583 posts
|
Post by princeton on Apr 13, 2021 23:53:06 GMT
A Broadway musician also told me that there is a minimum number of players required for any show that plays each house. If that's true, then not sure that 14 would fit the requirements of the Majestic. That is correct. The current agreement is that the minimum requirement for the Majestic is 18 musicians. It's because of this that there was the bizarre situation of having fewer musicians in the first Broadway revival of Les Mis (which played the Longacre - 12 musician minimum) which was based on the original tour, than in the second revival which was the 'new' version and orchestrations but as it was on at the Imperial it had an 18 musician minimum requirement. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 0:08:16 GMT
You are absolutely right Dan. There is so much charged emotion when people talk about changes to long runners that people completely fail to understand how musicals are made viable in 2021 and indeed in a post pandemic world. I also feel the discussion doesn't need to be so polarised. You can be sad that the orchestra is being reduced AND understand the logical (and I am afraid inevitable) reasons behind this. Then close the show and put something else in. Rather than pretending nothing's changed and charging higher prices for a lesser product. There is just no truth in the charge that the original production wasn't viable. If anything it played to smaller audiences (in a bigger house) on Broadway...and that will reopen at full scale. I'm not saying it would have always been viable. But what they've done is prematurely end its run and then replace it with an inferior substitute and gaslight the audience. Gosh, for so-called Phantom fans some of you seem very determined for the whole lot to be out of a job and not just the half of the orchestra who have been let go! If you'd really rather see it close than keep going in one form or another then you might as well stop complaining at all and just never buy another ticket! You may never see it in the West End again then. Shows change and close all the time, it's business. And it isn't false advertising to say it is the same show, because it is - same characters, smae musical numbers, same opening number, interval at the same point, same plot, same ending. That is all that most of the predominantly tourist audience will see and will understand. So they will still buy tickets, the show will make more money as it will now be cheaper to run and the investors will be happy. It's about as basic as economics gets. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 0:11:02 GMT
The reason I’m frustrated is the lies. Just say I want to make more money and be done with it. No-one is lying, it's still the same show. And anyone with half an ounce of common sense can work out it is for profit, you don't need to be spoon fed that. The thing to be angry about is how the musicians were told (or rather not told). Reducing the orchestra size was pretty much inevitable, but there are nicer ways to go about it and they haven't done that. |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Apr 14, 2021 3:33:33 GMT
Then close the show and put something else in. Rather than pretending nothing's changed and charging higher prices for a lesser product. There is just no truth in the charge that the original production wasn't viable. If anything it played to smaller audiences (in a bigger house) on Broadway...and that will reopen at full scale. I'm not saying it would have always been viable. But what they've done is prematurely end its run and then replace it with an inferior substitute and gaslight the audience. Gosh, for so-called Phantom fans some of you seem very determined for the whole lot to be out of a job and not just the half of the orchestra who have been let go! If you'd really rather see it close than keep going in one form or another then you might as well stop complaining at all and just never buy another ticket! You may never see it in the West End again then. Shows change and close all the time, it's business. And it isn't false advertising to say it is the same show, because it is - same characters, smae musical numbers, same opening number, interval at the same point, same plot, same ending. That is all that most of the predominantly tourist audience will see and will understand. So they will still buy tickets, the show will make more money as it will now be cheaper to run and the investors will be happy. It's about as basic as economics gets. Calling it the "brilliant original" so prominently is disingenuous at best, though, at this stage. That, frankly, is false advertising. It quite demonstrably isn't the original. A part of what is very strange, and many feel misleading, has been the dreadful marketing and optics surrounding the whole situation. You've got ALW saying one thing, Cameron Mackintosh Ltd saying another, awful communications re: box office. The whole thing has been a mess. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 6:55:45 GMT
Clearly an emotive subject.
Of course it it sad when the sizes of orchestras are massively reduced. The Phantom of The Opera was truly one of the mega musicals and with that came a no expense spared approach to all elements of the production in 1986. And nobody could deny that it is wonderful to have 30+ musicians in a West End pit.
But times have completely changed. There really are no musicals made in the model of the 80s and 90s anymore and there is no producer shelling out that kind of money. Theatre is a business and it is simply not a realistic part of the business model for a long running musical in 2021. 14-16 musicians is pretty much the maximum any show needs so Phantom remains at the top end. And although the finer tuned ear can tell the difference, 99% of the theatre going public will have no idea. Phantom is not unique. Aspects of Love, Sunset Boulevard, Woman in White, Love Never Dies all have lush scores with extensive use of strings and have all sounded sensational with the standard 14-16 piece orchestra.
Further, technology has massively, insanely moved on since 1986 and synthesised sound blended in with the other instruments can sound great. The thing is, you need to either decide to use synthesised strings or not - there isn't really a half way house, and that is why the orchestra has been almost cut in half and not reduced. You either have a full strings section, or you have fully synthesised 'backing' strings with a real violin/viola/cello playing solo lines across the top - as Les Mis now has. In fact Les Mis is a good example of this. As they gradually chipped away at the orchestra, I agree the quality did indeed go down. But when they fully re-orchestrated it 10 years ago and went fully with the synthesised strings plus solo lines over this, I think it sounded sensational. The current tour and London (pre covid) productions have never sounded better.
Yes of course a massive orchestra would be wonderful. But it is a luxury that cannot be afforded. And doesn't make sense. The drop in quality, to the average member of the public is minuscule compared to the cost saving.
And I really think people are underestimating how tough it's gonna be for shows like Phantom coming out of lockdown. A quick lock at the seating plans shows weeks and weeks of barely sold houses. It relies massively on tourism which isn't gonna be back at a meaningful level for ages. It absolutely HAS to re open as a lean efficient machine, otherwise it really will not survive. And that would be a far bigger tragedy than anything else we are discussing.
The argument that it has made huge profits in the past so they should be plunged into a bigger orchestra now is I am afraid a complete nonsense and shows no understanding of how businesses work. The profits go back to the shareholders, they don't sit in a safe somewhere and have long been dissipated around the world. Every business in the world has to be profitable TODAY. It doesn't matter what has gone before, to be a going concern it needs to work now. Otherwise you are pouring money away and ultimately the business will go. M&S were hugely profitable in the 90s and have massively struggled in later years. They don't use the profits from the 90s to give away free food and clothes now, that would clearly be ridiculous.
As for the old orchestra, yes of course this is very sad. People losing their jobs is tragic and everything that has gone with Coronavirus has been truly heartbreaking. But they are not alone. Covid has carved through jobs, lives, communities, industries. It's dreadful. But there really isn't a huge amount that can be done at individual production level. The recent outbursts on Twitter I understand, but are without substance really. The entire team was made redundant with no promise whatsoever that they would be re-employed. So they are cross about something that they were never told would happen anyway. Again, it's tragic how this effects individuals as they clearly hoped they would be re-employed but producers sadly don't owe them anything. Further, none of us will truly ever have any idea how CM/RUG have managed this. Nobody ever takes to Twitter to say "thrilled with my redundancy, bosses have managed it so well." Just doesn't happen. Social media in this regard is where the hurt and the the upset speak out. So one must understand their emotions and the hard time they are going through, but not necessarily draw conclusions about their former employer.
And re ALW and Cam Mac - again, God knows what the relationship is between them. Am sure ALW the purist and composer would always want the biggest orchestra, but ALW the businessman would understand he can't always have this. I think, Cam Mac holds the more power at Phantom London so perhaps could have overridden what ALW wanted. That said, I think they get on better than the media would have us believe.
"The Brilliant original." Well, clearly not for most people on here. But again I think definitely will be for Joe Public. My mates would-not-have-a-clue how many people are in the pit which you can't see. Plus it's an advertising strap line. It doesn't need to be true. It's designed to go on a poster and sell tickets. Advertisers make claims all the time. Is Bounty the taste of paradise? I mean it's a matter of opinion but not really. Is Gillette the best a man can get? No lol, it just rhymes.
So yes. Sad to see this epic orchestra halved, very sad for people that has lost their jobs. But IMHO essential in what will be a very harsh post corona world for theatre and necessary for the show's survival. Plus I do think if it's as good as Les Mis then the new orchestrations could be very exciting. And I for one, can't wait to see the show and am literally counting the days until can be in Her Majesty's again. I still think it's going to be a truly wonderful moment!
Now - if maybe we could have some casting info and communication about rescheduled dates!
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 14, 2021 8:25:37 GMT
All of this ^ 🙂
I just wish I could communicate it as elegantly as Dom. x
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 8:47:39 GMT
Yes of course a massive orchestra would be wonderful. But it is a luxury that cannot be afforded. And doesn't make sense. The drop in quality, to the average member of the public is minuscule compared to the cost saving. Well at least we've moved on from the nonsense that it is going to be "bigger and better" and "more spectacular than ever" to an admission that the quality will drop. Because it will. |
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Apr 14, 2021 8:51:59 GMT
"The Brilliant original." Well, clearly not for most people on here. But again I think definitely will be for Joe Public. My mates would-not-have-a-clue how many people are in the pit which you can't see. Plus it's an advertising strap line. It doesn't need to be true. It's designed to go on a poster and sell tickets. Advertisers make claims all the time. Is Bounty the taste of paradise? I mean it's a matter of opinion but not really. Is Gillette the best a man can get? No lol, it just rhymes. That argument works for the word “brilliant”. Yes, that’s just advertising speak. Obviously it’s subjective and there are people who actually think Phantom is crap rather than brilliant. But it doesn’t work for “original”. How can you reduce the orchestra, reduce the set, tell the investors the production has closed, stop paying rights to the creatives, and claim to be the “original”? My problem* with all of this is the lack of honesty. In fact, although CM is painted as the “villain” at least he’s actually been saying for a long time that it would not be the same show coming back. It’s ALW who is either being naive or deliberately misleading here. (* aside from the $hitty treatment of the orchestra and creatives, which you can argue is “necessary”, “inevitable” or whatever, but is still $hitty) |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 8:52:57 GMT
The reason I’m frustrated is the lies. Just say I want to make more money and be done with it. No-one is lying, it's still the same show. And anyone with half an ounce of common sense can work out it is for profit, you don't need to be spoon fed that. The thing to be angry about is how the musicians were told (or rather not told). Reducing the orchestra size was pretty much inevitable, but there are nicer ways to go about it and they haven't done that. Yes, saying that something is "showbusiness" and that is the way it's always done does not excuse it. There is simply no excuse to treat the musicians like that. Cameron would have known for some time if he planned to cut the musicians. Rather than leaving them in the dark throughout this horrendous past year, he could have done the decent thing rather than cause needless anxiety to those who have been loyal to this particular production since...well, in some cases since it opened. It's also clearly not the same show. On Broadway they can claim it is. If they brought back the original designs as Jessica Koravos and ALW repeatedly claimed would happened, then maybe. But that's obviously not going to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 8:54:12 GMT
Yes of course a massive orchestra would be wonderful. But it is a luxury that cannot be afforded. And doesn't make sense. The drop in quality, to the average member of the public is minuscule compared to the cost saving. Well at least we've moved on from the nonsense that it is going to be "bigger and better" and "more spectacular than ever" to an admission that the quality will drop. Because it will. For mega fans yes, for Joe Public no. That is the fundamental lack of understanding on this thread between those who clearly have more of an emotional attachment to the show and those who are able to step back and understand and accept that the commercial realities of 2021 are the only thing that matters in terms of the business of show, not what was viable in 1987. You can argue all you like, but the show is still the same show, just because the costumes or orchestrations change doesn't remove the fundamental plot and musical numbers that make it the Phantom of the Opera that everyone will recognise. You might notice the change in details, but the simple fact is that probably 9 out of 10 people won't. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 9:05:30 GMT
Well at least we've moved on from the nonsense that it is going to be "bigger and better" and "more spectacular than ever" to an admission that the quality will drop. Because it will. For mega fans yes, for Joe Public no. That is the fundamental lack of understanding on this thread between those who clearly have more of an emotional attachment to the show and those who are able to step back and understand and accept that the commercial realities of 2021 are the only thing that matters in terms of the business of show, not what was viable in 1987. You can argue all you like, but the show is still the same show, just because the costumes or orchestrations change doesn't remove the fundamental plot and musical numbers that make it the Phantom of the Opera that everyone will recognise. You might notice the change in details, but the simple fact is that probably 9 out of 10 people won't. Maybe it's just me, but doing something just because one can apparently get away with it without being caught out isn't a very good reason to do it. I don't hold "Joe Public" in such contempt. And, frankly, the comments on social media have been very surprising in terms of the sheer numbers objecting to this. Almost every post that is made by the powers-that-be seems to attract comments criticising what is going on. The very look of the show is being altered. It may be the same show, but not the same production, and certainly not the production that was branded for years as the "brilliant original". For a start, Cameron hasn't even committed to rehiring the remaining 14 musicians. All of them have been let go. Secondly, isn't that the very "showbusiness" you repeatedly invoke? *If* it is the case that a show ceases to become profitable (which in Phantom's case I highly doubt - we don't have the London grosses, but the reports from cast members was that it was still selling out and I don't recall seeing it regularly on TKTS in recent years), then it would be usual to close the show. Not hack away at it. |
|
|
|
Post by undercovercroc on Apr 14, 2021 9:51:33 GMT
I can't believe people are defending this. A billionaire is cutting corners so he can increase his wealth, and leaving people out on the street during a pandemic. It it disgusting. CamMac could lose £100,000 a week of his personal wealth (not even the companies) for 190 YEARS and would still have 200 million in the bank to live on! As I understand it, by closing the show it meant no one could be furloughed as they wouldn't have a job to go back to. The show was built on the hard work of creatives that he has decided don't deserve a share on what they created. It is absolutely appalling what he is doing to Phantom, and has done to Les Mis. He has given no support to the industry through this cesspit of a year, and yet people still support him at every turn. I'm sure you'll all look forward to his revival of Miss Saigon with a cast of three and a toddler with a Casio keyboard for the orchestra.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 14, 2021 10:44:26 GMT
Again to our ‘new member’, people aren’t so much defending it as acknowledging & understanding the circumstances in which it has happened. Theres no denying that it isn’t a crappy thing to do but I suspect it would have happened pandemic or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 11:43:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Apr 14, 2021 12:07:26 GMT
|
|
5,163 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Being Alive on Apr 14, 2021 12:39:16 GMT
Again to our ‘new member’, people aren’t so much defending it as acknowledging & understanding the circumstances in which it has happened. Theres no denying that it isn’t a crappy thing to do but I suspect it would have happened pandemic or not. This is essentially the point I think @posterj is trying to get across. Yes it's crappy, and we aren't defending it, but we can see why it has happened. Yes CamMack is a billionaire (and I don't for a second pretend to like the man) but an empty West End theatre still has running costs. Yes he let a lot of people go (again, a crappy thing to do) but people still work for him and he's had to pay them with 0 income. I know in the grand scheme of things it's not a huge amount of his money, but we get theatre refurbishments, revivals and new shows BECAUSE he has so much money. He puts a LOT of it back into the industry. The marketing of the brilliant original is now disingenuous and needs to be looked at, but trying to argue that it is no longer Phantom of the Opera (to me anyway) is not true. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 12:46:34 GMT
Nope, the joint statement didn't acknowledge they were putting the tour in, claiming they were building new sets to look exactly like the original production. In fact, they can't afford to do that and - as several of us said last year (but were dismissed) - they are putting in the tour sets into HM's. The 2020 tour did not look like the original in several ways and did not use Maria's original designs. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 13:10:10 GMT
I don’t know the make up of posters but I can’t believe theatre professionals or fans can defend what’s happening.
Also, it’s really disingenuous to pass this off as hysterical Phans.
I’ve repeatedly said I love to see non-replica productions, I’ve thought how parts of non-replicas have added to the show I just don’t want a knock-off. I have more respect for creators to have a licence to create and not plagiarise the work of others because they are contracted to do so to save money.
In the time it’s been closed. Redesign the posters, change the publicity, and reopen the show as the new reimagined Phantom for the 21st Century. Just cut the crap of the Brilliant Original, it’s dead now.
|
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Apr 14, 2021 13:31:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 13:36:37 GMT
I don’t know the make up of posters but I can’t believe theatre professionals or fans can defend what’s happening. Also, it’s really disingenuous to pass this off as hysterical Phans. I’ve repeatedly said I love to see non-replica productions, I’ve thought how parts of non-replicas have added to the show I just don’t want a knock-off. I have more respect for creators to have a licence to create and not plagiarise the work of others because they are contracted to do so to save money. In the time it’s been closed. Redesign the posters, change the publicity, and reopen the show as the new reimagined Phantom for the 21st Century. Just cut the crap of the Brilliant Original, it’s dead now. Stop saying we are defending it, because we aren't. All we are saying is that from a business perspective it is an entirely logical thing to do in the current commercial reality. Despite what you might want, the reality is that emotion and nostalgia don't come into it. This is a business decision and anyone with half a business brain would make the same choice. I cant believe anyone can fail to understand that. From a purely artistic perspective it is of course the wrong choice, but like or not there is more to keeping a West End show running than artistry. The problem many people on here have is that they are looking at this subjectively, not objectively. That does rather make them come across as "hysterical Phans" (your phrasing, not mine), and perhaps explains why they don't seem to be able to see the logical rationale behind this. The continued success of Les Mis has shown that the vast majority of audience members are not bothered about the size of the orchestra or whether or not the set and costumes are the same as the original. You may not like that, many theatre fans won't, but you simply cannot deny that is the reality. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 13:57:24 GMT
You may not like that, many theatre fans won't, but you simply cannot deny that is the reality. Aren't the ones denying the reality the ones who repeatedly insisted in the past few months, on posts in this very thread, that the show would return "bigger, better and more spectacular than ever before" and that we should "have faith" in Cameron? Rather than the ones who pointed out from the beginning that to say Hal Prince's production will "return in its entirety and hopefully bigger and better before" was duplicitous when the investors were told at the same time this would not be the case? David Benedict is at least on the same page as some of us - this is what he said today in The Stage: |
|
1,060 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by David J on Apr 14, 2021 13:59:41 GMT
Now where was all this passionate discussion when the closure of the original Les Mis was announced.
But seriously Phantom always kept its large orchestra since it opened and casted age appropriate people for the roles who could give solid performances. As much as I love Les Mis I admire how every Phantom performance felt fresh that way
It had a better right to the original claim than the Les Mis that ended in 2019.
All I'm saying is I'm going to sit back here with my popcorn and wait for Wicked to be downgraded in two decades time
Just putting it out there. Different producers, but as some of us have said here times will change and business is business.
Need to cut corners. Maybe remove the dragon that is only used for less than a minute in total and Elphaba will be lifted up with wires.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Apr 14, 2021 14:01:10 GMT
Now where was all this passionate discussion when the closure of the original Les Mis was announced. But seriously Phantom always kept its large orchestra since it opened and casted age appropriate people for the roles who could give solid performances. As much as I love Les Mis I admire how every Phantom performance felt fresh that way It had a better right to the original claim than the Les Mis that ended in 2019. All I'm saying is I'm going to sit back here with my popcorn and wait for Wicked to be downgraded in two decades time Just putting it out there. Different producers, but as some of us have said here times will change and business is business. Need to cut corners. Maybe remove the dragon that is only used for less than a minute in total and Elphaba will be lifted up with wires. It was back on the wha*sons*age forum 😂 |
|
1,060 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by David J on Apr 14, 2021 14:10:26 GMT
I'm telling you Wicked fans, when the brand new 'original' tour goes out you should start to worry
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 14:26:00 GMT
Now where was all this passionate discussion when the closure of the original Les Mis was announced. But seriously Phantom always kept its large orchestra since it opened and casted age appropriate people for the roles who could give solid performances. As much as I love Les Mis I admire how every Phantom performance felt fresh that way It had a better right to the original claim than the Les Mis that ended in 2019. All I'm saying is I'm going to sit back here with my popcorn and wait for Wicked to be downgraded in two decades time Just putting it out there. Different producers, but as some of us have said here times will change and business is business. Need to cut corners. Maybe remove the dragon that is only used for less than a minute in total and Elphaba will be lifted up with wires. I never understood why the dragon was there in the first place, I forget it even exists. There isn't much in Wicked that would be hugely damaged by cuts - the set could easily be reduced and the costumes less elaborate. Really just the flying, and they manage without that anyway when the equipment breaks! And Wicked never had much of an orchestra to begin with, so nothing to cut there. It is pointless comparing modern shows to those that began in the 1980s as they are completely different beasts. Look at Hamilton - it doesn't even really have a set beyond a mezzanine, a couple of ladders and some benches, boxes, chairs and candles that are brought on when needed. A show doesn't need elaborate sets or costumes to work. But the principle is the same no matter what - superfans get annoyed at cuts but they will be made nonetheless because it is economically the sensible thing to do, and the show will go on. Nothing more to it than that. |
|
