2,743 posts
|
Post by n1david on Jan 24, 2020 12:43:27 GMT
Where did you find the 15 minute version of My Night? I have what is called the "Full-length version" which is 8m58 - the Boys put this out on their website at the time that the cast album was released. They'd apparently had a falling-out with the record company who said that the full-length version was "too stagey" to open the album with (which kinda misses the point) so an edited version got put on the album. Still don't understand why they couldn't have stuck it on the end of the CD though. |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jan 25, 2020 0:52:57 GMT
Where did you find the 15 minute version of My Night? I have what is called the "Full-length version" which is 8m58 - the Boys put this out on their website at the time that the cast album was released. They'd apparently had a falling-out with the record company who said that the full-length version was "too stagey" to open the album with (which kinda misses the point) so an edited version got put on the album. Still don't understand why they couldn't have stuck it on the end of the CD though. Yes that is it lol I dunno wtf I thought it was 15 mins as it was obviously never that long in the show. I thought it was edited because you can only fit 75 mins of music on a cd? |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jan 25, 2020 0:56:44 GMT
No I missed it unfortunately. I had been to a show there not long before and it felt like the venue was going to be demolished by a tube train at any second which made the whole thing a little uncomfortable for me and that's without mentioning the horrible seats. Plus I still had the Union production buzzing in my brain *shudders The score is great! I even managed to find the original 15 minute version of My Night a few years ago which excited me no end. The book is completely fine, it just needs reframing so it is definitely Pauls story and not Billie's which is how is appears at the start. It should be framed as a flashback which he narrates. Plus it really needs a more definitive timeline of events, as it all seems to take place over about 4 days, which makes the whole love story aspect not work at all. He meets this guy who dies 2 days later and is meant to have fallen in love with him and be devastated...Really? The rest of it is fine I think. The boyband stuff is a little out of date now, but the gay stuff is still pretty accurate and very funny. In the end it is what it is. Where did you find the 15 minute version of My Night? I agree - wouldn't surprise me if there was some conflict re who's story it was. The Pet Shop Boys only ever talk about Billie Trix whereas Harvey who has kept more of a dignified silence probably wanted it to be Straight Dave's (I think this is who you mean when you said Paul?!) Anyway, the PSB have constantly banged on about how doing Closer To Heaven was not a pleasant experience for them. Which annoys me no end as I have all the PSB albums, and CTH is probs my fave of the lot. Frustrates me when writers create a work of brilliance and don't seem to like it themselves! Yes I meant Dave, the actor who played him in the original was Paul something. I always thought Harvey slagged it off much more than they did, he never seemed to not have a nice word to say about it. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2020 7:41:45 GMT
Where did you find the 15 minute version of My Night? I agree - wouldn't surprise me if there was some conflict re who's story it was. The Pet Shop Boys only ever talk about Billie Trix whereas Harvey who has kept more of a dignified silence probably wanted it to be Straight Dave's (I think this is who you mean when you said Paul?!) Anyway, the PSB have constantly banged on about how doing Closer To Heaven was not a pleasant experience for them. Which annoys me no end as I have all the PSB albums, and CTH is probs my fave of the lot. Frustrates me when writers create a work of brilliance and don't seem to like it themselves! Yes I meant Dave, the actor who played him in the original was Paul something. I always thought Harvey slagged it off much more than they did, he never seemed to not have a nice word to say about it. Ahh ok am sure you are right. Was before social media and I was a big PSB fan so I was probs more aware of what they were saying than Harvey. And certainly they had nothing good to say about it. So basically nobody enjoyed working on it! RUG also got a lot of blame. Though without them would never have been in the West End. Anyway, amazing given how unhappy the creatives were that they produced something so great! Ahh yes of course, Paul Keating. |
|
1,255 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Jan 25, 2020 8:31:10 GMT
I always thought Harvey slagged it off much more than they did, he never seemed to not have a nice word to say about it. So he always had a good word to say about it?  |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jan 25, 2020 8:38:14 GMT
I always thought Harvey slagged it off much more than they did, he never seemed to not have a nice word to say about it. So he always had a good word to say about it? LOL I tried to write it 2 different ways and forgot to delete the wrong one  |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jan 25, 2020 12:53:01 GMT
Just found this on youtube!
|
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Jan 25, 2020 14:42:49 GMT
Am I the only one who kind of misses hearing news about the latest West End flop? What I mean is that lately there haven't really been a major flop in recent memory, not since the mid-2010s at least. The last 'big West End flop' was 'I Can't Sing: The X Factor Musical'. I guess that's a good thing, as producers and the like are probably more cautious when making a new musical. But still, it's fun to gossip about how bad a new show has done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 11:19:01 GMT
Am I the only one who kind of misses hearing news about the latest West End flop? What I mean is that lately there haven't really been a major flop in recent memory, not since the mid-2010s at least. The last 'big West End flop' was 'I Can't Sing: The X Factor Musical'. I guess that's a good thing, as producers and the like are probably more cautious when making a new musical. But still, it's fun to gossip about how bad a new show has done. I also miss it. As so many flops were actually amazing. I Can't Sing was another gem! I think what it shows is that producers don't take risks with new British musicals going straight in to the West End. It's just been a steady stream of bland (but box office proven) American stuff for ages now.... #Yawn |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 11:26:55 GMT
The recurring problem at the root of these stories comes down to bad producing: METROPOLIS- egomaniac at the helm; GHOST- terrible lack of control of costs; MOBY- wrong producer, with Cameron just not knowing how to make it the next Rocky Horror as it could have been; CLOSER TO HEAVEN- heavy-handed interference in the artistic process (plus a dollop of bad luck leading to scheduling conflicts for some key creatives). However I would take any one of those over the current trend- not sure whether we are in an Anti-Golden Age or whether this is Austerity Theatre, but I can't bear the cut-down, striped-back, underpowered productions of shows that demand spectacle. And musicals are a heightened form- they need spectacle.I can't agree that "it's the best we're likely to get/ it's the only way we can produce these show"- especially when the end product misrepresents what the show was meant to be: Menier and Hope Mill are lead offenders in this respect: no I don't want a chamber-piece La Cage because I remember the sumptuous, glorious original. I'm not grateful for a Mame with 3 in the band- no wonder Herman was unhappy! An actor-muso Chess? F-off! I know not every new show is under-produced, but I worry that there is a generation of young performers and audiences who will see anaemic productions of classic shows and think that is the way they are meant to be. So Bravo to Which Witch, Metropolis, Hunting of the Snark, Children of Eden, Ziegfeld et al for being BIG glorious disasters!I couldn't agree more. I LOVE spectacle. And they can harp on about the current cut-back era being artistic choices as much as they like - we all know it's all to do with money. I even think it affects the writing process. When Waitress/DEH/Come From Away were being commissioned/written they'd have known how cheap they'd be to produce on stage. You're 100% right - it's a real shame that an entire generation think the current crop is as ambitions and spectacular a musical can be. They've missed out! The last BIG production we've had was Bat Out Of Hell and I can't even remember what the biggest one was before that. Bring back the sensory overload - I love it! (I have high hopes for Back To The Future..... We'll see!) |
|
|
|
Post by elizapot on Jan 30, 2020 11:30:59 GMT
The recurring problem at the root of these stories comes down to bad producing: METROPOLIS- egomaniac at the helm; GHOST- terrible lack of control of costs; MOBY- wrong producer, with Cameron just not knowing how to make it the next Rocky Horror as it could have been; CLOSER TO HEAVEN- heavy-handed interference in the artistic process (plus a dollop of bad luck leading to scheduling conflicts for some key creatives). However I would take any one of those over the current trend- not sure whether we are in an Anti-Golden Age or whether this is Austerity Theatre, but I can't bear the cut-down, striped-back, underpowered productions of shows that demand spectacle. And musicals are a heightened form- they need spectacle.I can't agree that "it's the best we're likely to get/ it's the only way we can produce these show"- especially when the end product misrepresents what the show was meant to be: Menier and Hope Mill are lead offenders in this respect: no I don't want a chamber-piece La Cage because I remember the sumptuous, glorious original. I'm not grateful for a Mame with 3 in the band- no wonder Herman was unhappy! An actor-muso Chess? F-off! I know not every new show is under-produced, but I worry that there is a generation of young performers and audiences who will see anaemic productions of classic shows and think that is the way they are meant to be. So Bravo to Which Witch, Metropolis, Hunting of the Snark, Children of Eden, Ziegfeld et al for being BIG glorious disasters!I couldn't agree more. I LOVE spectacle. And they can harp on about the current cut-back era being artistic choices as much as they like - we all know it's all to do with money. I even think it affects the writing process. When Waitress/DEH/Come From Away were being commissioned/written they'd have known how cheap they'd be to produce on stage. You're 100% right - it's a real shame that an entire generation think the current crop is as ambitions and spectacular a musical can be. They've missed out! The last BIG production we've had was Bat Out Of Hell and I can't even remember what the biggest one was before that. Bring back the sensory overload - I love it! (I have high hopes for Back To The Future..... We'll see!) Surely something like & Juliet counts as a massive spectacle? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 11:39:07 GMT
I couldn't agree more. I LOVE spectacle. And they can harp on about the current cut-back era being artistic choices as much as they like - we all know it's all to do with money. I even think it affects the writing process. When Waitress/DEH/Come From Away were being commissioned/written they'd have known how cheap they'd be to produce on stage. You're 100% right - it's a real shame that an entire generation think the current crop is as ambitions and spectacular a musical can be. They've missed out! The last BIG production we've had was Bat Out Of Hell and I can't even remember what the biggest one was before that. Bring back the sensory overload - I love it! (I have high hopes for Back To The Future..... We'll see!) Surely something like & Juliet counts as a massive spectacle? Ish. I mean it is probably the most spectacular new musical on stage at the moment in London (and coincidentally my fave West End show currently other than Les Mis/Phantom) but that's in the context of expectations having been re-set. It's spectacle comes from great projections and an amazing concert like lighting design. But the actual physical set is pretty simple, with cast moving most of it around. Those fully automated huge sets that folded to reveal scene after scene were epic. Imagine combining one of those with the lighting and projection technology we have now! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 17:25:22 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows.
But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet!
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Jan 30, 2020 17:41:50 GMT
‘42nd St’ had big budget spectacle, it just wasn’t ‘fantasy’ spectacle. Something like ‘Curious Incident’ with interesting modern set design can be just as thrilling as the likes of Bat, because of how much it is part of the piece.
|
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jan 30, 2020 18:15:00 GMT
‘42nd St’ had big budget spectacle, it just wasn’t ‘fantasy’ spectacle. Something like ‘Curious Incident’ with interesting modern set design can be just as thrilling as the likes of Bat, because of how much it is part of the piece. Agreed on both counts x |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 18:18:24 GMT
‘42nd St’ had big budget spectacle, it just wasn’t ‘fantasy’ spectacle. Something like ‘Curious Incident’ with interesting modern set design can be just as thrilling as the likes of Bat, because of how much it is part of the piece. 42nd St definitely had big budget spectacle, and those steps were thrilling when they came out. They also had amazing costumes, still love all those different coloured tap shoes in the opening, but every big production of 42nd St is the same, and has the same shoes and steps. The Hunting of The Snark. Now that had spectacle!! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 18:19:21 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows. But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet! I really regret not having seen Lord Of The Rings. I’ve never read the books/seen the films and wasn’t massively moved by the cast recording so decided not to.... As well as my Back To The Future hopes, I also wonder if Prince of Egypt might provide some breathtaking spectacle. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 19:07:24 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows. But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet! I really regret not having seen Lord Of The Rings. I’ve never read the books/seen the films and wasn’t massively moved by the cast recording so decided not to.... As well as my Back To The Future hopes, I also wonder if Prince of Egypt might provide some breathtaking spectacle. The staging was the only good thing about LOTR, imo. It was overly long, made zero sense and the musoc was plodding. I'm seeing Prince of Egypt in a few weeks and really hope they fill the Dominion stage with something special. |
|
2,678 posts
|
Post by viserys on Jan 30, 2020 19:56:38 GMT
LOTR was a snoozer, it was impossible to cram all that plot into a stage show and the music was forgettable.
We had got front row tickets through GILT back then and what this arachnophobe remembers most from the show was that massive spider turning up towards the end. I almost jumped out of my skin.
I echo the hopes for Prince of Egypt to be a feast for the eyes.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Jan 30, 2020 20:28:13 GMT
I'd take a guess at Lord Of The Rings being the last show before Bat, that had massive spectacle. So many revolves, that split, created steps, spun in every direction. Even the fireflies in that show had more stage magic than alot of new shows. But a special shoutout to the crystal curtain in Dreamgirls and the smoke filled bubbles in & Juliet! I really regret not having seen Lord Of The Rings. I’ve never read the books/seen the films and wasn’t massively moved by the cast recording so decided not to.... As well as my Back To The Future hopes, I also wonder if Prince of Egypt might provide some breathtaking spectacle. I think Lord of the Rings was the last time I thought "wow, I've never seen so much money on a stage"- and yes the fireflies were gorgeous. 42nd was sumptuous, but of course it was very nearly a straight revival from the 1980s- but that staircase was genuinely a coup de theatre. The use of projections can never have the same visceral impact as actual scenic items. |
|
318 posts
|
Post by MrBraithwaite on Jan 31, 2020 9:28:39 GMT
I liked LOTR for what it was, saw it three times during its run. It was very different from the films and took some liberties with the books, but some of the songs were great and easily the best part of the show. The scenery was definitely some of the most impressive stuff I've seen on stage. And this is one of my favourite 'flops' I have actually seen.  Pity they didn't film it at the time, nowadays might be a different story. At the time they thought this might have more life in it, there was talk of a NZ and a German production, but it never happened of course. |
|
1,578 posts
|
Post by anita on Jan 31, 2020 9:51:53 GMT
I liked LOTR for what it was, saw it three times during its run. It was very different from the films and took some liberties with the books, but some of the songs were great and easily the best part of the show. The scenery was definitely some of the most impressive stuff I've seen on stage. And this is one of my favourite 'flops' I have actually seen. Pity they didn't film it at the time, nowadays might be a different story. At the time they thought this might have more life in it, there was talk of a NZ and a German production, but it never happened of course. I saw it 3 times too. Loved it. |
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Jan 31, 2020 12:32:12 GMT
LOTR was a snoozer, it was impossible to cram all that plot into a stage show and the music was forgettable. And it was apparently better in London than it was in Toronto, where it felt like six months of my life that I'll never get back. |
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Feb 2, 2020 0:18:35 GMT
The best way I can describe the LOTR musical (despite not actually seeing it, although I would have given the opportunity!) is that it was the West End's equivalent to Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. Both had huge budgets behind them, were adaptations of popular works of fiction that had big screen Hollywood adaptations, both were 'the most expensive musicals in both the West End (LOTR) and Broadway (Turn Off the Dark) respectively, they experienced technical difficulties (although for LOTR, it wasn't as bad or as publicised as Turn Off the Dark), were ravaged by the critics upon opening and both were the biggest commercial flops for their time. Not to mention, Conan O'Brien made fun of both of them!
Turn Off the Dark however has gained a much more 'notorious' reputation than LOTR and I suppose the reason why there aren't really any major big budget flops nowadays is because producers don't want to lose millions, like what happened with Turn Off the Dark. In a way, I guess it is an 'important' part of both Broadway and musical theatre history, as it is a cautionary tale about making such an expensive musical and the problems faced producing one.
A YouTuber called Wait in the Wings made an interesting and insightful video about Turn Off the Dark's tumultuous history;
|
|
1,996 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Feb 4, 2020 22:12:43 GMT
Just found this on youtube!
Featuring an early appearance by Jonathan Pie (i.e. Tom Walker)!
|
|
Pity they didn't film it at the time, nowadays might be a different story. At the time they thought this might have more life in it, there was talk of a NZ and a German production, but it never happened of course. 
