2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Jul 21, 2020 18:31:02 GMT
I wouldn't worry only because there's nothing any of us can do about it. I think a bleak version of curiosity works!
|
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Jul 21, 2020 18:38:29 GMT
I wouldn't worry only because there's nothing any of us can do about it. I think a bleak version of curiosity works! I guess you make a good point. If they were planning to scrap the original, they would have made a statement by now wouldn't they? With Les Mis, they announced that the original production was going to close in Jan/Feb last year and be replaced by the newer one, as the original was still running. Surely if they were planning to do the same to Phantom, it would have been announced months ago wouldn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 18:44:54 GMT
If they’re taking the opportunity to refurb like the Queens/Sondheim then it includes dressing rooms etc. Removing costumes and important set pieces would be a sensible move to protect them. Doesn’t mean they’re gone for good.
|
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Jul 21, 2020 19:08:32 GMT
If they’re taking the opportunity to refurb like the Queens/Sondheim then it includes dressing rooms etc. Removing costumes and important set pieces would be a sensible move to protect them. Doesn’t mean they’re gone for good. I'm fine with doing some maintenance/refurb work on the sets, but what worries me is if they sacrifice any big and spectacular moments, like the chandelier coming down or making the sets smaller. For many of us, we just find it hard to trust Cameron Mackintosh whenever something comes up like what's been going on recently. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 20:14:30 GMT
I assume there's some sort of safety issue preventing them selling it off to fans in pieces. (Beads: £5 each)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 9:30:06 GMT
I assume there's some sort of safety issue preventing them selling it off to fans in pieces. (Beads: £5 each) You may joke but some of the smaller props have been remade quite often along the run, stuff like the Hannibal skulls etc. I read once that someone passing by saw them leaving some replaced props out for waste disposal and asked if he could take them, they said yes. Thats one reason I'd be tempted to linger around rn. |
|
2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Jul 22, 2020 14:25:24 GMT
Which would've been good fodder for a West End Flea Market!
|
|
526 posts
|
Post by danielwhit on Jul 22, 2020 18:35:42 GMT
Also, if a lot of the work to the theatre is to rip out the old machinery and fit new kit in its place, surely the Phantom set as it was would just get in the way?
Even if (and assuming that) everything will go back after, it's probably far safer/quicker to strike it and then put back in rather than have people working around it. You never know, parts of the set may well be getting refurbished (or rebuilt) elsewhere during this period too.
|
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 22, 2020 18:40:41 GMT
It will look and sound exactly the same when it reopens. The mechanics behind it all will be new/safer/cheaper to run but Joe public won’t be able to see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Jul 22, 2020 18:45:40 GMT
If they’re taking the opportunity to refurb like the Queens/Sondheim then it includes dressing rooms etc. Removing costumes and important set pieces would be a sensible move to protect them. Doesn’t mean they’re gone for good. I'm fine with doing some maintenance/refurb work on the sets, but what worries me is if they sacrifice any big and spectacular moments, like the chandelier coming down or making the sets smaller. For many of us, we just find it hard to trust Cameron Mackintosh whenever something comes up like what's been going on recently. Indeed; for the recent tour, the producers even tried to give reassurance that the chandelier would "rise" but in fact was never on the stage to begin with in the auction scene. The worry is that they'll move the recent tour sets (which are smaller and less opulent than the originals) into the home of the original production. RUG and CML have got to be aware of all the commentary online over this, so why don't they just give reassurance in a statement rather than leaving this all unsaid? ALW's tweet didn't help matters as it suggested it's possible the show won't return in its original format. I know posters on here sometimes say the show is dated, but I don't think people are against genuine improvements. The issue is that nothing Cameron has done for this show in recent years has constituted any kind of improvement; rather, it has been a cheapening. An improvement might be implementing some of the stuff that was in the Vegas production, which Hal Prince oversaw (I mean set-wise rather than cutting the material, though I didn't necessarily think everything in that production was an improvement). The Broadway production regularly sells its old used notes and even beads from the chandelier in the Broadway Flea Market. I was really disappointed with what the first West End Flea Market was offering (basically nothing of interest). It would be a good way to raise money for the production and even maybe some of the out-of-work actors. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 18:55:51 GMT
It will look and sound exactly the same when it reopens. The mechanics behind it all will be new/safer/cheaper to run but Joe public won’t be able to see it. Praise be! A measured and calm response and by far the most likely scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Jul 22, 2020 18:59:03 GMT
It will look and sound exactly the same when it reopens. The mechanics behind it all will be new/safer/cheaper to run but Joe public won’t be able to see it. So do we know for certain that the show will look like this...  ...rather than like this?  And like this...  ...rather than like what's on the right below?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 20:31:37 GMT
It will look and sound exactly the same when it reopens. The mechanics behind it all will be new/safer/cheaper to run but Joe public won’t be able to see it. So do we know for certain that the show will look like this... ...rather than like this? And like this... ...rather than like what's on the right below? The relevant part is that Joe Public won't notice. I get that some fans are really passionate about this show, but heart is ruling head in the outrage here - theatre is a business and if they can be more economic and efficient than that is just business common sense. 99% of patrons won't notice. |
|
|
|
Post by phantom4ever on Jul 23, 2020 4:01:26 GMT
Poster J, am I correct then in saying that you are confirming that the pictured changes WILL be happening in the London production? And it's accurate to say that it is the EXACT same because 99% of patrons won't be able to tell the difference between the two set designs? AND you are saying that it is more economic and efficient to remove the original design and replace it with what's pictured above? Just trying to get a clear answer from someone who hopefully knows one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2020 7:28:49 GMT
Poster J, am I correct then in saying that you are confirming that the pictured changes WILL be happening in the London production? And it's accurate to say that it is the EXACT same because 99% of patrons won't be able to tell the difference between the two set designs? AND you are saying that it is more economic and efficient to remove the original design and replace it with what's pictured above? Just trying to get a clear answer from someone who hopefully knows one way or the other. I don't know anything except basic economics and a bit of perspective. I have nothing to do with the show, but read back through the thread and you'll find plenty of people with technical knowledge talking about how inefficient and dated the current set up is. And don't put words in my mouth - I didn't say anything about confirming the changes are happening, or that it's accurate to say they are the same because 99% of people probably won't be able to tell the difference (don't be ridiculous!). I'm talking about looking at this rationally and about whether it is likely to have any impact whatsoever on the vast majority of the paying audience who aren't people who frankly are coming across as slightly obsessed superfans. In other words, think about it logically rather than being outraged because they've dared to think about modernising the workings of a nearly 35 year old show and making it more efficient. They would not be doing it if there wasn't an economic benefit - realising that doesn't require any inside knowledge whatsoever, just the tiniest bit of business common sense. |
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 23, 2020 7:31:39 GMT
People go to Her Majesty’s to see the chandelier fall. The set pieces in POTO are intrinsic to the show and where they’ve tried to tour the show without them people have been disappointed. There is no money in disappointed customers, especially if the show attracts the number of repeat visits that Phantom does. POTO will be at Her Majesty’s theatre for many years to come so there’s no reason not to reinstall a better, modern, possibly FASTER Chandelier. Same goes for the other set pieces. I really think people are worrying unnecessarily. As far as the orchestra is concerned, yes it’s a shame if it’s smaller, but nevertheless it will sound the same to all but the most discerning ears. And while it’s sad that some jobs are replaced by technology that’s something that’s happening in every industry.
Now you’re going to say that Cam Mack did it with Les Mis to which I would reply most people didn’t go to Les Mis to see a revolve, and that in my opinion the new version is visually more spectacular and yes, better than the original.
|
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jul 23, 2020 8:33:06 GMT
Poster J, am I correct then in saying that you are confirming that the pictured changes WILL be happening in the London production? And it's accurate to say that it is the EXACT same because 99% of patrons won't be able to tell the difference between the two set designs? AND you are saying that it is more economic and efficient to remove the original design and replace it with what's pictured above? Just trying to get a clear answer from someone who hopefully knows one way or the other. I don't know anything except basic economics and a bit of perspective. I have nothing to do with the show, but read back through the thread and you'll find plenty of people with technical knowledge talking about how inefficient and dated the current set up is. And don't put words in my mouth - I didn't say anything about confirming the changes are happening, or that it's accurate to say they are the same because 99% of people probably won't be able to tell the difference (don't be ridiculous!). I'm talking about looking at this rationally and about whether it is likely to have any impact whatsoever on the vast majority of the paying audience who aren't people who frankly are coming across as slightly obsessed superfans. In other words, think about it logically rather than being outraged because they've dared to think about modernising the workings of a nearly 35 year old show and making it more efficient. They would not be doing it if there wasn't an economic benefit - realising that doesn't require any inside knowledge whatsoever, just the tiniest bit of business common sense. There is an economic benefit to not having a plethora of single seats for JCS at the OAT. People could look at that rationally, logically, and not be outraged (or appalled). But hey, everyone is different. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Jul 23, 2020 8:56:30 GMT
I don't think anyone on the thread is disputing showbiz is, well, a business. But I can understand why the outrage is warranted if the changes are artistically worse and there is no reason for them other than to make the show cheaper. Yes, it might mean the show will run for longer, but it would be artistically worthier to close the original and conceive a revival that wasn't simply a watered down version of it. To add to that, the fact they've appeared to wait until the three main design/staging creatives of this show have passed away leaves a very sour taste. And add to that the fact that, if a watered-down version reappears, CML will still market it with the tagline 'The Brilliant Original'.
Saying 'Joe Public' won't notice is not really a very good argument when the likelihood is ticket prices will be even higher when the show reopens. It's quite disrespectful to 'Joe Public' too. This is also a show that's been seen worldwide for three decades. There's a very good chance Joe Public WILL notice - if they really lapped everything up and just came to Phantom for a chandelier, then they'd have shoved in Laurence Connor's substandard production in ages ago. But they didn't, and that production has been junked, and it's because Joe Public didn't buy it. I think the difference in the last picture above is clear, and the public will notice.
I used to have a lot of respect for Mackintosh as he seemed to care about the product he was giving audiences and had an honesty/integrity I considered lacking in other producers. Obviously, I was wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2020 9:13:50 GMT
I'm fine with doing some maintenance/refurb work on the sets, but what worries me is if they sacrifice any big and spectacular moments, like the chandelier coming down or making the sets smaller. For many of us, we just find it hard to trust Cameron Mackintosh whenever something comes up like what's been going on recently. ... RUG and CML have got to be aware of all the commentary online over this, so why don't they just give reassurance in a statement rather than leaving this all unsaid?... That in itself really is thread-worthy. Twitter is rife with begrudged cast and crew of CML productions who were informed they wouldn't be working for the rest of the year or that their jobs no longer existed via Social Media. CML couldn't even dignify employees with any information about their contracts so no chance of the meagre public getting any information from them as to their plans. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2020 16:35:08 GMT
I don't know anything except basic economics and a bit of perspective. I have nothing to do with the show, but read back through the thread and you'll find plenty of people with technical knowledge talking about how inefficient and dated the current set up is. And don't put words in my mouth - I didn't say anything about confirming the changes are happening, or that it's accurate to say they are the same because 99% of people probably won't be able to tell the difference (don't be ridiculous!). I'm talking about looking at this rationally and about whether it is likely to have any impact whatsoever on the vast majority of the paying audience who aren't people who frankly are coming across as slightly obsessed superfans. In other words, think about it logically rather than being outraged because they've dared to think about modernising the workings of a nearly 35 year old show and making it more efficient. They would not be doing it if there wasn't an economic benefit - realising that doesn't require any inside knowledge whatsoever, just the tiniest bit of business common sense. There is an economic benefit to not having a plethora of single seats for JCS at the OAT. People could look at that rationally, logically, and not be outraged (or appalled). But hey, everyone is different. How mature. I had thought this board was over its phase of petty sniping but clearly not. Sometimes I wonder why I bother posting at all anymore, it isn't enjoyable when people follow you from one thread to another just to take another swipe. |
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jul 23, 2020 16:42:29 GMT
There is an economic benefit to not having a plethora of single seats for JCS at the OAT. People could look at that rationally, logically, and not be outraged (or appalled). But hey, everyone is different. How mature. I had thought this board was over its phase of petty sniping but clearly not. Sometimes I wonder why I bother posting at all anymore, it isn't enjoyable when people follow you from one thread to another just to take another swipe. Not sniping, just commenting on a case of double standards. |
|
324 posts
|
Post by barrowside on Jul 23, 2020 17:10:54 GMT
I think there is a confusion here. Aren't the second set of photos in Scarpia's post of Paul Brown's designs and chandelier from the non-replica tour which has now been scrapped. I think the worry is that the production will retain Maria Bjornson's designs when it reopens but that they may be cheapened, dumbed or scaled down for economy and some of her effects such as the rising candelabra may be compromised.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2020 17:21:56 GMT
It will look and sound exactly the same when it reopens. The mechanics behind it all will be new/safer/cheaper to run but Joe public won’t be able to see it. So do we know for certain that the show will look like this... ...rather than like this? And like this... ...rather than like what's on the right below? Wasn’t the phantom on horse thing from the 25th anniversary Connor version? Think we can be fairly confident they’re not using that. As for the end of act 1 look, apparently this was not complete in Leicester this year. I know it’s hard living with uncertainty, but we’ll just have to wait and see. Re Cameron, no doubt he has faults, but he has almost never delivered a poor quality product. |
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 23, 2020 19:09:34 GMT
I find it interesting that the people on this very forum who saw the latest tour version at the Curve have not commented on how close it was to “the brilliant original “. Sorry if ive missed the post.
|
|
|
|
Post by 10642 on Jul 23, 2020 19:35:51 GMT
Main differences between 2020 UK tour and London production:
- in Leicester they used the restaged tour chandelier which began above the audience, lowered when mentioned by auctioneer then rose slightly during the overture. Fell directly over the audience at end of act 1 (didn’t fall to stage like London). Apparently they were building a new chandelier more like the London one but it didn’t fit the curve or wasn’t ready in time. (An ideal replacement for London if they’ve already spent the money to build it...?)
- All I ask of You reprise - during all i ask of you the “pegasus” statue is at the back of the stage as Raoul and Christine leave it swings forward and the Phantom appears at the top to sing, as he holds the last note it retreats backwards before the chandelier falls
- slight lyric change in Final Lair where Phantom sings “I had rarely dreamt we’d be so blessed/and now my wish comes true, you have truly made my night” instead of “i had rather hoped that you would come”
-no trapdoor for masquerade - hard to have a trapdoor in same place on different stages when touring - Phantom runs off stage covered by the ensemble
- Raoul does jump from the bridge on way to the Lair but into a box that slides out in the darkness rather than through a trapdoor
|
|
