|
|
Post by Boob on Apr 12, 2021 12:35:05 GMT
Don’t be fooled if they could replace actors through automation they probably would. This show has been replacing actors with mannequins for 35 years! |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Apr 12, 2021 13:25:41 GMT
This is really going to hurt the show, just like the downsizing of Les Mis hurt the musical integrity of the piece. Not good news to hear.
|
|
|
|
Post by marob on Apr 12, 2021 13:32:47 GMT
That’s a shame. Like the original Les Mis I took it for granted it would be running for years yet, and I never got around to seeing it.
|
|
1,210 posts
|
Post by musicalmarge on Apr 12, 2021 13:33:05 GMT
It will save Cameron about 20,000 a week.
Les Mis did it and years later most of us have moved on.
Technology changes! I’m against it really but will it sound the same?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 13:34:49 GMT
Don’t be fooled if they could replace actors through automation they probably would. This show has been replacing actors with mannequins for 35 years! Hahahaha that gave me a good chuckle thanks  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 13:44:29 GMT
It will save Cameron about 20,000 a week. Les Mis did it and years later most of us have moved on. Technology changes! I’m against it really but will it sound the same? Saving £20,000 is nothing when you are a billionaire, he will earn more from interest in a year. What's never factored into the Les Mis discourse is the fact it's lost over 150,000 seats approx a year since it opened. I don't think the audience for Phantom has been declining when you see the Broadway Grosses. West End Grosses aren't released but I always struggle to get a seat at Phantom. For me if I was his age with his wealth I wouldn't be ruining my legacy. Let those who inherit the estate be known for greed. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 12, 2021 14:28:07 GMT
I wonder would we make such comments if it was our money? I take the mick out of Kenwright because his thrift is legendary and almost a positive reason to go to one of his shows.
If some sort of decline or key cost is being hit because of current market circumstances, you would do what hou could to alleviate it surely? If it’s this or closing you would certainly experiment with a few things before throwing in the towel?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 14:30:54 GMT
It will save Cameron about 20,000 a week. Les Mis did it and years later most of us have moved on. Technology changes! I’m against it really but will it sound the same? No it wont sound the same. I'll admit that a while ago the internet provided me with an orchestra mix (no vocals) from the sound desk of the UK tour (reduced 2012 version) and it's reallly flat in places and lacks the dynamics and power of the full orchestration. |
|
526 posts
|
Post by danielwhit on Apr 12, 2021 14:53:52 GMT
It will save Cameron about 20,000 a week. Les Mis did it and years later most of us have moved on. Technology changes! I’m against it really but will it sound the same? No it wont sound the same. I'll admit that a while ago the internet provided me with an orchestra mix (no vocals) from the sound desk of the UK tour (reduced 2012 version) and it's reallly flat in places and lacks the dynamics and power of the full orchestration. I'm suitably intrigued by that.. Sound board mixes are sometimes surprisingly strange to listen to - it doesn't always sound the same as the theatre does. I don't remember being as struck by the 2012 tour's orchestrations (or anything about it, but that's a different story) as I was with the London staging. May well be mixed differently, who knows.. I remain hopeful. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 15:18:55 GMT
No it wont sound the same. I'll admit that a while ago the internet provided me with an orchestra mix (no vocals) from the sound desk of the UK tour (reduced 2012 version) and it's reallly flat in places and lacks the dynamics and power of the full orchestration. I'm suitably intrigued by that.. Sound board mixes are sometimes surprisingly strange to listen to - it doesn't always sound the same as the theatre does. I don't remember being as struck by the 2012 tour's orchestrations (or anything about it, but that's a different story) as I was with the London staging. May well be mixed differently, who knows.. I remain hopeful. Oh I don't doubt that. Parts of Prima Donna etc were particularly noticeable it was a violin, horn and some keyboards plonking along. Nothing the acoustics of a theatre would mask. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 12, 2021 15:23:55 GMT
Fake news, nothing is changing, it's the brilliant original, ALW and CM are wonderful etc etc etc.
We knew this was happening so what else is there to say? Nothing to do with COVID, these plans have been in the making for ages.
I've had hit-and-miss experiences with the 14-piece orchestration. Mostly misses. With 16 it can work OK so I was hoping they would at least use that given this is a sit-down production, but clearly CM just doesn't care any more. They used the 14-piece one for the Hamburg revival and it was noticeably a downgrade. Particularly awful was the moment where the music should swell just before Twisted Every Way in the second managers scene...it sounded rather lame.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 12, 2021 15:25:51 GMT
This is really going to hurt the show, just like the downsizing of Les Mis hurt the musical integrity of the piece. Not good news to hear. The changes to the orchestrations for that show in particular killed it for me. It sounds so lame now. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 12, 2021 15:27:37 GMT
13 musicians and their deps losing work. Not to mention the many stage crew who are being replaced by technology. Very sad Not to mention the loss of all that know-how! Several of the people who haven't even been contacted by CM & RUG (they've just been left in the dark) had worked on that show since it opened. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 15:29:12 GMT
I wonder would we make such comments if it was our money? I take the mick out of Kenwright because his thrift is legendary and almost a positive reason to go to one of his shows. If some sort of decline or key cost is being hit because of current market circumstances, you would do what hou could to alleviate it surely? If it’s this or closing you would certainly experiment with a few things before throwing in the towel? It’s just my opinion, we all have one. Phantom is probably the show that’s most secure in terms of revenue going by Broadway Grosses. I know the old adage save the pennies and the pounds will save themselves but penny pinching can also have a negative effect. There’s already a slight resentment and remember Phantom has probably the largest fan base due to its appeal across the ages. I have no doubt that Phantom will live on but what will that legacy be? If you want to save a penny, retire the original, bring in the revised version and see how long it lasts. I don’t go on Grindr and say I’m 20 when I’m nearly double it, that would be fooling no one but myself. |
|
634 posts
|
Post by ncbears on Apr 12, 2021 15:49:41 GMT
When does Mackintosh have the Laurence Connor version become the only version?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 16:11:22 GMT
Part of Phantom's unique appeal and selling point was the size of the orchestra and it's sound. To purists perhaps, but not to most tourists or probably 9/10 theatre goers. If people want to hear a full orchestra they go to the Proms, not the West End. As a musician I would rather hear a larger orchestra but I am a realist and understand that commercially there is no place for a large orchestra in the West End anymore, if there ever really was (who knows, Phantom could have been as much of a success if it had opened with a 14 piece orchestra - it hasn't hurt Wicked or Hamilton or many others!). People can of course be sad at the change, but you have to be realistic rather than wearing the rose-tinted spectacles that many on this thread seem to have on. |
|
883 posts
|
Post by longinthetooth on Apr 12, 2021 16:48:34 GMT
Half the orchestra, the touring version, but still West End prices.
|
|
287 posts
|
Post by singingbird on Apr 12, 2021 16:58:16 GMT
Part of Phantom's unique appeal and selling point was the size of the orchestra and it's sound. To purists perhaps, but not to most tourists or probably 9/10 theatre goers. If people want to hear a full orchestra they go to the Proms, not the West End. As a musician I would rather hear a larger orchestra but I am a realist and understand that commercially there is no place for a large orchestra in the West End anymore, if there ever really was (who knows, Phantom could have been as much of a success if it had opened with a 14 piece orchestra - it hasn't hurt Wicked or Hamilton or many others!). People can of course be sad at the change, but you have to be realistic rather than wearing the rose-tinted spectacles that many on this thread seem to have on. I think this misses the point somewhat. I understand that finances are important and that theatre is a business, but Phantom is a tried and tested show that has already made its instigators a fortune. If any show could afford a large orchestra, it's this one. More importantly, this is a show set in a 19th Century opera house and aims to represent a relatively realistic (if extremely heightened and romanticised) version of such. The music was composed with this in mind. The sound worlds of Wicked, Hamilton and many (most?) other shows can happily work with small orchestras. Some shows would sound absurd with an orchestra of the Phantom's size. Phantom would sound absurd without one. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 17:17:03 GMT
To purists perhaps, but not to most tourists or probably 9/10 theatre goers. If people want to hear a full orchestra they go to the Proms, not the West End. As a musician I would rather hear a larger orchestra but I am a realist and understand that commercially there is no place for a large orchestra in the West End anymore, if there ever really was (who knows, Phantom could have been as much of a success if it had opened with a 14 piece orchestra - it hasn't hurt Wicked or Hamilton or many others!). People can of course be sad at the change, but you have to be realistic rather than wearing the rose-tinted spectacles that many on this thread seem to have on. I think this misses the point somewhat. I understand that finances are important and that theatre is a business, but Phantom is a tried and tested show that has already made its instigators a fortune. If any show could afford a large orchestra, it's this one. More importantly, this is a show set in a 19th Century opera house and aims to represent a relatively realistic (if extremely heightened and romanticised) version of such. The music was composed with this in mind. The sound worlds of Wicked, Hamilton and many (most?) other shows can happily work with small orchestras. Some shows would sound absurd with an orchestra of the Phantom's size. Phantom would sound absurd without one. I'm afraid as far as I am concerned you are the one missing the point. The vast majority of people who see Phantom will not be musicians. If they hear a 14-strong orchestra then that is what they will associate with the show. They won't feel like they are missing out as they won't know anything else. Plus if many of those who have seen it before haven't seen it for as long as it has been since I was last there (about a decade), they probably won't remember how it used to be. And I suspect most people won't have a clue what a 19th Century opera house is supposed to sound like. As I have classical music experience I do, but I am well aware I am in the minority. Some people may listen to the cast recording but many won't, and many who do won't know it in enough detail to realise they are missing something. There are a lot of people on this thread assuming most audience members are as detail-oriented as the superfans, when they just aren't. And if you think business decisions stop the moment a show breaks even or makes a profit, then you are incredibly commercially naive. Historical success is completely irrelevant when the rent and running costs still have to be paid now. And profit breeds want for more profit. Simple as that. You are entitled to have a romanticised view of Phantom and its operation, as you clearly do, but you need to understand that romanticism and commercial reality do not go together, no matter how much anyone wants them to. |
|
|
|
Post by 10642 on Apr 12, 2021 17:27:05 GMT
Cameron’s next board meeting: meg doesn't have that many lines, lets give them to Madame Giry, and do we really need two managers when one would do the trick?
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 12, 2021 17:42:52 GMT
I think this misses the point somewhat. I understand that finances are important and that theatre is a business, but Phantom is a tried and tested show that has already made its instigators a fortune. If any show could afford a large orchestra, it's this one. More importantly, this is a show set in a 19th Century opera house and aims to represent a relatively realistic (if extremely heightened and romanticised) version of such. The music was composed with this in mind. The sound worlds of Wicked, Hamilton and many (most?) other shows can happily work with small orchestras. Some shows would sound absurd with an orchestra of the Phantom's size. Phantom would sound absurd without one. I'm afraid as far as I am concerned you are the one missing the point. The vast majority of people who see Phantom will not be musicians. If they hear a 14-strong orchestra then that is what they will associate with the show. They won't feel like they are missing out as they won't know anything else. Plus if many of those who have seen it before haven't seen it for as long as it has been since I was last there (about a decade), they probably won't remember how it used to be. And I suspect most people won't have a clue what a 19th Century opera house is supposed to sound like. As I have classical music experience I do, but I am well aware I am in the minority. Some people may listen to the cast recording but many won't, and many who do won't know it in enough detail to realise they are missing something. There are a lot of people on this thread assuming most audience members are as detail-oriented as the superfans, when they just aren't. And if you think business decisions stop the moment a show breaks even or makes a profit, then you are incredibly commercially naive. Historical success is completely irrelevant when the rent and running costs still have to be paid now. And profit breeds want for more profit. Simple as that. You are entitled to have a romanticised view of Phantom and its operation, as you clearly do, but you need to understand that romanticism and commercial reality do not go together, no matter how much anyone wants them to. I think you underestimate the audience. The 14-piece orchestra does sound noticeably weaker even with modern technology even to those with untrained ears. They used it for the Hamburg revival in 2014 and at the Q&A I attended after the show there were several comments from the audience who said they felt it was thinner (though to be fair, the reduced orchestra had a fair amount of publicity in Hamburg due to the associations of that town with the original production which ran there for a decade). Honestly, I think they could have got away with 16-18 in the pit without compromising too much on quality...14 is a stretch. Also, a lot of the Phantom audience is made up of repeat visitors. I think they'll know. And I don't just mean the superfans who've seen it a billion times. I was surprised overhearing two women seeing the Laurence Connor tour in Bristol in 2012 about how well they remembered the Hal Prince production a decade earlier (and their comparisons with what they had just seen were not favourable). And this show has also hyped up the size of its orchestra before - even as recently as 2019: lwtheatres.co.uk/summer-of-andrew-lloyd-webber/In a show like Phantom, the orchestra is a character in the show itself given it's set in an opera house (indeed, they're even brought into the action in some of the pastiche opera scenes). Having those players in the pit vastly contributes to the atmosphere and even when I first saw the show in the late 80s, it's what captivated me (and back then I knew very little about the theatre but it was the presence of all those live players that fascinated me and made me want to go back). A 27-piece orchestra was a luxury, to be sure, and I am surprised it lasted this long. And yes, the running costs for this show are high. But I think the combined effect of a 14-piece orchestration on top of the downscaling of the set designs will be detrimental to the look, sound, and overall impression the show makes. There is only so much you can cut before the whole production starts to collapse. On a separate note, I am saddened most not by the loss of the players to the show but how they've been treated. One had told me only a month ago that they had no word from the production. The anxiety throughout 2020 of not knowing whether or not the job would be there post-pandemic is not something I would wish on anyone. I wish the producers had been more upfront about their plans with the cast, the crew, the orchestra, and indeed the public rather than initially denying anything was changing at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 17:58:29 GMT
Part of Phantom's unique appeal and selling point was the size of the orchestra and it's sound. To purists perhaps, but not to most tourists or probably 9/10 theatre goers. If people want to hear a full orchestra they go to the Proms, not the West End. As a musician I would rather hear a larger orchestra but I am a realist and understand that commercially there is no place for a large orchestra in the West End anymore, if there ever really was (who knows, Phantom could have been as much of a success if it had opened with a 14 piece orchestra - it hasn't hurt Wicked or Hamilton or many others!). People can of course be sad at the change, but you have to be realistic rather than wearing the rose-tinted spectacles that many on this thread seem to have on. In that case, petition to rename the show "The Phantom of the reduced pit-band Musical Theatre". Content dictates form. One of Sondheim's long standing mantras. This show is set in an opera, with a orchestral, operatic score entirely prescribing a large orchestra to perform the score. It is not a chamber piece. My point was not that people wanting to hear an orchestra go to see Phantom, but conversely are drawn in to see the show as a result of it's opulence and reputation (part of which is a result of the orchestra). There is a commercial place for a large orchestra on the West End for as long as Producers continue to produce shows worthy of a large orchestra. An American in Paris, is testament to this. Producers brave and strong enough to give the score orchestrations the size they require and deserve. I suppose ENO should be looking at their production scale and considering vast reductions as well give that apparently it's not commercially viable anymore, right? Given that Phantom ran for 33 years is testament to it's commercial success as an entire vehicle. People can try argue about inflation pushing up running costs, but given the ticket for the show has consistently risen and was rarely discounted, yet the house consistently full, shows demand and success of the show in it's previous form, so I don't buy that. If tickets were still 1986 prices whilst running costs soared and the production began hemorrhaging money, then yes absolutely, trim. If you can't be arsed to produce this show properly in the form it was written in and deserves. Don't bother. IMO. |
|
362 posts
|
Post by JJShaw on Apr 12, 2021 18:04:18 GMT
With the gutting of Les Mis and now Phantom, Cam Mac really got me out here defending these two shows..! Not my faves but I thought it was amazing that you could still see the original 80s productions that launched British musical theatre to be what it is today. A great shame that they didnt get a proper send off and that Cameron is going to try and tout that they are still the same. I agree a general tourist might not notice, but thats not the point. (Although the loss of the turntable could confuse non-thespies who discuss seeing it at different times..!)
|
|
1,057 posts
|
Post by David J on Apr 12, 2021 18:54:33 GMT
New chandelier is up. At least the frame of it unless Cameron is resorting to plastic
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 19:01:20 GMT
New chandelier is up. At least the frame of it unless Cameron is resorting to plastic When did they put the extra circle in?  |
|
