44 posts
|
Post by theatremole on Jun 22, 2020 11:25:28 GMT
Unfortunately what happens with long running shows is they're left to rot with very little done to maintain them. The bare minimum will be done but often things become too expensive or they're so old, the parts don't exist any more. They also weren't built with 20yrs + use in mind so might not have been very well constructed in the first place.
Shows shouldn't become museum pieces, they should be looked after and invested in with improvements being made, largely for safety.
The international staging of Phantom is new, it spent months being built and tested but it's still the 'brilliant original'.
|
|
375 posts
|
Post by Theatre Fan on Jun 22, 2020 11:35:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Jun 22, 2020 11:36:52 GMT
But that petition is inaccurate as it gives the impression they want to bring in the Laurence Conner version I know, but it's the only one going that speaks out against any drastic changes. Fears are that Cameron is going to "pull a Les Mis" with Phantom (direct quote from a Tweet)- perhaps not with the Restaged version from 2012, but even with the just-cancelled UK tour version, which I think is not worthy of replacing the original- there are major changes in major scenes- a “reinvented staging of the original” that was endlessly marketed as the “brilliant original” until the final cancellation announcement- that's how it was worded on the official picture post. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 11:43:07 GMT
Unfortunately what happens with long running shows is they're left to rot with very little done to maintain them. The bare minimum will be done but often things become too expensive or they're so old, the parts don't exist any more. They also weren't built with 20yrs + use in mind so might not have been very well constructed in the first place. Shows shouldn't become museum pieces, they should be looked after and invested in with improvements being made, largely for safety. The international staging of Phantom is new, it spent months being built and tested but it's still the 'brilliant original'. Replacing sets and updating functionality is absolutely fine. It makes complete sense and I doubt anyone would complain. It’s all backstage stuff - as an audience member I only want to see what I’ve always seen. |
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Jun 22, 2020 11:48:44 GMT
Unfortunately what happens with long running shows is they're left to rot with very little done to maintain them. The bare minimum will be done but often things become too expensive or they're so old, the parts don't exist any more. They also weren't built with 20yrs + use in mind so might not have been very well constructed in the first place. Shows shouldn't become museum pieces, they should be looked after and invested in with improvements being made, largely for safety. The international staging of Phantom is new, it spent months being built and tested but it's still the 'brilliant original'. But changes to the actual design and staging shouldn't be necessary. The world tour has one major scene that is different from West End/Broadway because replicating it on tour would be technically too demanding/expensive. But this is the town production we're talking about, going 30+ years strong. The downsizing of the orchestra waters it down. Replacing old/original-design set pieces with completely different ones for safety reasons waters it down. When bones fracture, you don't replace the entire limb with something else- you either get pins implanted to make the bone heal stronger, or a prosthetic that strives to look and function exactly like the original used to. |
|
2,264 posts
|
Post by richey on Jun 22, 2020 11:48:47 GMT
Unfortunately what happens with long running shows is they're left to rot with very little done to maintain them. The bare minimum will be done but often things become too expensive or they're so old, the parts don't exist any more. They also weren't built with 20yrs + use in mind so might not have been very well constructed in the first place. Shows shouldn't become museum pieces, they should be looked after and invested in with improvements being made, largely for safety. The international staging of Phantom is new, it spent months being built and tested but it's still the 'brilliant original'. Replacing sets and updating functionality is absolutely fine. It makes complete sense and I doubt anyone would complain. It’s all backstage stuff - as an audience member I only want to see what I’ve always seen. Exactly this! And there's no denying there are elements of the set which need updated (dressing room and Masquerade staircase especially) |
|
19,795 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 22, 2020 11:56:19 GMT
I’m all for updates, but the fact ALW basically tweeted he’s having to use his ‘power’ to get the original production back in place is sort of worrying. There’s updates and then there’s a complete redesign. Phantom isn’t a perfect production but it is iconic. After so many years I don’t think reducing costs is a bad thing and it makes sense to use an enforced period of closure to get everything sorted. But it’s an important piece of musical theatre history and I don’t see anything wrong with maintaining the original production: what would losing it provide exactly? Bit of tub-thumping there I reckon. Scare story emerges about changes to Phantom, people in uproar, ALW tweets to say he’s doing all he can, production emerges with no visible difference, ALW is the shows saviour and theatrical superhero. |
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jun 22, 2020 12:07:40 GMT
God that tweet from ALW has made things juicy hasn't it!!! *grabs popcorn*
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 22, 2020 12:09:48 GMT
God that tweet from ALW has made things juicy hasn't it!!! *grabs popcorn* Exactly! It’s such a bizarre thing to say unless there is a disagreement going on. And if there is a disagreement it’s amazing he’s commented on it so publicly. I do wonder if he just worded it badly. |
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Jun 22, 2020 12:24:29 GMT
God that tweet from ALW has made things juicy hasn't it!!! *grabs popcorn* Exactly! It’s such a bizarre thing to say unless there is a disagreement going on. And if there is a disagreement it’s amazing he’s commented on it so publicly. I do wonder if he just worded it badly. Wouldn't be surprised if the disagreement is between him and Mackintosh, who I believe is the one trying to bring in a "newer" production (no surprise there). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 12:33:19 GMT
Exactly how much actual ‘power’ does ALW have though? It’s an odd turn of phrase.
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 22, 2020 12:37:12 GMT
Exactly how much actual ‘power’ does ALW have though? It’s an odd turn of phrase. As co-producer, composer, and landlord I’d assume he should have a little bit of power. |
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Jun 22, 2020 12:39:51 GMT
Exactly how much actual ‘power’ does ALW have though? It’s an odd turn of phrase. He owns the Really Useful Group, which co-produced the show alongside Mackintosh. I don't know a lot on the business side, but I would assume he has quite a bit of power. |
|
19,795 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 22, 2020 12:48:41 GMT
These people are masters of PR. The very fact that we are talking about it shows how we’re being manipulated by them. ALW and CM are almost certainly aligned on opinion about what’s being done and will be laughing at the fuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 12:49:51 GMT
Exactly how much actual ‘power’ does ALW have though? It’s an odd turn of phrase. As co-producer, composer, and landlord I’d assume he should have a little bit of power. Probably not the best phrased question I’ve ever posed lol. I suppose what I’m really asking is contractually, what influence does he have - as composer, for example, has he signed over rights to stage the work indefinitely? It has been going for decades after all. If he evicted the show, could they take it elsewhere without his permission? I was unaware he was a co-producer, so yes, he has quite a bit of power as that too. But then it raises the question - who has more power to go against what are presumably his wishes? Because that’s the implication of his tweet: that he’s to do battle and could lose. |
|
|
|
Post by 10642 on Jun 22, 2020 12:55:35 GMT
I remember reading somewhere (though I may be wrong, feel free to correct!) that Cameron owns the rights to Phantom within the UK and US (hence West End/Broadway and UK/US tours are produced by him) but Andrew (Really Useful Group) owns the rights for the rest of the world hence why the world tour has remained a modified version of the original when Cameron was touring the restaged version in the UK and US
|
|
|
|
Post by 42ndBlvd on Jun 22, 2020 13:06:54 GMT
sorry have to disgaree. How on earth is adding modern video elements a 'very good thing'? I want to see a proper set. The curtains, the angel and the chandelier are intrinsic parts of the set and should not be replaced Actually, I didn’t spot that line about video effects! What video effects?!? How does Phantom need video effects? All I can imagine is the lightning bolts?! On the subject of video effects, I could see them replacing the traditional light gobos (replaced for world tour and broadway I believe) during the overtune that enhance the Hannibal backdrop as it rises up, maybe with video projections? Idk. The phantom's shadow during the ballet scene could be replaced as well with a projection and made more elaborate like what they did with the las vegas projection which Hal and Maria designed. These are the only new video elements I can think of. The house already has a projector installed but it's used for special events or when the theatre is hired out.  Lighting effects during overtune.  This fight scene between Phantom and Joseph buquet was unique to the Las Vegas production.  The current production in New York, London and the world tour don't have a fight scene but the phantom looming over a stage light. |
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 22, 2020 13:15:48 GMT
As co-producer, composer, and landlord I’d assume he should have a little bit of power. Probably not the best phrased question I’ve ever posed lol. I suppose what I’m really asking is contractually, what influence does he have - as composer, for example, has he signed over rights to stage the work indefinitely? It has been going for decades after all. If he evicted the show, could they take it elsewhere without his permission? I was unaware he was a co-producer, so yes, he has quite a bit of power as that too. But then it raises the question - who has more power to go against what are presumably his wishes? Because that’s the implication of his tweet: that he’s to do battle and could lose. Very good questions! If Cameron did somehow force through changes ALW didn’t want (if that is even the situation we’re in!), could ALW just take his theatre away and go home? |
|
375 posts
|
Post by Theatre Fan on Jun 22, 2020 13:31:20 GMT
Fair play to John x
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 13:33:27 GMT
As co-producer, composer, and landlord I’d assume he should have a little bit of power. Probably not the best phrased question I’ve ever posed lol. I suppose what I’m really asking is contractually, what influence does he have - as composer, for example, has he signed over rights to stage the work indefinitely? It has been going for decades after all. If he evicted the show, could they take it elsewhere without his permission? I was unaware he was a co-producer, so yes, he has quite a bit of power as that too. But then it raises the question - who has more power to go against what are presumably his wishes? Because that’s the implication of his tweet: that he’s to do battle and could lose. It's a very good question - and this is something that has always fascinated me about the production of Phantom. Are they 50/50 in their producers share/rights (am not sure what the correct term is!) or does Cameron have a larger share? I have no idea of the answer - but reading massively between the lines, I do wonder if Cameron is in control. Certainly all the advertising in London has always shared space with Les Mis and it has always had more of a CM flavour. Also the fact that it was lumped in with Cameron's "off until 2021" announcement would imply this. Especially given that unlike the other shows, it's not even in a DMT theatre. And ALW has been fairly public in expressing his hopes that theatre will be up and running again in the Autumn. |
|
2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Jun 22, 2020 13:39:48 GMT
That is such a weird tweet. Is he less in control of the property than one would assume?
(Also, sorry, didn't see several replies above when I replied!)
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 22, 2020 13:45:04 GMT
It could always just be that ALW wants to retain as much original staging as possible in spite of physical limitations. If the Angel has been out of order, and the Chandelier “condemned” (as was claimed earlier), perhaps any attempt at recreating these in this old theatre will be difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 13:45:32 GMT
Scare story emerges about changes to Phantom The way people let their imaginations run away from them, within a week there'll be stories that the Phantom is going to be an alien, Christine will be a sex robot from the future, and the whole thing will be set in a recording studio on the moon. |
|
3,057 posts
|
Post by ali973 on Jun 22, 2020 13:48:20 GMT
For those of you who have seen the new UK tour, what are the minor changes they've done that make it different from the London version? All I recall seeing from photos is a gargoyle at the rooftop where the Phantom appears from there instead of the proscenium. Thanks!
|
|
5,160 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jun 22, 2020 13:49:54 GMT
Scare story emerges about changes to Phantom The way people let their imaginations run away from them, within a week there'll be stories that the Phantom is going to be an alien, Christine will be a sex robot from the future, and the whole thing will be set in a recording studio on the moon. Isn't that the new musical by Dave Malloy? 🤣 I'd pay to see it! |
|
