out and set pieces are restored.

There are many videos of this online! Trust me, it is significantly less exciting than Hal Prince's original staging. Also, the chandelier itself completely pales in comparison to the look of the original."

It does indeed sound significantly less exciting than Prince's staging!

[MikeInTheDistrict]

Posted: 7/21/20 at 4:53pm

Thanks, Phantom4ever, for the Les Miz info. I hadn't realized it had been doing so poorly toward the end of its run. I saw the tour in D.C. around that same time and it was sold out that night. I just assumed it was doing as well in New York. I also didn't know Phantom was slated to close before the film came out. I'm thankful it didn't because I didn't get to see it until several years later. There is so much detail and thought put into that production, I really would hate to see it replaced with the crappy touring version.

[Lot666]

Posted: 7/22/20 at 7:55am

joevitus said: "am I to understand nothing rises in the touring production? It's already up there in place? Doesn't that kinda kill the whole point of the dialogue leading into the Overture? Do you just sit there in the dark listening to the Overture?"

Yes, the chandelier becomes totally extraneous. Ridiculous, isn't it?

[Lot666]

Posted: 7/22/20 at 7:57am

toottoot said: "Lot666 said: "toottoot said: "I opted to ask around, and someone involved with the Broadway production said they understand that it's only planned for the London production. Of course, caution that it is all a bunch of hearsay. But that's what I learned, fwiw."

I've heard the opposite from NY cast members."

Iiiiiiiiinteresting. I'm going to personally withhold which area of production my sources are from, but I'll simply say it seems there's just rumors going around if that's the case. Who knows what holds weight."

I'm not comfortable sharing who/when/where specifics, but I mentioned the story about the London plans and the response was something along the lines of, "Yes, and we're expecting to be next."

[joevitus]

Posted: 7/22/20 at 2:14pm

Lot666 said: "joevitus said: "am I to understand nothing rises in the touring production? It's already up there in place? Doesn't that kinda kill the whole point of the dialogue leading into the Overture? Do you just sit there in the dark listening to the Overture?"

Yes, the chandelier becomes totally extraneous. Ridiculous, isn't it?"

Hugely. And odd, since if the chandelier has to fall at the end of Act 1, anyway, so why not raise it from the floor in the opening? In fact, I'd always assumed the real reason the play opens with this effect (which, as far as the plot goes, makes no sense) is so that audiences will see the chandelier is safely attached and won't really crash down on them during the Act 1 climax.