874 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Jan 11, 2019 10:26:14 GMT
Just think about it. Les Miz can be nominated for best revival in 2020. Shows change every night, ask an actor. Long running shows change over time. I saw School Of Rock on Monday and the doubling has changed to eliminate/reduce the cast. They may have done this a while ago to cut expenses. When you bring in a different director and designers, it's a revival. If the Olivier's don't acknowledge this I'd be surprised. Did Les Miz make it to 35 years? 33, it opened October 1985.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2019 10:37:42 GMT
It also sets an interesting presedent for other producers. Look at Hamilton and at how much profit share was offered to so many people. when the show starts to slow down or they want to make more money they can change the show up a bit (but not too much that the average theatre goes would notice or care) and save a fortune
|
|
1,639 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Jan 11, 2019 15:24:55 GMT
Just to complicate, the printed Stage newspaper yesterday said the revolve was going into the Gielgud. Maybe they haven't decided yet. It's an odd one, The new production isn't a brand new one so it isn't obvious to save it for the 'glorious return' to the Queens. It even ran in London before during the anniversary didn't it? So the last night of the revolve is a bigger deal and you'd think that would happen with leaving queens rather than leaving Gielgud.
|
|
3,927 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Jan 11, 2019 15:33:27 GMT
Maybe they haven't decided yet. It's an odd one, The new production isn't a brand new one so it isn't obvious to save it for the 'glorious return' to the Queens. It even ran in London before during the anniversary didn't it? Yes, at the Barbican for 3 weeks in September 2010.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2019 15:50:28 GMT
Just to complicate, the printed Stage newspaper yesterday said the revolve was going into the Gielgud. Maybe they haven't decided yet. It's an odd one, The new production isn't a brand new one so it isn't obvious to save it for the 'glorious return' to the Queens. It even ran in London before during the anniversary didn't it? So the last night of the revolve is a bigger deal and you'd think that would happen with leaving queens rather than leaving Gielgud. I think it will have been decided long before the press release which production is going where. My interpretation of the press release is that it's the original production with the revolve that's going to the Gielgud. Which makes sense to me, for reasons I've said before. Plus, the performance on the 13th July seems low key in terms of the press release - would they not make it more of an event if it were the final night of the last remaining original production? There's clearly another press release to follow in February confirming what "exciting plans" they have for the Gielgud, so I guess we'll have to wait for that.
|
|
3,069 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Rory on Jan 11, 2019 18:59:45 GMT
It seems very clear to me the existing London production will go to the Gielgud and end there.
The 'new' touring / Broadway production will reopen the Queens in December.
|
|
349 posts
|
Post by kimbahorel on Jan 11, 2019 19:32:39 GMT
This is very confusing because some of the cast have posted about the last time you see the show as it is on 13th July. But it moving and still having the revolve is it the current version or the new one? Then if it's the new production why is it saying the new production opens at Queens with a new cast. If it is the current one why did they not just announce it in the press release?
If its not the 13th I can ditch a ticket I bought for another one but I hope they announce something soon. Plus they must have to build another revolve into the stage because there is no way that's coming out of Queens I assume it will start back up next door on the 15th.
To be honest aside probably the "last show" I really want to know when my fave actors in the cast are leaving so I can see their last day. Because the other rumour going around is they are ditching all the current cast. But I thought by December the tour will probably be doing a cast change and I'll except some of them to end up in the London one.
|
|
6,310 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jan 11, 2019 20:15:47 GMT
I do think the Gielgud will be a dry run for the new production, I don't think Cameron would want to move the existing set to the Gielgud for cost reasons.
|
|
|
Post by FrontroverPaul on Jan 11, 2019 21:09:47 GMT
Advice please.
I want to see the current London production from a front row seat before it closes and on several of the suitable dates for me one or both of the two seats behind the conductor are available - A13 and A14 - and cost up to £25 less than the remainder of the front row.
I have been in a seat behind a conductor a few times in the past and after a while I didn't really notice him that much. Being tall probably helped. However this is the first show I've known where the seats cost less, suggesting the restriction on the view may be more extreme. Is the saving worth making ? - and is there any preference between the two as A13 seems more available than A14 though that may just be down to superstition ?
|
|
23 posts
|
Post by crunchemhall on Jan 11, 2019 22:06:06 GMT
Advice please. I want to see the current London production from a front row seat before it closes and on several of the suitable dates for me one or both of the two seats behind the conductor are available - A13 and A14 - and cost up to £25 less than the remainder of the front row. I have been in a seat behind a conductor a few times in the past and after a while I didn't really notice him that much. Being tall probably helped. However this is the first show I've known where the seats cost less, suggesting the restriction on the view may be more extreme. Is the saving worth making ? - and is there any preference between the two as A13 seems more available than A14 though that may just be down to superstition ? Both seats are fabulous, you are right into the action. Go ahead, being behind the conductor is not a problem at all.
|
|
426 posts
|
Post by alison on Jan 11, 2019 22:27:43 GMT
Advice please. I want to see the current London production from a front row seat before it closes and on several of the suitable dates for me one or both of the two seats behind the conductor are available - A13 and A14 - and cost up to £25 less than the remainder of the front row. I have been in a seat behind a conductor a few times in the past and after a while I didn't really notice him that much. Being tall probably helped. However this is the first show I've known where the seats cost less, suggesting the restriction on the view may be more extreme. Is the saving worth making ? - and is there any preference between the two as A13 seems more available than A14 though that may just be down to superstition ?
I've sat there before and I'm short (5'3, with all my shortness in my body rather than my legs) and had no issues. Can't remember exactly what it was like as it was years ago, but I'd happily sit there again.
|
|
|
Post by FrontroverPaul on Jan 11, 2019 23:08:47 GMT
Thank you both. Booked a March matinee for a very reasonable £54.75 in seat A13. £23 cheaper than A12. Ideal as I already have an evening show booked for that day.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Jan 12, 2019 0:33:55 GMT
This, I am afraid is purely about cost and profit. The "original" production at the Palace Theatre (after the show had been dramatically cut/edited after the Barbican run) was epic! The reveal of the barricade on that stage was awesome and a theatrical moment I will never forget.
The move to the Queens Theatre marked a reduction in production values with orchestra, smaller cast and set. Now, we have the prospect of basically the touring production - cheaper again (projections and the sometimes temperamental revolve does not have to be maintained) plus of course the disgraceful situation where the original creatives are not paid their royalty payments - which would be all very well if the "new" production was completely re-imagined - it isn't). Frankly I don't know how Cam Mack has not been sued by the original creatives for the copying of their original copywrite work. I suppose it must be "sufficiently different" to get away with it.
Although Les Mis is a brilliant musical sometimes the producers forget the role the creatives play in its success with the staging. I always say that Starlight Express would not have played the Apollo Victoria for 17 YEARS had it not been for the original brilliant direction and staging - oh Trevor Nunn again!!!
So, although I totally applause Cam Mack for his theatre refurbishment - at huge cost, I think he is using the refurbishment of the Queens to downsize the Les Mis production again - although I doubt the seat prices will be downsized. He will save a large percentage in royalty payments to the original creatives.
I don't know what the legal position is about advertising "the worlds longest running musical" etc. is. I suppose the show is the same - music, lyrics book etc, but surely how many days/weeks can it be dark before it becomes a revival rather than a continuous run? Plus if it is a "brand new production" then it is brand new production and not a continuous run? So perhaps it may be eligible for "Best New Musical"? It is all a very grey area quite frankly.
On a lighter note - I assume no trucks will be needed to move the set next door. I do expect to see Cam Mack leading by example and hand balling all the barricade next door with the tech crew!
|
|
193 posts
|
Post by groupbooker on Jan 12, 2019 0:40:40 GMT
Wouldn't it be very nice IF we could have a DVD of the original production? After all we have had them of the 10 & 25 Les Mis, Phantom and Miss Saigon. If it will not come back then a reminder of a great show?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 9:40:03 GMT
Wouldn't it be very nice IF we could have a DVD of the original production? After all we have had them of the 10 & 25 Les Mis, Phantom and Miss Saigon. If it will not come back then a reminder of a great show? Absolutely YES! I am always sad that the incredible original productions of Cats, Starlight Express, Aspects, Miss Saigon and Sunset were never properly filmed - I guess we didn't know at the time that these epic sets and staging would become a thing of the past. Basically I am obsessed with John Napier's design and/or Trevor Nunn's direction. I love the DVD of the new Miss Saigon and if that production is never mounted again, it is a wonderful memory.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 9:44:24 GMT
This, I am afraid is purely about cost and profit. The "original" production at the Palace Theatre (after the show had been dramatically cut/edited after the Barbican run) was epic! The reveal of the barricade on that stage was awesome and a theatrical moment I will never forget. The move to the Queens Theatre marked a reduction in production values with orchestra, smaller cast and set. Now, we have the prospect of basically the touring production - cheaper again (projections and the sometimes temperamental revolve does not have to be maintained) plus of course the disgraceful situation where the original creatives are not paid their royalty payments - which would be all very well if the "new" production was completely re-imagined - it isn't). Frankly I don't know how Cam Mack has not been sued by the original creatives for the copying of their original copywrite work. I suppose it must be "sufficiently different" to get away with it. Although Les Mis is a brilliant musical sometimes the producers forget the role the creatives play in its success with the staging. I always say that Starlight Express would not have played the Apollo Victoria for 17 YEARS had it not been for the original brilliant direction and staging - oh Trevor Nunn again!!! So, although I totally applause Cam Mack for his theatre refurbishment - at huge cost, I think he is using the refurbishment of the Queens to downsize the Les Mis production again - although I doubt the seat prices will be downsized. He will save a large percentage in royalty payments to the original creatives. I don't know what the legal position is about advertising "the worlds longest running musical" etc. is. I suppose the show is the same - music, lyrics book etc, but surely how many days/weeks can it be dark before it becomes a revival rather than a continuous run? Plus if it is a "brand new production" then it is brand new production and not a continuous run? So perhaps it may be eligible for "Best New Musical"? It is all a very grey area quite frankly. On a lighter note - I assume no trucks will be needed to move the set next door. I do expect to see Cam Mack leading by example and hand balling all the barricade next door with the tech crew! Agree with everything you say. And absolutely Trevor was pivotal along with ALW and Cam Mack on the incredible success of the British musical in the 80s. And he shaped these shows in a different way than ALW/Cam Mack allow their shows to be directed now (latterly producer seems to have more influence on what a director does when the producer is MASSIVE and the director is hired help). It was Trevor in fact who had the idea of roller skates and races for Starlight. ALW was imagining a gentle Cinderella type little-engine-that-could show.
|
|
4,960 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jan 12, 2019 10:28:46 GMT
Put it this way, I'm booked into those seats for old time's sake... Both if them? I've heard of musicians booking seats on aeroplanes for their instruments, but I've never known anyone book an extra seat at the theatre just for their bananas. 🍌=🙂
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 10:42:36 GMT
It was Trevor in fact who had the idea of roller skates and races for Starlight While we are on the subject, does "Starlight" in fact count as a long run anyway? That went through several versions at the Apollo over the years. Obviously as a Starlight nut I have thought about this - so was the same creative team that came in in 1992 for the 'new' version. Set, costumes and lighting the same. Direction and choreography much the same from the same people. Then main difference was that songs and characters were cut, so was more a reduction exercise than a change I'd say. Then musically, two new songs, mega mix and updated 90s orchestrations with Nigel Wright's influence after the success of the Palladium Joseph! (In fact it was heavily advertised at and with Joseph so the revamp may well have been to capitalise on the Joseph audience). Anyway, sorry, long answer - but I'd say yes on basis of same creative team.
|
|
|
Post by singularsensation10 on Jan 12, 2019 12:10:12 GMT
The last time I saw the show (almost a year ago), the set was tired, the production had no life with it because the creatives who are receiving royalties are no longer part of the day to day running of the show so it is down to the in-house resident direction team to re-cast and keep the show alive. That means the direction that the cast received is second if not third hand which ultimately means, with no disrespect to the resident directors because they do a great, tough and often thankless job, the quality of the staging and direction is aged and diluted. I thought the show looked old and tired - and welcome the idea of a new production. I’ve only heard great things about the touring production and personally see no great issue with this new production replacing the tatty, old, original production. And don’t think this is Cam trying to avoid paying royalties - from what I’ve heard he’s very fair and pays people what they deserve.
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Jan 12, 2019 19:13:11 GMT
The last time I saw the show (almost a year ago), the set was tired, the production had no life with it because the creatives who are receiving royalties are no longer part of the day to day running of the show so it is down to the in-house resident direction team to re-cast and keep the show alive. That means the direction that the cast received is second if not third hand which ultimately means, with no disrespect to the resident directors because they do a great, tough and often thankless job, the quality of the staging and direction is aged and diluted. I thought the show looked old and tired - and welcome the idea of a new production. I’ve only heard great things about the touring production and personally see no great issue with this new production replacing the tatty, old, original production. And don’t think this is Cam trying to avoid paying royalties - from what I’ve heard he’s very fair and pays people what they deserve. That's not what I've heard (ask the original cast members of Miz who were asked to be there at the anniversary concerts). He seems to have become a bit of a Bill Kenwright, which is really sad as I used to associate Cameron Mackintosh with quality production standards. Is the Poppins revival at the Prince Edward going to be the touring production as well? I'll be disappointed if it is... I really think they should film the original production. I find the film too boring to watch. We also deserve a record of Hal Prince's Phantom, because the 25th thing at the Albert Hall was not at all what Hal's staging was about (again, Hal got asked to keep away by Cameron in favour of Laurence bleeding Connor...).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2019 19:47:53 GMT
I really think they should film the original production. I find the film too boring to watch. We also deserve a record of Hal Prince's Phantom, because the 25th thing at the Albert Hall was not at all what Hal's staging was about (again, Hal got asked to keep away by Cameron in favour of Laurence bleeding Connor...). LOL, he got asked to keep away? Sadly I think it's a little too late to film the original production of Les Mis, as I agree with what people have said before about the current London show being a shadow of it's former self. The production at the Palace (and even the first UK tour) was epic, and it's slowly been hacked away over the years. That said, I do still prefer the original staging to the new production, and am sad it will soon disappear. But it might not be such a bad thing if it injects some life, care and attention back into the show.
|
|
874 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Jan 12, 2019 21:09:41 GMT
I wish I could have seen it in it's past glory. I listen to the 10th Anniversary concert mostly and the music in that is so beautiful, I never get bored of it. Incidentally, I was on the tube the other day listening to it and Ruthie Henshall got on and sat next to me. A very weird occurance!
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Jan 13, 2019 3:16:15 GMT
It appears that even a "professional" critic can spot the things that are "directly recognisable" from the original production! Thanks to 49thand8th for teaching me how to paste a tweet!!
|
|
1,102 posts
|
Post by zak97 on Jan 13, 2019 11:00:05 GMT
Based on that picture, is it normal for Fantine to be bowing on the second row, and for Mme T to be on the front but Monsieur T to be pretty the near back few rows?
|
|
1,037 posts
|
Post by jgblunners on Jan 13, 2019 11:06:49 GMT
Oh wow, the costume design for the new production really is almost identical to the original isn't it?
|
|
1,102 posts
|
Post by zak97 on Jan 13, 2019 14:14:26 GMT
I’m wondering if the Gielgud (if it is the end of the original in there) is going to be an interim cast before the new production made up of all of Cameron’s favourites/public favourites.....which could mean the return of Carrie.
|
|
1,905 posts
|
Post by LaLuPone on Jan 13, 2019 14:17:05 GMT
I’m wondering if the Gielgud (if it is the end of the original in there) is going to be an interim cast before the new production made up of all of Cameron’s favourites/public favourites.....which could mean the return of Carrie. Could be, but Carrie has said quite a few times recently that she only wants to return to Miz to play Fantine now, when she’s older.
|
|
1,102 posts
|
Post by zak97 on Jan 13, 2019 14:20:52 GMT
I’m wondering if the Gielgud (if it is the end of the original in there) is going to be an interim cast before the new production made up of all of Cameron’s favourites/public favourites.....which could mean the return of Carrie. Could be, but Carrie has said quite a few times recently that she only wants to return to Miz to play Fantine now, when she’s older. True. Imagine if she was the first London Fatine in the new production. Fan girls would go mad.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2019 14:56:22 GMT
I’m wondering if the Gielgud (if it is the end of the original in there) is going to be an interim cast before the new production made up of all of Cameron’s favourites/public favourites.....which could mean the return of Carrie. I was wondering that (not specifically Carrie, but an interim cast of favourites). And if that is the case, he may well want to film the show for cinema/DVD. He has to do something special to say farewell to this iconic staging.
|
|
874 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Jan 13, 2019 16:03:59 GMT
Just for fun who would everyone choose for a dream cast out of all previous cast members? Regardless of their current age.
|
|