875 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Mar 25, 2019 16:34:39 GMT
Tickets for the 'new' production at the Queen's Theatre are now on sale from Delfont Mackintosh - playing from December 18th. A cursory glance suggests that ticket prices are pretty similar, and not much is changing in terms of seating but they appear to be getting rid of the central aisle in the Upper Circle. I'm sure @theatremonkey can comment more confidently on the changes. And the Dress Circle slips are no longer on sale which used to be my go to cheap seats. Gutted Ah no, me too.
|
|
61 posts
|
Post by TheatreTwittic on Mar 25, 2019 21:30:04 GMT
Perhaps I was expecting too much but with the no doubt pretty considerable lower production costs of the new staging, I was hoping for a price reduction when it seems to be not the case.
It's also fascinating that a 'staged concert' costs more to see than either production.
|
|
|
Post by apubleed on Mar 25, 2019 21:41:04 GMT
Hahaha if the strategy is to increase profit margin they can't reduce ticket prices, that would defeat the purpose!
|
|
524 posts
|
Post by vabbian on Mar 26, 2019 7:27:48 GMT
Perhaps I was expecting too much but with the no doubt pretty considerable lower production costs of the new staging, I was hoping for a price reduction when it seems to be not the case. It's also fascinating that a 'staged concert' costs more to see than either production. Due to the cast of the staged concert. In particular Alfie Boe. Perhaps cheaper to stage, but shows are not priced according to cost, but to what the audience will pay. They know people would pay a lot more even to see him in Les Mis. And they wouldn't reduce ticket prices much on performances he is not on, so as to not sh*t on the other Valjean.
|
|
349 posts
|
Post by kimbahorel on Apr 12, 2019 16:01:21 GMT
There is only now 8 seats left for 13th July evening. If anyone was still looking to book for the last one.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2019 10:55:06 GMT
Mary Berry is having a tour of the theatre and a bit of a Les Mis feature now on BBC1
|
|
3,114 posts
|
Post by Rory on May 1, 2019 8:47:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 9:00:01 GMT
That is sh*t.
|
|
109 posts
|
Post by theatregod on May 1, 2019 9:46:11 GMT
It’s sadly, more than 50% (more like 80%) of the orchestra will be removed and replaced. The same happened when the show relocated from the palace to queens and the orchestrations re-worked and musicians replaced.
|
|
750 posts
|
Post by horton on May 1, 2019 11:26:45 GMT
Some people take pride in their legacy. Others take the money and run.
|
|
109 posts
|
Post by theatregod on May 1, 2019 11:30:27 GMT
You referring to CMac ?
Run it cheaper, take the money and run ?
|
|
875 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on May 1, 2019 12:46:00 GMT
That's depressing.
|
|
559 posts
|
Post by danieljohnson14 on May 1, 2019 12:48:41 GMT
Urgh, this whole thing just annoys me. Losing one of the iconic London shows in its original production is one thing, but you forget about those who will get screwed over in the process. Such a money making ploy that honestly could be a hit or miss in the long run.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by indis on May 1, 2019 12:53:37 GMT
first they do a big-orchestra-concert version and then you got maybe 5 people in the pit? wow, this surely sounds different then why suddenly the cheapening of the show? is the money the make through the show too less? as if the 14 people they had before in the pit were too many how sad
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on May 1, 2019 13:10:26 GMT
The band ( I hesitate to say that 14 musicians is an orchestra) will still number 14 - it is just that half of them have not been rehired for some unknown reason. 5 have been kept on and 2 go and play for Mary Poppins. New musicians will be brought in. I assume (again) this is about money in that the new musicians will be cheaper and on a different contract.
Clearly without the revolve (with the high maintenance issues) less staff are required backstage.
The royalties of the original creatives will not be paid on this "new" production - a huge saving I suspect.
So the show will be much cheaper to run - again, as it was when it moved from the Palace to the Queens. The prices off course will not be cheaper!
My question is this - do we think it will continue to be successful? If the production is deemed inferior will the audience fall away. Even long runners close eventually - Cats, Starlight Express etc. Has Cam Mack shot himself in the foot? Or do we think like The Mousetrap and Phantom the show is almost immune to the usual artistic criteria?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 13:22:53 GMT
I'm pretty sure they're not halving the band. They're just letting people go and they'll hire new people. Why is everyone making it look like it's a big deal? Actors come and go every year and everyone gets excited at a cast change. This is the same thing, people.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 13:46:20 GMT
The Stage article is misleading and just click bait.
|
|
3,114 posts
|
Post by Rory on May 1, 2019 15:28:54 GMT
The Stage article is misleading and just click bait. How so?
|
|
6,382 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on May 1, 2019 17:11:26 GMT
Les Miserables is a business so cutting costs isn’t a new thing, they did it 15 years ago when they moved to the Queens.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 17:25:52 GMT
Les Miserables is a business so cutting costs isn’t a new thing, they did it 15 years ago when they moved to the Queens. And before that when they trimmed the show to under 3 hours in order to save money on overtime costs.
It's always sad when people lose their jobs, but I guess a lot (most? all?) of the cast's contracts won't be renewed either, when they expire in July.
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 1, 2019 17:37:46 GMT
Perhaps it’s ready for the sort of shake up that traditional employment law cannot accomodate. 😳
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 17:38:43 GMT
Les Miserables is a business so cutting costs isn’t a new thing, they did it 15 years ago when they moved to the Queens. And before that when they trimmed the show to under 3 hours in order to save money on overtime costs.
It's always sad when people lose their jobs, but I guess a lot (most? all?) of the cast's contracts won't be renewed either, when they expire in July. Most cast expect to change 1-2yearly which can be different for musos and crew. The odd thing here is “7 of the 14 musicians” have been asked back. Why only those specifically? As reported it’s created a very awkward atmosphere backstage. Some crew had been working on the show for 15 years, I think that’s a bit more than “sad”.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 18:13:22 GMT
And before that when they trimmed the show to under 3 hours in order to save money on overtime costs.
It's always sad when people lose their jobs, but I guess a lot (most? all?) of the cast's contracts won't be renewed either, when they expire in July. Most cast expect to change 1-2yearly which can be different for musos and crew. The odd thing here is “7 of the 14 musicians” have been asked back. Why only those specifically? As reported it’s created a very awkward atmosphere backstage. Some crew had been working on the show for 15 years, I think that’s a bit more than “sad”. I wasn't trivialising someone losing their job. But unfortunately it happens every day in every profession. To people who have given more than 15 years of service to their employer. Also, shows close (including long runners) and everyone loses their job, but I don't go around saying I'm "heartbroken" or "devastated" for them.
So no, I'll stick with "sad".
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 18:15:48 GMT
I acknowledge this may not be ethical, if it's a cost-cutting exercise to get rid of people on older, more expensive contracts, thus creating the "awkward atmosphere backstage". But that's where unions/tribunals come in.
|
|
109 posts
|
Post by theatregod on May 1, 2019 18:24:53 GMT
And before that when they trimmed the show to under 3 hours in order to save money on overtime costs.
It's always sad when people lose their jobs, but I guess a lot (most? all?) of the cast's contracts won't be renewed either, when they expire in July. Most cast expect to change 1-2yearly which can be different for musos and crew. The odd thing here is “7 of the 14 musicians” have been asked back. Why only those specifically? As reported it’s created a very awkward atmosphere backstage. Some crew had been working on the show for 15 years, I think that’s a bit more than “sad”.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by princeton on May 1, 2019 18:32:50 GMT
I don't know the exact details of contracts etc - but I'm assuming that CML is treating each of the productions as a separate business - even if still under the Cam Mac banner - In which case everyone who has an ongoing contract (as opposed to a fixed term one) for Les Mis London (or whatever the current production/business is called) would have to be put at risk of redundancy because the company they work for won't exist beyond say the middle of July. Of course employees could transfer to the new company but it's not always guaranteed in law - and in particular because the 'Les Mis Concert Version' is likely to require fewer crew members and more orchestra members (perhaps with different doubling) so a like-for-like transfer is possibly difficult to argue. 'Les Mis London Reboot' may require a similar number of crew and musos as the current version - but because it's not a direct transfer in terms of time things get even muddier. Many of these decisions may be driven by cost savings but others will be regular company and business management.
It's also clear that the various unions have been involved throughout the process - and the MU rep gives no indication that he considers there is anything untoward going on. This is pretty unprecedented in the West End - so of course some people will be unhappy and unsettled - whilst others might actually be glad of any deals which are being done and delighted to move on.
Redundancy processes are always painful - particularly when there's some sort of selection process taking place. I've been through it twice myself - once after 17 years with a particular company - and it leads to much anxiety and tension not least because everyone has different attitudes to what is going on and there's often a reluctance to share personal circumstances and future plans with colleagues - and everything is usually done with a high level of confidentiality.
It's really awful to have a lack of certainty about future employment particularly after a long time in one job in an industry where instability is the norm - but The Stage article makes everything seem very black and white - when it's likely that it's much more complicated and nuanced than that.
|
|
109 posts
|
Post by theatregod on May 1, 2019 18:33:37 GMT
This is so sad for those involved and those losing their jobs, all because management want them out for some random reason!? What a producer to work for !!
Wow, that first day back will be sad, to see another person in their shoes, working/performing the same role, to the same professional standard.......!!!!
Can’t they just call a rehearsal for the orchestra? So no one has to leave? Like clean up calls for tech and cast ? Sounds like the producer is playing chicken to me!
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 1, 2019 19:19:16 GMT
This is so sad for those involved and those losing their jobs, all because management want them out for some random reason!? What a producer to work for !! Wow, that first day back will be sad, to see another person in their shoes, working/performing the same role, to the same professional standard.......!!!! Can’t they just call a rehearsal for the orchestra? So no one has to leave? Like clean up calls for tech and cast ? Sounds like the producer is playing chicken to me! I suggest you re-read Princeton’s more reasoned, less emotional post. This is a business. For LM to survive another ten years it obviously needs to streamline further in many areas, not just cast & crew members (although every team has it’s disputive members that you’d like to get rid off if it were possible). Mr Mackintosh does not strike me as a fool, rather someone that surrounds himself with what he considers to be the best people. We’ve seen in many a documentary his creative passion alongside his financial nouse, and I feel we need to trust that he knows exactly what he’s doing. In choosing the more focussed tour version of the show to move forward with I am already convinced.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 21:36:15 GMT
This is so sad for those involved and those losing their jobs, all because management want them out for some random reason!? What a producer to work for !! Wow, that first day back will be sad, to see another person in their shoes, working/performing the same role, to the same professional standard.......!!!! Can’t they just call a rehearsal for the orchestra? So no one has to leave? Like clean up calls for tech and cast ? Sounds like the producer is playing chicken to me! Again, there doesn't need to be a specific reason. Why do they do cast changes? Why do some performers stay, and why do the others go? Sometimes they all leave, sometimes they just recast 2-3 specific roles, sometimes it's half of them leaving. Is it sad? Yes. But they will get new jobs (some of the musicians leaving already got a job in Mary Poppins). This is how show business works.
So let's not make a big deal of this, guys! I just feel everyone is overreacting. However, you just need to say the magic words "cast change" when talking about Wicked, or other super popular shows, and everyone gets so excited, start tweeting their dream cast... Isn't it the same after all?
Btw I'm not directing this post specifically at you. I'm talking to everyone "complaining"; I just thought it was the perfect post to quote.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2019 7:42:40 GMT
It is all quite unusual. But as always in these matters, we will never have all the information to hand and there will be gossip and hearsay as to what exactly is happening.
Certainly restructuring if you can call it that happens through all businesses all the time in attempts to keep them profitable and a going concern.
Re: the orchestra, while they may be changing it's members, I really don't think they will be changing it's size. London and the current tour are using the SAME orchestrations already and give or take have the same make up. And whilst I do feel sorry for any members moving on, sometimes all teams need a shake up to get a great dynamic for that team to be the best and most cohesive going forward. And it's a good point made above that we get excited for the annual cast change. Why should the pit be different?
Re: the ongoing success of Les Mis, I truly think it will go from strength to strength. This entire saga is only of interest to people like us and Joe Public will continue to flock. If shows can survive years 15-25 ish, it seems to me they become almost like 'events' and so famous they are almost indestructible. Also make no mistake, Cam Mac knows exactly what he is doing.
In other news, I saw the tour in Birmingham at the weekend. After Miss Saigon, this is now by far and away the best quality tour on the road and was SO sharp. The sound in particular was epic (why on earth is it easier to get decent sound at tour venues that it's permanent sit down at the Queen's where sound at the rear stalls is SO underpowered).
Now, I still mourn the lament of the original and wish it was staying. That goes without saying. BUT, it IS being replaced by a quality product. (Although I am in no doubt that the tour is a progression from the Nunn/Caird original and their influence runs through it - it remains appalling that they will no longer get credit).
|
|