The Phantom of the Opera - His Majesty's Theatre

Yes, but unfortunately the terminology is causing heaps of confusion on social media, where there are hundreds of posts thanking the producers for bringing back the original (they genuinely believe all the old sets are going back in after a refurb). And it's not surprising because until this year (when Cameron's new tour started using it), the phrase "Brilliant Original" was not used for ANY production other than London. Even Broadway never used that term, because it's not the original West End production (and yet Broadway has more claim to that title than the UK 2020 tour). 

Broadway most definitely used the phrase Brilliant Original, as it should, because it stood along with London as the original productions. The dynamited through 60 feet of bedrock to make enough space for those candleabras to rise as they do in London. They altered the computer program that raised the candelabras because they did it too perfectly, unlike the wobbly Victorian mechanics in London. I challenge someone to find a compelling difference between the New York and London Brilliant Original productions. 

Another reason they used the Brilliant Original tagline was to differentiate between Broadway and the new tour, which was going around as the SPECTACULAR NEW production.  The Brilliant Original used a white and blue scheme and the Spectacular New used a reddish orange and black scheme.  

Word around Broadway is that the original 1988 sets are still in place at the Majestic on Broadway, and nothing has been done to them......yet.  Here's to hoping that Cameron never gets his cheap claws on the Brilliant Original Broadway production. 

I’ve said it before probably, but I found the interior of the Majestic too light & airy to fully engage with Phantom on Broadway. It needs a certain environment to produce a really immersive experience, which is why I think the Manchester Opera House & Bristol Hippodrome worked for me as tour venues in a way that other auditoria did not. As long as Her Majestys is left in its knackered splendour & not overly modernised it will go a long way to staving off feelings of being messed with.

I think you're mixing what I'd refer to as a "visual update" with a "mechanical update".

A visual update, as such, is a redesign of everything a show looks like - this is often referred to as a new production.

A "mechanical update" as I termed it is updating the mechanics underneath what we can see to improve safety/efficiency.

The language coming out of the theatre at the start of closure was the set was falling into disrepair/bits were in need of being replaced. That doesn't mean it would appear different to an audience, but it would be a new physical set.

The fact the theatre is currently bare indicates it will physically be a new set. How closely it resembles the original whilst still being called the "Brilliant Original" is the subject of the debate at the moment.

What it really needs - in keeping with the renewed 'original'sets - is a renewed sense of the discoveries the original cast made. The rehearsal footage of Brightman/Crawford (in ordinary rehearsal clothes) make it clear a new drama is being explored, not recast recreated. It's a difficult thing to capture. It's ages since I saw Phantom in London, but a Resident Director with impeccable taste is needed (i.e respect for Hal Prince's vision and some talent of their own). Despite all our big talk of the Angel and Chandelier, what I remember is the sound of ripping velcro at the end when Meg removed the cloak from the chair! (How hard is it to get that right after decades?) Then she angled the mask to the audience in such a plonkingly obvious way, she might as well have said/sung "take a butchers at that mush". Similarly in latter performances of 'Cats' the smoke through the heavenly aperture was poured inartistically from side to side with all the grace of someone pouring Mr Muscle down the loo. Within a multi million pound show, it's taste that costs nothing.

From what I know, it didn't rise from the stage, but instead it was hump up and would lower down and shake. I've also heard that they were originally intending to have a chandelier that would be like the one in HMT, but for some reason they weren't able to do so, so they reused the one from the 2012 tour and they were planning to unveil the chandelier that they had intended in Manchester. 

As for this post, I'm not sure if this is an acknowledgment of the original's return or not. Maybe the chandelier will rise again like before, who knows.

Is this meant to be ‘hung up’? Otherwise I’m imagining 3 sweaty workmen lugging it up the stairs of HMT & chucking it off the balcony every night.

3 sweaty workmen? Hmmm, Where do I get my ticket....

At the risk of repeating myself on this forum (it’s been a while since I recounted this so bear with) the first time I went to see POTO at Her Madge’s I thought I’d treat myself to a top price stalls seat. Special occasion etc. WoopieDoo. Upon arrival at my seat I found was unable to sit down in it. Literally, as I sat in the seat and my bum pushed the seat down, my knees jammed up against the seat in front. It wasn’t just short on legroom, I physically could not sit. 
I had to seek out a FOH and was put in a box which was ok, but not the bang on central under the chandelier view Id paid for. 
Ok, I’m 6’3 and a big man but even so this is a disgrace. Theatres need to accommodate modern audiences. 

I'm 6'6", I survived it once but I doubt I'll ever go back without a refurb!

Does this mean they've now kept the original stage machinery? Interesting to see the proscenium without the sculptures.
/