|
Post by 141920grm on Aug 15, 2021 7:39:48 GMT
That's really interesting, I always thought of LND the other way: as something bold. For me at least, Phantom works because it's gothic and grand and magical and romantic. LND, on the other hand, seems earthbound and domestic to me and... well... soap-operatic. There's no grandeur to it, and that seems intentional. It's like Lloyd-Webber committed to the parts of the mythology that he likes, whether his fans agreed or not. I'd agree with that...it takes something out of the realm of the mythical and makes it rather pedestrian. I think that's why the Connor tour didn't work...and the film to some extent. Rather than bold mythology with an almost superhuman, supernatural Phantom, we got a guy who doesn't even win swordfights. Exactly this- and why "modern", "gritty", "for the 21st century" in any marketing spiel makes me so apprehensive... because if you're still trying to capture/capitalise on the same look and feel of the three-decades old original, itself based on a century-old story, you NEED to take a lot of care so nothing feels anachronistic, if the end goal is to transport audiences back to your "1980s take on the late 19th century", which is what Phantom is. "Modern" is subjective yes, but materially, "shiny and new" doesn't automatically make something "better" in this context. Agree with above posters re: directional changes switching out the metaphorical for the literal, prioritising "making sense" over suspension of disbelief, ridding concept and poetry for *realism*... why the Connor tour and other non-replicas failed so much artistically- though I respect them for trying. The reviews and pictures coming out of the West End revival though... hard to muster any respect for this production. For a show purporting to be the "bigger and better" version of the original whose selling point was visual spectacle, material details should've been a high priority: there should've been someone to oversee and make sure fabrication techniques, materiality, any visible technology all feel of their time, at least on the surface, as they all contribute to the bigger picture. Any shortfall in this area will be obvious to any trained eye, to people who know and notice how things are made, not just the "overzealous fan" stereotype that some love to perpetuate on this board. The lack of detail in the set, chandelier, we have all seen proof, and with more costume comparisons coming out these days... just makes me sad. The more budget is slashed on this deeper level of care & attention, adding more "earthbound", modern tweaks here and there- the more the show becomes a shallow, cobbled-together facade of its former self than the true immersive extravaganza it wants to continue being.
|
|
318 posts
|
Post by MrBraithwaite on Aug 18, 2021 11:35:36 GMT
Found this thread very amusing over the last few months, not a regular at all, seen it a few times only over the years, only once in London, though love the score. Decided to go see the show because of the cast and to form my own opinion, but seeing the prices has made the decision for me. 87.50 front (well, nearly all good) stalls, no discounts or access tickets to speak of. No, thank you.
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Aug 19, 2021 22:29:38 GMT
I'd agree with that...it takes something out of the realm of the mythical and makes it rather pedestrian. I think that's why the Connor tour didn't work...and the film to some extent. Rather than bold mythology with an almost superhuman, supernatural Phantom, we got a guy who doesn't even win swordfights. Exactly this- and why "modern", "gritty", "for the 21st century" in any marketing spiel makes me so apprehensive... because if you're still trying to capture/capitalise on the same look and feel of the three-decades old original, itself based on a century-old story, you NEED to take a lot of care so nothing feels anachronistic, if the end goal is to transport audiences back to your "1980s take on the late 19th century", which is what Phantom is. "Modern" is subjective yes, but materially, "shiny and new" doesn't automatically make something "better" in this context. Agree with above posters re: directional changes switching out the metaphorical for the literal, prioritising "making sense" over suspension of disbelief, ridding concept and poetry for *realism*... why the Connor tour and other non-replicas failed so much artistically- though I respect them for trying. The reviews and pictures coming out of the West End revival though... hard to muster any respect for this production. For a show purporting to be the "bigger and better" version of the original whose selling point was visual spectacle, material details should've been a high priority: there should've been someone to oversee and make sure fabrication techniques, materiality, any visible technology all feel of their time, at least on the surface, as they all contribute to the bigger picture. Any shortfall in this area will be obvious to any trained eye, to people who know and notice how things are made, not just the "overzealous fan" stereotype that some love to perpetuate on this board. The lack of detail in the set, chandelier, we have all seen proof, and with more costume comparisons coming out these days... just makes me sad. The more budget is slashed on this deeper level of care & attention, adding more "earthbound", modern tweaks here and there- the more the show becomes a shallow, cobbled-together facade of its former self than the true immersive extravaganza it wants to continue being. The lack of attention to detail has been surprising. I wasn't expecting them to randomly cobble together a hybrid of Leicester and the original without trying to achieve some coherence, but that's what they've done. One example has already been discussed - which is the chandelier. I've had it confirmed from parties involved that there *was* a last-minute reversal and that it was never the intention for this chandelier to rise from the stage. But they had problems in getting the drapes sucked in and apparently ALW was not too happy with the change, rightly sensing audiences didn't want a non-rising-from-the-stage lighting fixture. Hence hours before curtain up, they prised the lyres off the old one (which was seen pictured outside the theatre) and stuck them on. But the result means a chandelier with a hole at the bottom and one that isn't collapsible, and looks rather cheaply painted. Another example, which I had mentioned before but was dismissed, is the quality of the costumes. Since posters wanted evidence here it is. On the left is what Christine's Masquerade costume should look like, representing twilight. On the right the current costume worn by Lucy St Louis. I shouldn't need to point out the lack of details, the neon colours, the absence of the beading etc...it's plainly obvious that budgets have been slashed for costumes too. As another example of lack of attention to detail, not only does the removal of Hal Prince's black box and some of the statues without anything to compensate for it make the false curvature of the top part painfully obvious (rather than it looking integrated within the architecture of the theatre)... ...but they couldn't be bothered even to blend together the bits from the UK tour and the bits they salvaged from the original set! See below: It's difficult to justify any of this when they had ample time in which to do it. And yes, I know many audience members will not notice or care. Doesn't make this artistically a good decision. And overall, cumulatively, these little details add up (on top of the loss of the orchestra, the Angel, little details like the catwalk and the sliding of the candelabra) to a detrimental effect. And people wonder why posters get annoyed by this, when Cameron Mackintosh literally says in interviews that this is "even more opulent" than its predecessor and both the producers, rather offensively, say how this is honouring Prince and Björnson.
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Aug 19, 2021 22:35:27 GMT
Saw The Brilliant Orig…The Passable Imitation again tonight.
Preferred the alternate Christine to the regular one.
Candelabra still don’t track.
I like the candle lights around the front of the circles that become flickering candles whenever we are watching a performance on the opera stage. Guess this is the show blending into the theatre they made such a big deal about.
Raoul didn’t leap off the bridge, but that often happens doesn’t it?
Chandelier had lots of pyrotechnics I either missed or couldn’t see on the opening night.
Still can’t understand why the proscenium is all cracked and full of holes - looks crap!
|
|
3,315 posts
|
Post by david on Aug 20, 2021 9:29:48 GMT
Have any board members managed to get any last minute walk up box office tickets at a bargain price or am I looking at paying full price? Thanks in advance.
|
|
4,026 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Aug 20, 2021 12:35:43 GMT
On the left is what Christine's Masquerade costume should look like, representing twilight. On the right the current costume worn by Lucy St Louis. I shouldn't need to point out the lack of details, the neon colours, the absence of the beading etc...it's plainly obvious that budgets have been slashed for costumes too. That new Masquerade costume looks like something made by Mattel for a Barbie princess. Which is all very well for Mattel as they'd be churning out thousands of them & it's 1/6th scale. However for a limitedly-made item at full scale, & compared to the previous version, I think it looks a bit cheap.
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Aug 20, 2021 14:44:13 GMT
On the left is what Christine's Masquerade costume should look like, representing twilight. On the right the current costume worn by Lucy St Louis. I shouldn't need to point out the lack of details, the neon colours, the absence of the beading etc...it's plainly obvious that budgets have been slashed for costumes too. That new Masquerade costume looks like something made by Mattel for a Barbie princess. Which is all very well for Mattel as they'd be churning out thousands of them & it's 1/6th scale. However for a limitedly-made item at full scale, & compared to the previous version, I think it looks a bit cheap. Got to agree. The thing that always astonished me was the WEIGHT of those costumes. As well as being garish and undetailed, the new costume seems to just have nothing to it. Not that I'm any kind of costume expert of course!
|
|
5,877 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Aug 20, 2021 18:42:30 GMT
Those new costumes are a disgrace. Maria Bjornsons designs were genius and it’s so tawdry that CM thinks this is good enough. I hope whoever has destroyed those costumes is credited (blamed) and not Maria B.
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Aug 20, 2021 18:50:15 GMT
Those new costumes are a disgrace. Maria Bjornsons designs were genius and it’s so tawdry that CM thinks this is good enough. I hope whoever has destroyed those costumes is credited (blamed) and not Maria B. It’s the same attitude CM and ALW have for the whole production. Cheapen it because no one will notice the difference (as demonstrated by a lot of the discerning people on here!) and sod the artistic integrity of the original creatives.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2021 19:19:11 GMT
The overall feeling I'm getting is it's been disneyfied for want of a better word. Everything looks cleaner and brighter and the dark gothic romance aspect seems watered down, which for me is a shame and makes me loose interest a bit. The new chandelier does look better though.
If this had been another show I might buy into the need to save money for survival, but phantom is the highest grossing piece of entertainment in the world, grossing more than Hollywood blockbusters. Of all shows that needs to save money this isn't it. Its about control for Cameron, and lining his pockets more.
|
|
5,877 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Aug 20, 2021 19:32:20 GMT
The overall feeling I'm getting is it's been disneyfied for want of a better word. Everything looks cleaner and brighter and the dark gothic romance aspect seems watered down, which for me is a shame and makes me loose interest a bit. The new chandelier does look better though. If this had been another show I might buy into the need to save money for survival, but phantom is the highest grossing piece of entertainment in the world, grossing more than Hollywood blockbusters. Of all shows that needs to save money this isn't it. Its about control for Cameron, and lining his pockets more. No I think the word for it all is ‘CHEAPER’.
|
|
4,026 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Aug 20, 2021 20:29:47 GMT
Got to agree. The thing that always astonished me was the WEIGHT of those costumes. As well as being garish and undetailed, the new costume seems to just have nothing to it. Not that I'm any kind of costume expert of course! Nor am I but costumes are the aspect I'm most interested in out of the technical/backstage aspects of theatre so when I was fortunate enough to get to go backstage at Phantom a few years ago I paid most attention to them. The detail of those costumes I saw close-to was amazing. Gorgeous base fabrics & then so much added by way of ribbons, brocades, beadwork, etc. It would be interesting to see the new costumes similarly close-to. I have the feeling that by in large they would not have the same level of detail.
|
|
3,315 posts
|
Post by david on Aug 22, 2021 17:27:43 GMT
Having only seen POTO on tour in Manchester a few years ago and absolutely loving it, I decided to give the new WE version a watch as I’ve never seen it so I rolled up to the box office and got a £37.50 front row Grand Circle seat (A2) this afternoon. Despite there being swathes of empty seats both in the Grand Circle and stalls, no offers or cheap last minute deals were to be had unfortunately. Anyway, the seat was RV and I had to lean forward to see the bottom right hand side corner during the 2.5hrs. With only the touring version to compare it to, this 2021 WE production left me really underwhelmed by the end by not delivering that WOW factor I felt watching it in Manchester. With the full main cast performing, vocally they delivered those fantastic numbers, and both Killian Donnelly and Lucy St. Louis gave knockout performances as the leads, unfortunately this wasn’t backed up by the orchestra. The 15 piece orchestra really felt underpowered and I just couldn’t muster any enthusiasm for that fantastic ALW score. I would have loved to have heard this score with the original orchestra because the cuts made in the pit really don’t do this score justice in its current format. Whilst the set pieces such as the chandelier rising and falling and all the pyrotechnics were impressive from where I was sat, there was something about the staging that just left me cold. During the interval I was reading some the posts on this thread and then I realised what the issue for me was. The whole staging just felt too much like a Disney production and less of that gothic feel that the piece needs to deliver the tension and emotion as events unfold on stage. I couldn’t care about any of the characters and their outcomes. I wouldn’t say the costumes looked cheap from where I was sat, but I can’t really make much comment on that without having a look at the original ones. Overall, It’s ticked HM theatre off the list of theatres yet to visit even if the product didn’t do much for me. A really lovely theatre auditorium. Also, BurlyBeaR , having a look at the merch on sale, I did notice they are selling the Phantom bears at £35 each 😮. Maybe an email to ALW might be in order to get some of the sales money from image rights?
|
|
19,752 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 22, 2021 17:34:33 GMT
Also, BurlyBeaR , having a look at the merch on sale, I did notice they are selling the Phantom bears at £35 each 😮. Maybe an email to ALW might be in order to get some of the sales money from image rights? Honestly, if it isn’t that TallPaul nicking my best cape it’s ALW nicking my likeness for his merch! 🙄. Re the lighting, my first experience of the show was that tour and it was lit so dark I could barely see what was going on. I was squinting at the bloody thing half the night!
|
|
2,259 posts
|
Post by richey on Aug 22, 2021 17:40:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2021 18:18:40 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists.
|
|
622 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Aug 22, 2021 18:26:04 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists. Well supposedly you can see the original Broadway production which has not undergone any revisions/updates and have made a big deal about the orchestra not being reduced when it re-opens. Never imagined that in the US we would have a superior ALW production to the West End. I suppose it's true that COVID has literally turned the world upside down
|
|
|
Post by Theatrefan48 on Aug 28, 2021 9:31:53 GMT
I finally got to see this last night (My mum has not been well so we had to postpone twice). Only my second theatre trip since corona. I was going to post a full review but I've done that before on here and received some unkind comments from people with different views. But I really enjoyed it and I got to see Holly anne Hull, which I was so happy about. Stage door was very busy considering the rules. For anyone whose not seen it, the chandelier is huge and so much faster than before! Off to see les mis concert tonight but I'll be back for West End live and will try to catch it then.
|
|
|
Post by sukhavati on Aug 31, 2021 3:46:21 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists. Well supposedly you can see the original Broadway production which has not undergone any revisions/updates and have made a big deal about the orchestra not being reduced when it re-opens. Never imagined that in the US we would have a superior ALW production to the West End. I suppose it's true that COVID has literally turned the world upside down The last time I saw the show in New York, it was looking absolutely pristine. It was a last minute choice as Kevin Klein's show was dark that night, and it was impossible to get ticket's to Patti Lupone's show. The Majestic stage and house are larger than Her Majesty's, so the evening didn't seem as intimate as in London. But as I said, it was in excellent shape physically. I honestly preferred the London company that year - even though you obviously had the long time cast members, everyone was in the moment, and even the teeny bits of stage business that might not be seen by many were absolutely spot on. The B'way company did some good singing, and I'll leave it at that. I mean, London was absolutely magical compared to New York or other cities where I've seen sitting and touring productions. Those actors absolutely demonstrated they deserved to be on a West End stage.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Aug 31, 2021 8:42:03 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists. I mean if you have a look on YouTube there are around 10 different full bootlegs of the show, including the original Sydmonton performance. I won't post the links, but it's clear that RUG don't really care - most have been up for years.
|
|
42ndBlvd
Swing
I'll be back where I was born to be
|
Post by 42ndBlvd on Aug 31, 2021 22:51:16 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists. I mean if you have a look on YouTube there are around 10 different full bootlegs of the show, including the original Sydmonton performance. I won't post the links, but it's clear that RUG don't really care - most have been up for years. There also happens to be a officially recorded pro-shot done by RUG back in the 90s, I think it's on YouTube somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Sept 9, 2021 15:28:31 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists. There's supposedly a 2003 proshot of John Owen-Jones, Katie Knight Adams and Ramin Karimloo in the V&A archives that you can go see for research purposes, if you're UK based... (probs need to apply for permission or something)
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Sept 9, 2021 21:47:10 GMT
I am quite gutted that I wasn't able to see the original production. Is there a good filmed version of it anywhere? I have heard so much about all of the scenery and the orchestra. It's very sad that the original no longer exists. There's supposedly a 2003 proshot of John Owen-Jones, Katie Knight Adams and Ramin Karimloo in the V&A archives that you can go see for research purposes, if you're UK based... (probs need to apply for permission or something) This was recorded prior to the movie release, and on the deluxe DVD edition of the movie there are some clips from this pro-shot shown. To my knowledge it still hasn't been leaked in trading circles, which is astonishing really.
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Sept 10, 2021 15:59:54 GMT
There's supposedly a 2003 proshot of John Owen-Jones, Katie Knight Adams and Ramin Karimloo in the V&A archives that you can go see for research purposes, if you're UK based... (probs need to apply for permission or something) This was recorded prior to the movie release, and on the deluxe DVD edition of the movie there are some clips from this pro-shot shown. To my knowledge it still hasn't been leaked in trading circles, which is astonishing really. is this... a call to action? to all those researchers out there? all those treasures that must be in the RUG archives too...
|
|
cpm
Auditioning
|
Post by cpm on Sept 18, 2021 21:22:13 GMT
I'm very discombobulated at what's happened to Phantom. It always seemed to me to be a centre of excellence in London, a place where things were still done properly. Perhaps against the odds. I cannot comprehend what must've been happening in Lloyd Webber's mind, to allow this diminution. If I'd done one great thing in my entire life, and then some charlatan had said to me: but we can do it cheaper -- I would be f***ing livid. I would want to burn him to the ground. I wouldn't go along with his scheme. If he told me to halve the orchestra I would tell him we were doubling it. Trebling it. (I would do this anyway, just to be difficult.) I would tell him that he would know where to find me if he didn't like it. If he said that the staging was old, or dangerous, I would tell him to fix it and make it more spectacular than before. If some catastrophe were to befall the world I would think to myself, I can't take it with me; I might as well roll the dice. I might as well use these otherwise useless millions to build an ark. Maybe they'll build statues of me, for my great-grandchildren to preen over. What is going on in Lloyd Webber's head? Why would he go along with this stupidity, this plastic-moulded, spray-painted, sh*t-cast rendition of the only thing he might ever be remembered for?
|
|