|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2021 12:15:38 GMT
Every emerging statement from cast/crew further advocates and verifies pretty much every post I've made in this thread over the last year. Reading the galling contents of this blog I'd hoped there may have been some reformation here. Predictable responses from the elite undermining the essence of the writing. Remind me why I log on here. Petition to rename the board: Cameron Mackintosh Fan Club I’m not sure what you are reading? Nobody is approving of it, simply understanding the background and reasoning. Your inability to acknowledge the bigger picture is equally as frustrating. I am selfish enough to understand that if I want to continue to see quality productions the price might be scaled back reinterpretations, but I’d rather have something over nothing. Elite? Yeah right. You could hardly make it through a sentence in response to the blogs content without declaring you had it worse. Previous other responses have shown an unsympathetic response to the plight of the cast/crew/musicians indicating an incomprehension of said "bigger picture". Ironic that you'd class "quality" as "scaled back". People continue to hark on about the need to scale back these (TPOTO, LM) productions for financial longevity. Without referencing a CLM press release, I'd love to see some hard evidence from the CamFans that these productions were facing this apparent financial ruin. I've bitten my tongue countless times on this point, not wanting to respond in this manner, but it's getting silly now. I've been witness to conversations about the shows financial position, behind the pros of HMT and this notion people are throwing down here that POTO was struggling to recoup is so fictitious. It really is maddening to read people spout off any old garbage, laying it down as fact. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2021 12:16:15 GMT
Every emerging statement from cast/crew further advocates and verifies pretty much every post I've made in this thread over the last year. Reading the galling contents of this blog I'd hoped there may have been some reformation here. Predictable responses from the elite undermining the essence of the writing. Remind me why I log on here. Petition to rename the board: Cameron Mackintosh Fan Club Just a minute please. We’ve already had one valued and long standing member leave the forum because every time he stated an opinion in this thread he got jumped on(1). If people don’t want to hear differing opinions and aren’t able to disagree with those opinions with civility and without the snarky responses then they are indeed on the wrong forum(2).(1) Nearly every time I've stated something thats been backed up with evidence, I've been jumped on. In fact, said member jumped at me for making a point he didn't like, but of course that was all moderated into oblivion. (2) Noted. Bye. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 2, 2021 12:58:29 GMT
I’m not sure what you are reading? Nobody is approving of it, simply understanding the background and reasoning. Your inability to acknowledge the bigger picture is equally as frustrating. I am selfish enough to understand that if I want to continue to see quality productions the price might be scaled back reinterpretations, but I’d rather have something over nothing. Elite? Yeah right. You could hardly make it through a sentence in response to the blogs content without declaring you had it worse. Previous other responses have shown an unsympathetic response to the plight of the cast/crew/musicians indicating an incomprehension of said "bigger picture". Ironic that you'd class "quality" as "scaled back". People continue to hark on about the need to scale back these (TPOTO, LM) productions for financial longevity. Without referencing a CLM press release, I'd love to see some hard evidence from the CamFans that these productions were facing this apparent financial ruin. I've bitten my tongue countless times on this point, not wanting to respond in this manner, but it's getting silly now. I've been witness to conversations about the shows financial position, behind the pros of HMT and this notion people are throwing down here that POTO was struggling to recoup is so fictitious. It really is maddening to read people spout off any old garbage, laying it down as fact. Nobody knows the facts. That is one of the major frustrations. Unless you have access to the shows net profits you simply cannot lay claim to knowing one way or the other, neither do I. If it is just greed then its thoroughly unpalatable. Whilst it was the first W/E show I saw I have no sense of loyalty or sentimentality toward it. I realise that many people do. You also seem to have think that I happily see those people out of work, which couldn’t be further from the truth, but I do understand the business case for it if the blog post is all true. The way it was done was shoddy but they are hardly going to hold face to face meetings in a pandemic are they? I certainly never claimed to have had it worse. I held up an example of how a non-Phantom employee might be treated in similar circumstances. It is clearly an emotive subject for you that you wanted to discuss, but only with people that agree with you. |
|
3,473 posts
|
Post by ceebee on May 2, 2021 13:16:09 GMT
I'd rather have a new POTO than no POTO. I'm happy for a compromise, even if it upsets traditionalists. I'd prefer a full orchestra at every show but would need to pay a lot more for my ticket to have this.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on May 2, 2021 14:08:14 GMT
I'd rather have a new POTO than no POTO. I'm happy for a compromise, even if it upsets traditionalists. I'd prefer a full orchestra at every show but would need to pay a lot more for my ticket to have this. I am replying to you on your points. Why would you need to pay a lot more for your ticket? Phantom was extraordinarily profitable consistently for the last 30 years as it was. Even the official website says; "Played to over 140 million people in 35 countries in 166 cities around the world with an estimated gross of $6 billion". This is only happening because there is nobody left alive to prevent it from happening. |
|
5,155 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by TallPaul on May 2, 2021 14:21:55 GMT
Woolworths was profitable in the past...as was BHS...as was Debenhams... Marks & Spencer used to make profits of over £1 billion a year, until the world changed and it didn't.
The past is the past; it is neither the present nor the future.
|
|
3,473 posts
|
Post by ceebee on May 2, 2021 14:53:08 GMT
I'd rather have a new POTO than no POTO. I'm happy for a compromise, even if it upsets traditionalists. I'd prefer a full orchestra at every show but would need to pay a lot more for my ticket to have this. I am replying to you on your points. Why would you need to pay a lot more for your ticket? Phantom was extraordinarily profitable consistently for the last 30 years as it was. Even the official website says; "Played to over 140 million people in 35 countries in 166 cities around the world with an estimated gross of $6 billion". This is only happening because there is nobody left alive to prevent it from happening. Apologies, I meant a full orchestra at every West End show, not just POTO. I take your points on the profitability and artistic control. |
|
61 posts
|
Post by TheatreTwittic on May 2, 2021 16:18:05 GMT
Woolworths was profitable in the past...as was BHS...as was Debenhams... Marks & Spencer used to make profits of over £1 billion a year, until the world changed and it didn't. The past is the past; it is neither the present nor the future. The high street is a really interesting comparison as in many ways I think this decision is the same mistake as many high street stores also make. The focus on efficency and no heart. The lack of heart really drives people away and they get stuck in this rut if dropping customers which means more efficency. Cam Mac, nor any producer or stats company can truly say how many come for the original sets, for the huge orchestra, for the title, for it being the original production. Therefore they feel they can change all of that without sacrificing its audience. After saying all this I can't proclaim to know the answer either, what is clear is that the rumbles about this are wide scale. Twitter, Phantom fan pages etc. Scaling back the cost of a product while also increasing the cost of that product is a huge risk. Even more so on a product that has (from our understanding) been financially viable until the pandemic. In order to survive Phantom has a battle on its hand to either replace long running returning custom, or display to those old customers is that the new production is better. While CM's name is on the poster, I really can't see the latter happening. It's understandable why a producer may think they can get away a small band and painted scenery over detailed sets can be done. The West End is full of productions like that and they seem to do alright don't they? They certainly do, but arguable very few or them are designed to run and run. For Phantom its success us going to come back to its unique selling point. If its just the title with a set that's OK (I can't really say extravagant considering even the latest tour replaced fabric curtains with painted or printed screens) What is for sure is audiences don't want cheap and tacky and audiences did see the 25th as that. That's why there is such a mountain to climb at the moment. That is what everyone is talking about. Cam Mak productions are no longer a mark of quality. In my mind that's why if they wanted to try and assure audiences they need the creative team to get behind a camera and show the set box and talk through what their vision is. Not just blaze phrases like bigger and better or Phantom for the 21st Century 🤢 Personally speaking, already even after seeing the latest costume fitting video I'm thinking you've hiked the price up, you've culled the orchestra, the costumes are very similar but lacking finer details. If the set is going to end up the same way then why would I buy a ticket? We won't see the impact on audiences for the first six months, I think there's already going to be enough interest in the whole 'what have they done to it' to sell tickets. After that it's going to get interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on May 2, 2021 18:05:48 GMT
I'd rather have a new POTO than no POTO. I'm happy for a compromise, even if it upsets traditionalists. I'd prefer a full orchestra at every show but would need to pay a lot more for my ticket to have this. The upset has been caused in part by the producers' pretence that this isn't even a new POTO but simply a continuation of the same. Up until very recently even the official accounts responded to audience members' concerns via individual posts saying it would be the "brilliant original" returning, despite the fact that the brilliant original did not feature set designs by Matt Kinley or direction by Seth Sklar-Heyn, or "readapted" choreography by Chrissie Cartwright. That Prince, Björnson & Lynne are now dead doesn't preclude London from using their creations rather than "readapting" them to shirk royalty payments. If the show's finances were not in a good state (which I doubt given Broadway is apparently viable despite its considerably higher running costs), then the classy thing to have done would have been to let the production reach a natural closure and then revive it down the line in a newly thought out production. Rather than a cheap rehash that simply is the original in redux mode. After all, Debenhams and BHS closed. They aren't still with us as Primark but pretending still to be Debenhams and BHS. I don't think it's much to ask CM and ALW to do the announcement themselves on Zoom rather than chicken out and dump the task of telling everyone that they're fired on someone else. Particularly given that both CM and ALW knew by the time of the Zoom call that those fired would not return. The musicians worked out that they had nothing to return to not because they had been told, but: (a) because of industry rumours and speculation; and (b) because the planning submission to Westminster City Council included details of an extra row of seats where the orchestra pit was. They were only officially told that they would not return more recently, almost a year after ALW and CM knew that the original was dead. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 2, 2021 18:48:04 GMT
Yes, it is a very poor show; especially with the amount of messing around ALW has done on the internet to plug Cinderella. They should have done the call themselves.
|
|
95 posts
|
Post by theatre on May 2, 2021 18:52:04 GMT
Not sure if this has been mentioned already but it appears that the cuts on the production are going further than the orchestra and the sets -The wig assistants will now be doubling up as backstage crew to run the production, and are therefore currently having to train in a completely different skillset/craft in order to work on this new version of the production.
Every new piece of information I get about this version of the production sounds more and more like a joke!
|
|
61 posts
|
Post by TheatreTwittic on May 2, 2021 19:20:15 GMT
Not sure if this has been mentioned already but it appears that the cuts on the production are going further than the orchestra and the sets -The wig assistants will now be doubling up as backstage crew to run the production, and are therefore currently having to train in a completely different skillset/craft in order to work on this new version of the production. Every new piece of information I get about this version of the production sounds more and more like a joke! Killian will be doubling up as DSM at this rate 🙈 |
|
|
|
Post by firefingers on May 2, 2021 19:42:52 GMT
Not sure if this has been mentioned already but it appears that the cuts on the production are going further than the orchestra and the sets -The wig assistants will now be doubling up as backstage crew to run the production, and are therefore currently having to train in a completely different skillset/craft in order to work on this new version of the production. Every new piece of information I get about this version of the production sounds more and more like a joke! Killian will be doubling up as DSM at this rate 🙈 "Past the point of standby fly cue seven, no backwaLX GO" |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on May 2, 2021 20:57:27 GMT
Killian will be doubling up as DSM at this rate 🙈 "Past the point of standby fly cue seven, no backwaLX GO" "Standby autoq9, LXQ113 to 121, SNDQ82... and... Oh **** I need to be up a ladder right now! Erm, you know the rest, team!" |
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 2, 2021 21:20:26 GMT
Does Holly Ann Hull have set shows or does she stand by as well? No need for the Balcony to have its own usher when she has all that free time on her hands?
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by theatremole on May 2, 2021 21:37:28 GMT
Wigs assistants can't run a backstage plot, union rules. Also, wigs are employed by the company, backstage staff by the theatre. Two different job adverts.
Where on Earth are you getting this information?! LW are renaming their roles and expanding the requiments of some of them but they don't actually employ the wigs department... that's a separate contract.
|
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on May 3, 2021 3:02:50 GMT
Wigs assistants can't run a backstage plot, union rules. Also, wigs are employed by the company, backstage staff by the theatre. Two different job adverts. Where on Earth are you getting this information?! LW are renaming their roles and expanding the requiments of some of them but they don't actually employ the wigs department... that's a separate contract. Considering their track record, who’s to say the company won’t make up a new type of contract that exploits current loopholes, completely shirking union rules/expectations? As we saw from the trombonist’s story, his union is merely a technicality and they (union and fixer) know it. Additionally, if they’re so willing to throw actors, investors, crew, esteemed creatives, seasoned employees, and the good name of the Brilliant Original into the trash/under the bus- dumping or messing around existing contract structures wouldn’t be a big stretch for them. Change is change, am I right? The past is the past! Onwards and... not necessarily upwards, just another direction...! For the 21st Century! |
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on May 3, 2021 5:55:06 GMT
Wigs assistants can't run a backstage plot, union rules. Also, wigs are employed by the company, backstage staff by the theatre. Two different job adverts. Where on Earth are you getting this information?! LW are renaming their roles and expanding the requiments of some of them but they don't actually employ the wigs department... that's a separate contract. Considering their track record, who’s to say the company won’t make up a new type of contract that exploits current loopholes, completely shirking union rules/expectations? As we saw from the trombonist’s story, his union is merely a technicality and they (union and fixer) know it. Additionally, if they’re so willing to throw actors, investors, crew, esteemed creatives, seasoned employees, and the good name of the Brilliant Original into the trash/under the bus- dumping or messing around existing contract structures wouldn’t be a big stretch for them. Change is change, am I right? The past is the past! Onwards and... not necessarily upwards, just another direction...! For the 21st Century! In fairness, there's no evidence of this. But as you said, it wouldn't surprise me. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 3, 2021 6:20:27 GMT
It makes a huge amount of sense to me too. If it is the difference between losing people and keeping them on surely this is preferable? Not necessarily these job roles but retraining to multi task, given theatres’ unusual timings might be a compromise if a compromise is welcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on May 3, 2021 6:49:42 GMT
It makes a huge amount of sense to me too. If it is the difference between losing people and keeping them on surely this is preferable? Not necessarily these job roles but retraining to multi task, given theatres’ unusual timings might be a compromise if a compromise is welcome. While I understand your general point Dan, the problem with that is that you have extremely qualified and experienced professionals who are the premier in their field, who worked their way up, often over decades, to do their specific profession. As someone who has produced theatre myself, I can tell you conclusively that you can't find someone who is equally talented being on book, going up a tallescope and replacing a blown bulb and dressing a performer. There is only so much one can trim the beard until it's stubble, you know? Retraining to multi task isn't taking a day course. These professionals have worked extremely hard in their field to reach a level. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on May 3, 2021 8:03:42 GMT
It makes a huge amount of sense to me too. If it is the difference between losing people and keeping them on surely this is preferable? Not necessarily these job roles but retraining to multi task, given theatres’ unusual timings might be a compromise if a compromise is welcome. While I understand your general point Dan, the problem with that is that you have extremely qualified and experienced professionals who are the premier in their field, who worked their way up, often over decades, to do their specific profession. As someone who has produced theatre myself, I can tell you conclusively that you can't find someone who is equally talented being on book, going up a tallescope and replacing a blown bulb and dressing a performer. There is only so much one can trim the beard until it's stubble, you know? Retraining to multi task isn't taking a day course. These professionals have worked extremely hard in their field to reach a level. Oh I don’t doubt it for one minute, and I’m not belittling anyones craft or the years they took to train. It just seems like a practical solution. |
|
111 posts
|
Post by theatregod on May 3, 2021 10:21:02 GMT
This is what they won’t have in the new version.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on May 3, 2021 12:05:32 GMT
This is what they won’t have in the new version. The playout was always a highlight of that show. I used to love the fact that audience members would congregate round the pit, utterly entranced at the end. Seeing all those strings and the harp in the pit, as well as the percussion, just added to the whole atmosphere of the opera house. |
|
|
|
Post by robinhanssen on May 4, 2021 10:59:12 GMT
Hi everyone my name is Robin, am from the netherlands. I fear its to late but regardless i'd love to visit the original version of the phantom of the opera after thing are slightly back to normal. I've been planning and sparing money for this trip for a long time due my personal finacial situation. And during these times i've been following this thread and am so confused on what the heck is going with the phantom of the opera in london. Am hearing stories about a reduced orchestra and a completely different set design. I'll be verry sad if thats actually the case. I mean that would mean for me personally that i missed the opportunity at seeing the phantom of the opera in its "briliant original" form as it used to be. So can anybody tel me how big the changes in the set designg ar going to be? Ar we really getting that al new set design from that miserable touring version? Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by FairyGodmother on May 4, 2021 11:49:58 GMT
I think people do like having a bigger orchestra, and I often see people taking their children up to look in the pit and name the instruments, I always go and have a peep too (and was once waved back at my Wind Band's MD, who I hadn't realised was playing!). I don't know if they do this everywhere, but at my usual theatre if you go to the performances around Christmas time, the orchestra will play Sleigh Ride at some point and everybody loves it.
I can understand them trying to save money by reducing the people, on the same basis as reducing a horse's feed by one oat every day, but you do eventually get to the point where your horse is going to drop dead...
|
|
